Trial reportImplementation science : IS2018
What drives adoption of a computerised, multifaceted quality improvement intervention for cardiovascular disease management in primary healthcare settings? A mixed methods analysis using normalisation process theory.
Trial report in Implementation science : IS, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
22 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 56 citations in OpenAlex.
- Teamwork and implementation of innovations in healthcare and human service settings: a systematic review.Implementation science : IS · 2024Pooled it
- Supporting translation of research evidence into practice-the use of Normalisation Process Theory to assess and inform implementation within randomised controlled trials: a systematic review.Implementation science : IS · 2023Pooled it
- Stakeholder Perspectives of Clinical Artificial Intelligence Implementation: Systematic Review of Qualitative Evidence.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Pooled it
- The Challenge of Integrating eHealth Into Health Care: Systematic Literature Review of the Donabedian Model of Structure, Process, and Outcome.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021Pooled it
- The effects of clinical decision support system for prescribing medication on patient outcomes and physician practice performance: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2021Pooled it
- Effectiveness of Electronic Quality Improvement Activities to Reduce Cardiovascular Disease Risk in People With Chronic Kidney Disease in General Practice: Cluster Randomized Trial With Active Control.JMIR formative research · 2025 · on this mapTrial
- Do process evaluations open up the 'black box' of implementation interventions in health care? A scoping review.Implementation science : IS · 2025Article
- Optimising a clinical decision support tool to improve chronic kidney disease management in general practice.BMC primary care · 2024Article
- Development of a communication platform for patients with head and neck cancer for effective information delivery and improvement of doctor-patient relationship: application of treatment journey-based service blueprint.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2024Review
- Article
- Strategies for Implementing Machine Learning Algorithms in the Clinical Practice of Radiology.Radiology · 2024Review
- Sustainability, spread, and scale in trials using audit and feedback: a theory-informed, secondary analysis of a systematic review.Implementation science : IS · 2023Article
- Readiness for Change in the Implementation of a 3D Printing Initiative in a Catalan Tertiary Hospital Using the Normalization Process Theory: Survey Study.JMIR human factors · 2023Article
- Snakes and ladders: A qualitative study understanding the active ingredients of social interaction around the use of audit and feedback.Translational behavioral medicine · 2023Article
- Evaluating the translation of implementation science to clinical artificial intelligence: a bibliometric study of qualitative research.Frontiers in health services · 2023Review
- Using multi-criteria decision analysis to describe stakeholder preferences for new quality improvement initiatives that could optimise prescribing in England.Frontiers in health services · 2023Article
- Barriers and enablers to implementing and using clinical decision support systems for chronic diseases: a qualitative systematic review and meta-aggregation.Implementation science communications · 2022Review
- Automated Decision Support For Community Mental Health Services Using National Electronic Health Records: Qualitative Implementation Case Study.JMIR human factors · 2022Article
- Data-driven quality improvement program to prevent hospitalisation and improve care of people living with coronary heart disease: Protocol for a process evaluation.Contemporary clinical trials · 2022Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA computerised, multifaceted quality improvement (QI) intervention for cardiovascular disease (CVD) management in Australian primary healthcare was evaluated in a cluster randomised controlled trial. The intervention was associated with improved CVD risk factor screening but there was no improvement in prescribing rates of guideline-recommended medicines. The aim of this study was to conduct a process evaluation to identify and explain the underlying mechanisms by which the intervention did and did not have an impact. METHODS/
designNormalisation process theory (NPT) was used to understand factors that supported or constrained normalisation of the intervention into routine practice. A case study design was used in which six of the 30 participating intervention sites were purposively sampled to obtain a mix of size, governance, structure and performance. Multiple data sources were drawn on including trial outcome data, surveys of job satisfaction and team climate (68 staff) and in-depth interviews (19 staff). Data were primarily analysed within cases and compared with quantitative findings in other trial intervention and usual care sites.
resultsWe found a complex interaction between implementation processes and several contextual factors affecting uptake of the intervention. There was no clear association between team climate, job satisfaction and intervention outcomes. There were four spheres of influence that appeared to enhance or detract from normalisation of the intervention: organisational mission and history (e.g. strategic investment to promote a QI culture enhanced cognitive participation), leadership (e.g. ability to energise or demotivate others influenced coherence), team environment (e.g. synergistic activities of team members with different skill sets influenced collective action) and technical integrity of the intervention (e.g. tools that slowed computer systems limited reflective action). DISCUSSION: Use of NPT helped explain how certain contextual factors influence the work that is done by individuals and teams when implementing a novel intervention. Although these factors do not necessarily distil into a recipe for successful uptake, they may assist system planners, intervention developers, and health professionals to better understand the trajectory that primary health care services may take when developing and engaging with QI interventions.
trial registrationACTRN 12611000478910 . Registered 08 May 2011.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.