{"title":"Integrating Implementation Science in Interpersonal Violence Research and Practice: A Systematic Review of Barriers and Facilitators of Implementation","authors":"Bushra Sabri, Neenah Young, Iris Cardenas, Chuka Nestor Emezue, Michelle Patch","doi":"10.1177/15248380241305567","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Despite the prevalence and harmful consequences of interpersonal violence and the growth in intervention research, applying research evidence and strategies into practice remains limited. This systematic review addresses this gap by using the Consolidated Framework of Implementation Research (CFIR) to characterize barriers and facilitators in efforts to prevent and address interpersonal violence. A systematic search of peer-reviewed literature was conducted using the following databases: PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane, Web of Science, Scopus, and APA PsycInfo. The searches resulted in 1,319 articles for initial screening, with 31 studies included in the final synthesis. The selected studies were original research highlighting barriers and facilitators of implementing interpersonal violence interventions for adolescents and adults across various US settings, employing quantitative, qualitative, or mixed methods approaches. Excluded studies included protocols, reviews, and research that did not identify barriers or facilitators of implementing violence prevention or intervention programs. Published from 2007 to 2023, the selected studies spanned healthcare, school, community, correctional, and military settings. Using the CFIR, the review identified multilevel barriers (e.g., lack of cultural relevance, leadership commitment) and facilitators (e.g., intervention adaptability, stakeholder engagement) across five domains: outer setting (external factors), inner setting (organizational characteristics) implementation process, individual characteristics, and intervention characteristics. These findings underscore the importance of adaptable, culturally relevant strategies and comprehensive stakeholder involvement for effective implementation. The review emphasizes the need for enhanced pre-implementation planning, capacity building, and organizational support to address identified barriers. Furthermore, it highlights the necessity for further research in under-researched settings, employing evidence-based implementation strategies.","PeriodicalId":54211,"journal":{"name":"Trauma Violence & Abuse","volume":"31 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Trauma Violence & Abuse","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15248380241305567","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Despite the prevalence and harmful consequences of interpersonal violence and the growth in intervention research, applying research evidence and strategies into practice remains limited. This systematic review addresses this gap by using the Consolidated Framework of Implementation Research (CFIR) to characterize barriers and facilitators in efforts to prevent and address interpersonal violence. A systematic search of peer-reviewed literature was conducted using the following databases: PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane, Web of Science, Scopus, and APA PsycInfo. The searches resulted in 1,319 articles for initial screening, with 31 studies included in the final synthesis. The selected studies were original research highlighting barriers and facilitators of implementing interpersonal violence interventions for adolescents and adults across various US settings, employing quantitative, qualitative, or mixed methods approaches. Excluded studies included protocols, reviews, and research that did not identify barriers or facilitators of implementing violence prevention or intervention programs. Published from 2007 to 2023, the selected studies spanned healthcare, school, community, correctional, and military settings. Using the CFIR, the review identified multilevel barriers (e.g., lack of cultural relevance, leadership commitment) and facilitators (e.g., intervention adaptability, stakeholder engagement) across five domains: outer setting (external factors), inner setting (organizational characteristics) implementation process, individual characteristics, and intervention characteristics. These findings underscore the importance of adaptable, culturally relevant strategies and comprehensive stakeholder involvement for effective implementation. The review emphasizes the need for enhanced pre-implementation planning, capacity building, and organizational support to address identified barriers. Furthermore, it highlights the necessity for further research in under-researched settings, employing evidence-based implementation strategies.
尽管人际暴力的流行和有害后果以及干预研究的增长,但将研究证据和策略应用于实践仍然有限。本系统综述通过使用实施研究综合框架(CFIR)来描述预防和处理人际暴力工作中的障碍和促进因素,从而解决了这一差距。通过以下数据库对同行评议文献进行了系统搜索:PubMed、Embase、CINAHL、Cochrane、Web of Science、Scopus和APA PsycInfo。搜索结果为1319篇文章进行了初步筛选,最终合成了31篇研究。所选的研究是原创性研究,强调了在美国各种环境中对青少年和成年人实施人际暴力干预的障碍和促进因素,采用定量、定性或混合方法。被排除的研究包括没有确定实施暴力预防或干预项目的障碍或促进因素的方案、综述和研究。这些研究发表于2007年至2023年,涵盖了医疗保健、学校、社区、惩教和军事等领域。利用CFIR,本文确定了外部环境(外部因素)、内部环境(组织特征)、实施过程、个人特征和干预特征五个领域的多层次障碍(例如,缺乏文化相关性、领导承诺)和促进因素(例如,干预适应性、利益相关者参与)。这些发现强调了适应性强、与文化相关的战略和利益相关者全面参与对有效实施的重要性。审查强调需要加强实施前规划、能力建设和组织支持,以解决已确定的障碍。此外,它强调了在研究不足的情况下进一步研究的必要性,采用基于证据的实施策略。
期刊介绍:
Trauma, Violence, & Abuse is devoted to organizing, synthesizing, and expanding knowledge on all force of trauma, abuse, and violence. This peer-reviewed journal is practitioner oriented and will publish only reviews of research, conceptual or theoretical articles, and law review articles. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse is dedicated to professionals and advanced students in clinical training who work with any form of trauma, abuse, and violence. It is intended to compile knowledge that clearly affects practice, policy, and research.