Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29426341›Full record

SynthesisImplementation science : IS2018

Navigating the sustainability landscape: a systematic review of sustainability approaches in healthcare.

L Lennox, L Maher, J Reed

Registry-linked trialAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Implementation science : IS, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06608589 (CONSTELLATIONS Living Lab), which is not on this map. Cited by 181 papers, 14 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
181citing papers in PubMed, 14 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.

NCT06608589 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2023, after this paper: background citation

CONSTELLATIONS Living Lab: Development, Implementation and Evaluation of a Patient-oriented Quality Improvement Program Targeting Care Transitions of Older Adults Living with Major Neurocognitive Disorders and Their Caregivers.

TypeinterventionalSponsorLaval UniversityRan2023 to 2026Enrolled700ConditionsAlzheimer Disease, Dementia, Neurocognitive DeclineArmsCoMPAS+ MNCDs Program - Quality improvement program targeting the care transitions of patients living with a major neurocognitive disorder and their caregivers
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

181 citing papers in PubMed, 14 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

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

121 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

3 authors.

L LennoxNIHR CLAHRC North West London, 369 Fulham Road, London, SW10 9NH, United Kingdom. l.lennox@imperial.ac.uk.
L MaherKo Awatea I Health System Innovation and Improvement, Middlemore Hospital, 100 Hospital Road, Otahuhu, New Zealand.
J ReedNIHR CLAHRC North West London, 369 Fulham Road, London, SW10 9NH, United Kingdom.

Funding

National Institute for Health Research N/A
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundImprovement initiatives offer a valuable mechanism for delivering and testing innovations in healthcare settings. Many of these initiatives deliver meaningful and necessary changes to patient care and outcomes. However, many improvement initiatives fail to sustain to a point where their full benefits can be realised. This has led many researchers and healthcare practitioners to develop frameworks, models and tools to support and monitor sustainability. This work aimed to identify what approaches are available to assess and influence sustainability in healthcare and to describe the different perspectives, applications and constructs within these approaches to guide their future use.

methodsA systematic review was carried out following PRISMA guidelines to identify publications that reported approaches to support or influence sustainability in healthcare. Eligibility criteria were defined through an iterative process in which two reviewers independently assessed 20% of articles to test the objectivity of the selection criteria. Data were extracted from the identified articles, and a template analysis was undertaken to identify and assess the sustainability constructs within each reported approach.

resultsThe search strategy identified 1748 publications with 227 articles retrieved in full text for full documentary analysis. In total, 62 publications identifying a sustainability approach were included in this review (32 frameworks, 16 models, 8 tools, 4 strategies, 1 checklist and 1 process). Constructs across approaches were compared and 40 individual constructs for sustainability were found. Comparison across approaches demonstrated consistent constructs were seen regardless of proposed interventions, setting or level of application with 6 constructs included in 75% of the approaches. Although similarities were found, no approaches contained the same combination of the constructs nor did any single approach capture all identified constructs. From these results, a consolidated framework for sustainability constructs in healthcare was developed.

conclusionsChoosing a sustainability method can pose a challenge because of the diverse approaches reported in the literature. This review provides a valuable resource to researchers, healthcare professionals and improvement practitioners by providing a summary of available sustainability approaches and their characteristics.

trial registrationThis review was registered on the PROSPERO database: CRD42016040081 in June 2016.

Indexed as

Delivery of Health CareChecklistHealth PersonnelHumansQuality Assurance, Health CareQuality ImprovementAssessmentFrameworkMethodModelQuality improvementSustainabilityTool

Identifiers

PMID29426341
PMCPMC5810192

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.