Trial reportJournal of advanced nursing2025
Implementation contexts and strategies for alternative peripherally inserted central catheter material and design selection: A qualitative exploration using CFIR/ERIC approach.
Trial report in Journal of advanced nursing, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Implementation contexts and strategies for alternative peripherally inserted central catheter material and design selection: A qualitative exploration using CFIR/ERIC approach.Journal of advanced nursing · 2025Trial
- Application status of the CFIR-ERIC matching tool in healthcare context: a scoping review.Implementation science : IS · 2026Article
- Using a Co-Designed Implementation Enhancement Plan to Increase the Adoption of a Digital Fall Prevention Platform: A Non-Randomized Pre-Post Interventional Study.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimTo explore the implementation contexts and strategies that influence the uptake and selection of alternative peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) materials and design.
designQualitative evaluation of end user perspectives within a randomized control trial of different PICC materials and design.
methodsSemi-structured interviews with key stakeholders were undertaken via an adapted, rapid-analytic approach using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Outcomes were mapped against the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) tool for strategies to guide innovation in PICC practice.
resultsParticipants (n = 23) represented a combination of users and inserters/purchasers, from adult and paediatric settings. Dominant themes included intervention characteristics (intervention source), inner setting (structural characteristics) and individuals involved (self-efficacy). Strategies emerging to support a change from ERIC mapping (n = 16) included promotion of intervention adaptability, inclusion of staff and consumer perspectives and sufficient funding. Implementation contexts such as inner setting and individuals involved equally impacted PICC success and implementation effectiveness and enabled a greater understanding of barriers and facilitators to intervention implementation in this trial.
conclusionTrial evidence is important, but healthcare decision-making requires consideration of local contexts especially resourcing. Implementation contexts for Australian healthcare settings include a practical, strategic toolkit for the implementation of alternative PICC materials and designs. REPORTING
methodThis study adhered to COREQ guidelines. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No patient or public contribution.
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.