Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20731817›Full record

ArticleBMC family practice2010

Key factors influencing adoption of an innovation in primary health care: a qualitative study based on implementation theory.

Siw Carlfjord, Malou Lindberg, Preben Bendtsen, Per Nilsen, Agneta Andersson

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC family practice, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03617874 (PC4PrEP), which is not on this map. Cited by 53 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
53citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT03617874 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2020, after this paper: background citation

PC4PrEP: Integrating Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) Into Primary Care

TypeinterventionalSponsorAlbert Einstein College of MedicineRan2020 to 2022Enrolled22ConditionsHuman Immunodeficiency Virus TransmissionArmsPC4PrEP- Intervention Clinics, Standard of Care Clinics
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

53 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Siw CarlfjordDepartment of Medical and Health Sciences, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden. siw.carlfjord@liu.se
Malou Lindberg
Preben Bendtsen
Per Nilsen
Agneta Andersson

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBridging the knowledge-to-practice gap in health care is an important issue that has gained interest in recent years. Implementing new methods, guidelines or tools into routine care, however, is a slow and unpredictable process, and the factors that play a role in the change process are not yet fully understood. There is a number of theories concerned with factors predicting successful implementation in various settings, however, this issue is insufficiently studied in primary health care (PHC). The objective of this article was to apply implementation theory to identify key factors influencing the adoption of an innovation being introduced in PHC in Sweden.

methodsA qualitative study was carried out with staff at six PHC units in Sweden where a computer-based test for lifestyle intervention had been implemented. Two different implementation strategies, implicit or explicit, were used. Sixteen focus group interviews and two individual interviews were performed. In the analysis a theoretical framework based on studies of implementation in health service organizations, was applied to identify key factors influencing adoption.

resultsThe theoretical framework proved to be relevant for studies in PHC. Adoption was positively influenced by positive expectations at the unit, perceptions of the innovation being compatible with existing routines and perceived advantages. An explicit implementation strategy and positive opinions on change and innovation were also associated with adoption. Organizational changes and staff shortages coinciding with implementation seemed to be obstacles for the adoption process.

conclusionWhen implementation theory obtained from studies in other areas was applied in PHC it proved to be relevant for this particular setting. Based on our results, factors to be taken into account in the planning of the implementation of a new tool in PHC should include assessment of staff expectations, assessment of the perceived need for the innovation to be implemented, and of its potential compatibility with existing routines. Regarding context, we suggest that implementation concurrent with other major organizational changes should be avoided. The choice of implementation strategy should be given thorough consideration.

Indexed as

Organizational InnovationAttitude of Health PersonnelDiffusion of InnovationFocus GroupsHealth Plan ImplementationHumansInterviews as TopicModels, TheoreticalPrimary Health CareQualitative ResearchSwedenTechnology TransferTranslational Research, Biomedical

Identifiers

PMID20731817
PMCPMC2933616

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.