复杂健康干预措施的适应性、可扩展性和可持续性(ASaS):对理论、模型和框架的系统回顾。

IF 8.8 1区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Implementation Science Pub Date : 2024-07-17 DOI:10.1186/s13012-024-01375-7
Lixin Sun, Andrew Booth, Katie Sworn
{"title":"复杂健康干预措施的适应性、可扩展性和可持续性(ASaS):对理论、模型和框架的系统回顾。","authors":"Lixin Sun, Andrew Booth, Katie Sworn","doi":"10.1186/s13012-024-01375-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Complex health interventions (CHIs) are increasingly used in public health, clinical research and education to reduce the burden of disease worldwide. Numerous theories, models and frameworks (TMFs) have been developed to support implementation of CHIs. This systematic review aims to identify and critique theoretical frameworks concerned with three features of implementation; adaptability, scalability and sustainability (ASaS). By dismantling the constituent theories, analysing their component concepts and then exploring factors that influence each theory the review team hopes to offer an enhanced understanding of considerations when implementing CHIs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This review searched PubMed MEDLINE, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Google Scholar for research investigating the TMFs of complex health interventions. Narrative synthesis was employed to examine factors that may influence the adaptability, scalability and sustainability of complex health interventions.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 9763 studies were retrieved from the five databases (PubMed, MEDLINE, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Google Scholar). Following removal of duplicates and application of the eligibility criteria, 35 papers were eligible for inclusion. Influencing factors can be grouped within outer context (socio-political context; leadership funding, inter-organisational networks), inner context; (client advocacy; organisational characteristics), intervention characteristics (supervision, monitoring and evaluation), and bridging factors (individual adopter or provider characteristics).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This review confirms that identified TMFS do not typically include the three components of adaptability, scalability, and sustainability. Current approaches focus on high income countries or generic \"whole world\" approaches with few frameworks specific to low- and middle-income countries. The review offers a starting point for further exploration of adaptability, scalability and sustainability, within a low- and middle-income context.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>Not registered.</p>","PeriodicalId":54995,"journal":{"name":"Implementation Science","volume":"19 1","pages":"52"},"PeriodicalIF":8.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11253497/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Adaptability, Scalability and Sustainability (ASaS) of complex health interventions: a systematic review of theories, models and frameworks.\",\"authors\":\"Lixin Sun, Andrew Booth, Katie Sworn\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s13012-024-01375-7\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Complex health interventions (CHIs) are increasingly used in public health, clinical research and education to reduce the burden of disease worldwide. Numerous theories, models and frameworks (TMFs) have been developed to support implementation of CHIs. This systematic review aims to identify and critique theoretical frameworks concerned with three features of implementation; adaptability, scalability and sustainability (ASaS). By dismantling the constituent theories, analysing their component concepts and then exploring factors that influence each theory the review team hopes to offer an enhanced understanding of considerations when implementing CHIs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This review searched PubMed MEDLINE, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Google Scholar for research investigating the TMFs of complex health interventions. Narrative synthesis was employed to examine factors that may influence the adaptability, scalability and sustainability of complex health interventions.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 9763 studies were retrieved from the five databases (PubMed, MEDLINE, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Google Scholar). Following removal of duplicates and application of the eligibility criteria, 35 papers were eligible for inclusion. Influencing factors can be grouped within outer context (socio-political context; leadership funding, inter-organisational networks), inner context; (client advocacy; organisational characteristics), intervention characteristics (supervision, monitoring and evaluation), and bridging factors (individual adopter or provider characteristics).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This review confirms that identified TMFS do not typically include the three components of adaptability, scalability, and sustainability. Current approaches focus on high income countries or generic \\\"whole world\\\" approaches with few frameworks specific to low- and middle-income countries. The review offers a starting point for further exploration of adaptability, scalability and sustainability, within a low- and middle-income context.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>Not registered.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54995,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Implementation Science\",\"volume\":\"19 1\",\"pages\":\"52\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":8.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11253497/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Implementation Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-024-01375-7\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Implementation Science","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-024-01375-7","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:复杂健康干预(CHIs)越来越多地应用于公共卫生、临床研究和教育领域,以减轻全球疾病负担。目前已开发出许多理论、模型和框架 (TMF),以支持健康干预措施的实施。本系统性综述旨在识别和批评与实施的三个特征有关的理论框架:适应性、可扩展性和可持续性(ASaS)。通过拆解组成理论、分析其组成概念,然后探讨影响每种理论的因素,综述小组希望能让人们更好地理解实施计算机信息集成时的注意事项:本综述搜索了 PubMed MEDLINE、CINAHL、Web of Science 和 Google Scholar 中有关复杂健康干预的 TMFs 的研究。采用叙事综合法研究可能影响复杂健康干预措施的适应性、可扩展性和可持续性的因素:从五个数据库(PubMed、MEDLINE、CINAHL、Web of Science 和 Google Scholar)中共检索到 9763 项研究。在去除重复内容并应用资格标准后,有 35 篇论文符合纳入条件。影响因素可分为外部环境(社会政治环境、领导资金、组织间网络)、内部环境(客户倡导、组织特征)、干预特征(监督、监测和评估)以及衔接因素(采用者或提供者的个人特征):本次审查证实,已确定的技术管理和财务战略通常不包括适应性、可扩展性和可持续性这三个组成部分。当前的方法侧重于高收入国家或通用的 "全球 "方法,很少有专门针对中低收入国家的框架。本综述为在中低收入背景下进一步探索适应性、可扩展性和可持续性提供了一个起点:未注册。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Adaptability, Scalability and Sustainability (ASaS) of complex health interventions: a systematic review of theories, models and frameworks.

