{"title":"指导慢性疼痛数字化自我管理干预的实施框架:范围综述。","authors":"R. de la Vega, S. L. Bartels, R. W. Wicksell","doi":"10.1002/ejp.2262","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background and Objective</h3>\n \n <p>The development, evaluation and implementation of digital self-management interventions for chronic pain have increased exponentially. While intervention outcomes appear promising to improve well-being and functioning in target populations, it is unclear how the development and evaluation processes were structured and how implementation was planned and executed. The aim of this systematic review is to provide a comprehensive overview of implementation frameworks used to guide and evaluate scientific innovation in chronic pain.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Databases and Data Treatment</h3>\n \n <p>Four bibliography databases (Medline, Web of Science, PsycInfo, CINAHL) and two registries (PubMed Central, MedaRxiv) were systematically searched. Hits (<i>n</i> = 6830) and full texts (<i>n</i> = 351) were screened and read by two independent reviewers. Peer-reviewed articles that met the inclusion criteria were included in the narrative synthesis.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>In total, 10 studies were identified that report on seven distinct interventions. Five implementation frameworks were utilized across these studies: Behavioural Interventions using Technology (BIT); Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR); mHealth Agile and User-Centered Research and Development Lifecycle; Medical Research Council (MRC); Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption Implementation, and Maintenance (RE-AIM). Frameworks were operationalized using qualitative and quantitative methods, evaluating the innovation on various levels (e.g., individual vs. organizational) and applying a variety of study designs (e.g., single-arm or large trials).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>By utilizing implementation frameworks, access to evidence-based chronic pain care may be increased. Although the evidence on the utility of implementation frameworks to guide and evaluate digital self-management interventions is still limited, the body of literature is increasing. Future studies are urged to operationalize, communicate and discuss the innovation process, to promote transparency and replicability.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Significance</h3>\n \n <p>The use of implementation frameworks to guide and evaluate digital self-management interventions for chronic pain is a recent development in the field. Several promising examples exist and are presented in this review. Currently, the evidence is still limited, and prospective studies need to transparently operationalize, communicate and discuss their efforts. By utilizing an implementation framework, promising interventions can be made available to end-users, closing the research-to-clinical practice gap and increasing access to evidence-based care to people with chronic pain.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":12021,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Pain","volume":"28 8","pages":"1257-1275"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/ejp.2262","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Implementation frameworks guiding digital self-management intervention in chronic pain: A scoping review\",\"authors\":\"R. de la Vega, S. L. Bartels, R. W. Wicksell\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/ejp.2262\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Background and Objective</h3>\\n \\n <p>The development, evaluation and implementation of digital self-management interventions for chronic pain have increased exponentially. While intervention outcomes appear promising to improve well-being and functioning in target populations, it is unclear how the development and evaluation processes were structured and how implementation was planned and executed. The aim of this systematic review is to provide a comprehensive overview of implementation frameworks used to guide and evaluate scientific innovation in chronic pain.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Databases and Data Treatment</h3>\\n \\n <p>Four bibliography databases (Medline, Web of Science, PsycInfo, CINAHL) and two registries (PubMed Central, MedaRxiv) were systematically searched. Hits (<i>n</i> = 6830) and full texts (<i>n</i> = 351) were screened and read by two independent reviewers. Peer-reviewed articles that met the inclusion criteria were included in the narrative synthesis.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>In total, 10 studies were identified that report on seven distinct interventions. Five implementation frameworks were utilized across these studies: Behavioural Interventions using Technology (BIT); Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR); mHealth Agile and User-Centered Research and Development Lifecycle; Medical Research Council (MRC); Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption Implementation, and Maintenance (RE-AIM). Frameworks were operationalized using qualitative and quantitative methods, evaluating the innovation on various levels (e.g., individual vs. organizational) and applying a variety of study designs (e.g., single-arm or large trials).</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\\n \\n <p>By utilizing implementation frameworks, access to evidence-based chronic pain care may be increased. Although the evidence on the utility of implementation frameworks to guide and evaluate digital self-management interventions is still limited, the body of literature is increasing. Future studies are urged to operationalize, communicate and discuss the innovation process, to promote transparency and replicability.