Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33737854›Full record

ReviewJournal of healthcare leadership2021

Where Do Models for Change Management, Improvement and Implementation Meet? A Systematic Review of the Applications of Change Management Models in Healthcare.

Reema Harrison, Sarah Fischer, Ramesh L Walpola, Ashfaq Chauhan, Temitope Babalola, Stephen Mears, Huong Le-Dao

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of healthcare leadership, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 65 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
65citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
29.7field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

65 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 188 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Implementing total skin electron irradiation in radiotherapy: a structured change management approach.Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2026
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

5 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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Reema HarrisonSchool of Population Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-8609-9827
Sarah FischerClinical Excellence Commission, New South Wales Health, Sydney, NSW, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-7370-850X
Ramesh L WalpolaSchool of Population Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-6739-0558
Ashfaq ChauhanSchool of Population Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-2762-510X
Temitope BabalolaSchool of Population Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Stephen MearsHunter New England Medical Library, New Lambton, NSW, Australia.
Huong Le-DaoSchool of Population Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-8963-7347
UNSW Sydney · AUDeakin University · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe increasing prioritisation of healthcare quality across the six domains of efficiency, safety, patient-centredness, effectiveness, timeliness and accessibility has given rise to accelerated change both in the uptake of initiatives and the realisation of their outcomes to meet external targets. Whilst a multitude of change management methodologies exist, their application in complex healthcare contexts remains unclear. Our review sought to establish the methodologies applied, and the nature and effectiveness of their application in the context of healthcare.

methodsA systematic review and narrative synthesis was undertaken. Two reviewers independently screened the titles and abstracts followed by the full-text articles that were potentially relevant against the inclusion criteria. An appraisal of methodological and reporting quality of the included studies was also conducted by two further reviewers.

resultsThirty-eight studies were included that reported the use of 12 change management methodologies in healthcare contexts across 10 countries. The most commonly applied methodologies were Kotter's Model (19 studies) and Lewin's Model (11 studies). Change management methodologies were applied in projects at local ward or unit level (14), institutional level (12) and system or multi-system (6) levels. The remainder of the studies provided commentary on the success of change efforts that had not utilised a change methodology with reference to change management approaches.

conclusionChange management methodologies were often used as guiding principle to underpin a change in complex healthcare contexts. The lack of prescription application of the change management methodologies was identified. Change management methodologies were valued for providing guiding principles for change that are well suited to enable methodologies to be applied in the context of complex and unique healthcare contexts, and to be used in synergy with implementation and improvement methodologies.

Indexed as

change managementhealthcare changeimplementationimprovementtransformation

Identifiers

PMID33737854
PMCPMC7966357
OpenAlexW3138046339

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.