Background: Complex health interventions (CHIs) are increasingly used in public health, clinical research and education to reduce the burden of disease worldwide. Numerous theories, models and frameworks (TMFs) have been developed to support implementation of CHIs. This systematic review aims to identify and critique theoretical frameworks concerned with three features of implementation; adaptability, scalability and sustainability (ASaS). By dismantling the constituent theories, analysing their component concepts and then exploring factors that influence each theory the review team hopes to offer an enhanced understanding of considerations when implementing CHIs.

Methods: This review searched PubMed MEDLINE, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Google Scholar for research investigating the TMFs of complex health interventions. Narrative synthesis was employed to examine factors that may influence the adaptability, scalability and sustainability of complex health interventions.

Results: A total of 9763 studies were retrieved from the five databases (PubMed, MEDLINE, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Google Scholar). Following removal of duplicates and application of the eligibility criteria, 35 papers were eligible for inclusion. Influencing factors can be grouped within outer context (socio-political context; leadership funding, inter-organisational networks), inner context; (client advocacy; organisational characteristics), intervention characteristics (supervision, monitoring and evaluation), and bridging factors (individual adopter or provider characteristics).

Conclusion: This review confirms that identified TMFS do not typically include the three components of adaptability, scalability, and sustainability. Current approaches focus on high income countries or generic "whole world" approaches with few frameworks specific to low- and middle-income countries. The review offers a starting point for further exploration of adaptability, scalability and sustainability, within a low- and middle-income context.

Trial registration: Not registered.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Implementation Science
Implementation Science 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
14.30
自引率
11.10%
发文量
78
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Implementation Science is a leading journal committed to disseminating evidence on methods for integrating research findings into routine healthcare practice and policy. It offers a multidisciplinary platform for studying implementation strategies, encompassing their development, outcomes, economics, processes, and associated factors. The journal prioritizes rigorous studies and innovative, theory-based approaches, covering implementation science across various healthcare services and settings.
期刊最新文献
Assessing the comparative effectiveness of ECHO and coaching implementation strategies in a jail/provider MOUD implementation trial. Looking under the hood of a hybrid two-way texting intervention to improve early retention on antiretroviral therapy in Malawi: an implementation fidelity evaluation. Improving the adoption of a school-based nutrition program: findings from a collaborative network of randomised trials. Finding the right dose: a scoping review examining facilitation as an implementation strategy for evidence-based stroke care. Optimizing vaccine uptake in sub-Saharan Africa: a collaborative COVID-19 vaccination campaign in Madagascar using an adaptive approach.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1