ReviewInternational journal of nursing studies advances2025
Barriers and facilitators to the implementation of guidelines for venous thromboembolism prevention and management: A mixed-methods systematic review.
Review in International journal of nursing studies advances, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Application status of the CFIR-ERIC matching tool in healthcare context: a scoping review.Implementation science : IS · 2026Article
- Article
- A comprehensive review of venous thromboembolism risk assessment models for hospitalized medical patients: comparative evidence, implementation challenges, and future directions.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Review
- Knowledge Drives Venous Thromboembolism Prevention: Structural Equation Modeling Insights Into Physicians' Knowledge, Attitudes and Practices in Chinese Public Hospitals.Clinical and applied thrombosis/hemostasis : official journal of the International Academy of Clinical and Applied Thrombosis/HemostasisArticle
- Knowledge, Practices, and Challenges in Deep Venous Thrombosis Prevention Among ICU Nurses: A Cross-Sectional Study.SAGE open nursingArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Evidence-based venous thromboembolism prevention and management is a priority for global health services. Low adoption of venous thromboembolism guidelines can result in compromised patient outcomes. Understanding clinicians' and patients' perceptions of barriers to and facilitators for guideline implementation and mapping identified barriers and facilitators to the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research may inform theoretical interventions to improve guideline adoption rates. Objective: To synthesize quantitative and qualitative evidence on both 1) perceptions and experiences of hospital clinicians and patients regarding venous thromboembolism practices and 2) barriers to and facilitators for guideline implementation. Data source: English-language studies from MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Cochrane published between 2012 and 2023. Methods: The included studies primarily focused on two aspects: firstly, elucidating the perceptions and experiences of healthcare providers and patients concerning venous thromboembolism management practices, and secondly, identifying the barriers and facilitators that influence the implementation of venous thromboembolism guidelines. The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool was used for critical appraisal. Quantitative data were transformed into qualitized data and then thematically synthesized with qualitative data to compare the perspectives of clinicians and patients. Barriers and facilitators related to each topic were mapped to the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, and the barriers were entered into its implementation strategy matching tool to obtain implementation strategies. Results: Of 8262 studies of varying quality, 26 (20 quantitative, five qualitative, and one mixed-methods) met the inclusion criteria. Four themes represented factors influencing guideline implementation: 1) healthcare-led multidisciplinary prevention and management, 2) feasibility of guideline implementation, 3) patient involvement in prevention and management, and 4) government and hospital environments and related systems. The majority of barriers identified by healthcare providers were related to the second and fourth themes, while for patients, there were multiple barriers under the third theme. Barriers were mainly mapped into four domains: intervention characteristics, outer setting, inner setting, and characteristics of individuals. Most facilitators mentioned by healthcare providers and patients were related to themes 1, 3, and 4 and mapped to three domains: outer setting, inner setting, and characteristics of individuals. Seven optimal implementation strategies were obtained through the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research-Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change matching tool. Conclusions: We highlighted the most influential factors associated with implementing venous thromboembolism guidelines from the perspectives of both clinicians and patients, and mapping these factors to the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research can help to develop stakeholder-appropriate implementation interventions. Registration: This study's protocol has been registered at PROSPERO under the registration number CRD42024518184.
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.