Trial reportBMJ open2019
Can implementation failure or intervention failure explain the result of the 3D multimorbidity trial in general practice: mixed-methods process evaluation.
Trial report in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 3 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
25 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Organisation and integrated healthcare approaches for people living with HIV, multimorbidity, or both: a systematic review.BMC public health · 2023Pooled it
- What do we want to get out of this? a critical interpretive synthesis of the value of process evaluations, with a practical planning framework.BMC medical research methodology · 2022Pooled it
- Managing clinical uncertainty in older people towards the end of life: a systematic review of person-centred tools.BMC palliative care · 2021Pooled it
- Trial
- Trial
- Trial
- Digital Medication Management in Polypharmacy—Findings of a Cluster-Randomized, Controlled Trial With a Stepped-Wedge Design in Primary Care Practices (AdAM).Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2024Trial
- Patient and general practitioner experiences of implementing a medication review intervention in older people with multimorbidity: Process evaluation of the SPPiRE trial.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022Trial
- Implementation of a complex intervention to improve hospital discharge: process evaluation of a cluster randomised controlled trial.BMJ open · 2021Trial
- Patient-centred innovation for multimorbidity care: a mixed-methods, randomised trial and qualitative study of the patients' experience.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2021Trial
- Article
- Proactive planning for contextual fit: the role of the implementation premortem.Implementation science communications · 2025Article
- Predicting anticipated benefit from an extended consultation to personalise care in multimorbidity: a development and internal validation study of a prioritisation algorithm in general practice.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2024Article
- Mis-implementation of evidence-based behavioural health practices in primary care: lessons from randomised trials in Federally Qualified Health Centers.Evidence & policy : a journal of research, debate and practice · 2024Article
- Multimorbidity.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2022Review
- Use of an Electronic Medication Management Support System in Patients with Polypharmacy in General Practice: A Quantitative Process Evaluation of the AdAM Trial.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- The diabetes community exercise programme plus usual care versus usual care in patients with type 2 diabetes: A randomised, two-arm, parallel, open-label trial.EClinicalMedicine · 2022Article
- Health information technology to improve care for people with multiple chronic conditions.Health services research · 2021Review
- A new framework for developing and evaluating complex interventions: update of Medical Research Council guidance.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2021Article
- Framework for the development and evaluation of complex interventions: gap analysis, workshop and consultation-informed update.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2021Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesDuring a cluster randomised trial, (the 3D study) of an intervention enacting recommended care for people with multimorbidity, including continuity of care and comprehensive biennial reviews, we examined implementation fidelity to interpret the trial outcome and inform future implementation decisions.
designMixed-methods process evaluation using cross-trial data and a sample of practices, clinicians, administrators and patients. Interviews, focus groups and review observations were analysed thematically and integrated with quantitative data about implementation. Analysis was blind to trial outcomes and examined context, intervention adoption, reach and maintenance, and delivery of reviews to patients.
settingThirty-three UK general practices in three areas.
participantsThe trial included 1546 people with multimorbidity. 11 general practitioners, 14 nurses, 7 administrators and 38 patients from 9 of 16 intervention practices were sampled for an interview.
resultsStaff loss, practice size and different administrative strategies influenced implementation fidelity. Practices with whole administrative team involvement and good alignment between the intervention and usual care generally implemented better. Fewer reviews than intended were delivered (49% of patients receiving both intended reviews, 30% partially reviewed). In completed reviews >90% of intended components were delivered, but review observations and interviews with patients and clinicians found variation in style of component delivery, from 'tick-box' to patient-centred approaches. Implementation barriers included inadequate skills training to implement patient-centred care planning, but patients reported increased patient-centredness due to comprehensive reviews, extra time and being asked about their health concerns.
conclusionsImplementation failure contributed to lack of impact of the 3D intervention on the trial primary outcome (quality of life), but so did intervention failure since modifiable elements of intervention design were partially responsible. When a decisive distinction between implementation failure and intervention failure cannot be made, identifying potentially modifiable reasons for suboptimal implementation is important to enhance potential for impact and effectiveness of a redesigned intervention. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN06180958.
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.