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Significance</h3>\\n \\n <p>The use of implementation frameworks to guide and evaluate digital self-management interventions for chronic pain is a recent development in the field. Several promising examples exist and are presented in this review. Currently, the evidence is still limited, and prospective studies need to transparently operationalize, communicate and discuss their efforts. By utilizing an implementation framework, promising interventions can be made available to end-users, closing the research-to-clinical practice gap and increasing access to evidence-based care to people with chronic pain.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12021,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Pain\",\"volume\":\"28 8\",\"pages\":\"1257-1275\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/ejp.2262\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Pain\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ejp.2262\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ANESTHESIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Pain","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ejp.2262","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景和目的:针对慢性疼痛的数字化自我管理干预措施的开发、评估和实施呈指数增长。虽然干预结果似乎有望改善目标人群的福祉和功能,但目前尚不清楚如何构建开发和评估流程,以及如何规划和实施。本系统综述旨在全面概述用于指导和评估慢性疼痛科学创新的实施框架:系统检索了四个书目数据库(Medline、Web of Science、PsycInfo、CINAHL)和两个登记数据库(PubMed Central、MedaRxiv)。两位独立审稿人筛选并阅读了点击率(n = 6830)和全文(n = 351)。符合纳入标准的同行评审文章被纳入叙述性综述:总共确定了 10 项研究,报告了七种不同的干预措施。这些研究采用了五个实施框架:使用技术的行为干预(BIT);实施研究综合框架(CFIR);移动医疗敏捷和以用户为中心的研发生命周期;医学研究委员会(MRC);普及、效果、采用、实施和维护(RE-AIM)。采用定性和定量方法对框架进行操作,从不同层面(如个人与组织)对创新进行评估,并应用各种研究设计(如单臂或大型试验):结论:通过利用实施框架,可以增加循证慢性疼痛护理的可及性。尽管有关实施框架在指导和评估数字化自我管理干预措施方面的实用性的证据仍然有限,但文献数量正在不断增加。未来的研究应将创新过程操作化、进行交流和讨论,以提高透明度和可复制性:使用实施框架来指导和评估针对慢性疼痛的数字化自我管理干预措施是该领域的最新发展。本综述介绍了几个很有前景的例子。目前,证据仍然有限,前瞻性研究需要透明地操作、交流和讨论他们的工作。通过利用实施框架,可以向最终用户提供有前景的干预措施,缩小研究与临床实践之间的差距,增加慢性疼痛患者获得循证护理的机会。
Implementation frameworks guiding digital self-management intervention in chronic pain: A scoping review
Background and Objective
The development, evaluation and implementation of digital self-management interventions for chronic pain have increased exponentially. While intervention outcomes appear promising to improve well-being and functioning in target populations, it is unclear how the development and evaluation processes were structured and how implementation was planned and executed. The aim of this systematic review is to provide a comprehensive overview of implementation frameworks used to guide and evaluate scientific innovation in chronic pain.
Databases and Data Treatment
Four bibliography databases (Medline, Web of Science, PsycInfo, CINAHL) and two registries (PubMed Central, MedaRxiv) were systematically searched. Hits (n = 6830) and full texts (n = 351) were screened and read by two independent reviewers. Peer-reviewed articles that met the inclusion criteria were included in the narrative synthesis.
Results
In total, 10 studies were identified that report on seven distinct interventions. Five implementation frameworks were utilized across these studies: Behavioural Interventions using Technology (BIT); Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR); mHealth Agile and User-Centered Research and Development Lifecycle; Medical Research Council (MRC); Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption Implementation, and Maintenance (RE-AIM). Frameworks were operationalized using qualitative and quantitative methods, evaluating the innovation on various levels (e.g., individual vs. organizational) and applying a variety of study designs (e.g., single-arm or large trials).
Conclusions
By utilizing implementation frameworks, access to evidence-based chronic pain care may be increased. Although the evidence on the utility of implementation frameworks to guide and evaluate digital self-management interventions is still limited, the body of literature is increasing. Future studies are urged to operationalize, communicate and discuss the innovation process, to promote transparency and replicability.
Significance
The use of implementation frameworks to guide and evaluate digital self-management interventions for chronic pain is a recent development in the field. Several promising examples exist and are presented in this review. Currently, the evidence is still limited, and prospective studies need to transparently operationalize, communicate and discuss their efforts. By utilizing an implementation framework, promising interventions can be made available to end-users, closing the research-to-clinical practice gap and increasing access to evidence-based care to people with chronic pain.
期刊介绍:
European Journal of Pain (EJP) publishes clinical and basic science research papers relevant to all aspects of pain and its management, including specialties such as anaesthesia, dentistry, neurology and neurosurgery, orthopaedics, palliative care, pharmacology, physiology, psychiatry, psychology and rehabilitation; socio-economic aspects of pain are also covered.
Regular sections in the journal are as follows:
• Editorials and Commentaries
• Position Papers and Guidelines
• Reviews
• Original Articles
• Letters
• Bookshelf
The journal particularly welcomes clinical trials, which are published on an occasional basis.
Research articles are published under the following subject headings:
• Neurobiology
• Neurology
• Experimental Pharmacology
• Clinical Pharmacology
• Psychology
• Behavioural Therapy
• Epidemiology
• Cancer Pain
• Acute Pain
• Clinical Trials.