Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34016109›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2021

Barriers and facilitators to implementing the CURE stop smoking project: a qualitative study.

Angela Wearn, Anna Haste, Catherine Haighton, Verity Mallion, Angela M Rodrigues

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 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.

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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Barriers and Facilitators to Smoking Cessation Among University Students: A Scoping Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Attitudes towards the integration of smoking cessation into lung cancer screening in the United Kingdom: A qualitative study of individuals eligible to attend.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022
    Article
  8. Article
  9. 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.

Angela WearnDepartment of Psychology, Northumbria University, Northumberland Building, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE1 8ST, UK. angela.wearn@newcastle.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1349-6087
Anna HasteFuse: UKCRC Centre for Translational Research in Public Health, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Catherine HaightonFuse: UKCRC Centre for Translational Research in Public Health, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Verity MallionPublic Health England, Wellington House, 133-155 Waterloo Road, London, SE1 8UG, UK.
Angela M RodriguesDepartment of Psychology, Northumbria University, Northumberland Building, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE1 8ST, UK.

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/K02325X/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Conversation, Understand, Replace, Experts and evidence-based treatment (CURE) project aims to provide a comprehensive offer of both pharmacotherapy and specialist support for tobacco dependence to all smokers admitted to hospital and after discharge. CURE was recently piloted within a single trust in Greater Manchester, with preliminary evidence suggesting this intervention may be successful in improving patient outcomes. Plans are currently underway to pilot a model based upon CURE in other sites across England. To inform implementation, we conducted a qualitative study, which aimed to identify factors influencing healthcare professionals' implementation behaviour within the pilot site.

methodsIndividual, semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with 10 purposively sampled health professionals involved in the delivery and implementation of the CURE project pilot. Topic guides were informed by the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). Transcripts were analysed in line with the framework method, with data coded to TDF domains to highlight important areas of influence and then mapped to the COM-B to support future intervention development.

resultsEight TDF domains were identified as important areas influencing CURE implementation; 'environmental context and resources' (physical opportunity), 'social influence' (social opportunity), 'goals', 'professional role and identity' and 'beliefs about consequences' (reflective motivation), 'reinforcement' (automatic motivation), 'skills' and 'knowledge' (psychological capability). Most domains had the potential to both hinder and/or facilitate implementation, with the exception of 'beliefs about consequences' and 'knowledge', which were highlighted as facilitators of CURE. Participants suggested that 'environmental context and resources' was the most important factor influencing implementation; with barriers most often related to challenges integrating into the wider healthcare context.

conclusionsThis qualitative study identified multi-level barriers and facilitators to CURE implementation. The use of theoretical frameworks allowed for the identification of domains known to influence behaviour change, and thus can be taken forward to develop targeted interventions to support future service implementation. Future work should focus on discussing these findings with a broad range of stakeholders, to ensure resultant intervention strategies are feasible and practicable within a healthcare context. These findings complement wider evaluative work to support nationwide roll out of NHS funded tobacco dependence treatment services in acute care trusts.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelMotivationEnglandHumansQualitative ResearchSmokingBehaviour changeCOM-B modelImplementationSmoking cessationTheoretical domains frameworkTobacco dependence

Identifiers

PMID34016109
PMCPMC8136754

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.