Effectiveness of Implementation Interventions in Musculoskeletal Healthcare: A Systematic Review
Hansen, P. B.; Bahnsen, M.; Noergaard, M. S.; Jepsen, J. F.; Rathleff, M. S.; Lyng, K. D.
Show abstract
BackgroundImplementing new knowledge into clinical practice is a challenge, but nonetheless crucial to improve our healthcare system related to the management of musculoskeletal pain. This systematic review aimed to assess the effectiveness of implementation interventions within musculoskeletal healthcare. MethodsWe searched Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Scopus. Any type of randomised controlled trials investigating implementation strategies or interventions in relation to musculoskeletal pain conditions were included. Risk of bias were assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool. Data analysis was done using frameworks from Powell et al. 2015, and Waltz et al. 2015 and outcomes were identified by Thompson et al. 2022 or self-made outcome domains were established. ResultsThe literature search yielded 14,265 original studies, of which 38 studies from 31 trials, with 13,203 participating healthcare professionals and 30,320 participating patients were included in the final synthesis. Nineteen studies had a high risk of bias, sixteen had a moderate risk of bias, and three had a low risk of bias. Twenty distinct implementation interventions were identified. A significant heterogeneity in the utilised outcome measurements was observed, thereby rendering a meta-analysis infeasible; consequently, all outcomes were classified into six outcome domains for healthcare professionals, seven for patients and one for cost-effectiveness. ConclusionsOur findings suggest that some implementation interventions may have a tendency towards a statistically significant positive effect in favour of the intervention group on the outcome domain "Adherence to the implemented interventions" for healthcare professionals in the included studies. The remaining outcome domains yielded varying results; therefore, these findings should be interpreted with caution. Future high-quality trials with clear reporting and rationale of implementation strategies and interventions utilising standardised nomenclature are needed to further advance our understanding of this area. Trial registrationOpen Science Framework, DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/SRMP2
Matching journals
The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Strategies used to manage overlap of primary study data by exercise-related overviews. Protocol for a systematic methodological review 95%
- Effectiveness and clinical relevance of kinesio taping in musculoskeletal disorders: A protocol for an overview of systematic reviews and evidence mapping 95%
- The devil is in the details: Reporting and transparent research practices in sports medicine and orthopedic clinical trials 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Costs and models used in the economic analysis of Total Knee Replacement (TKR): A Systematic Review 95%
- Effectiveness of early versus delayed rehabilitation following rotator cuff repair: systematic review and meta-analyses 95%
- Designing multimedia patient education materials for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a protocol for a feasibility randomized controlled trial of patient education videos 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- The NASSS (Non-Adoption, Abandonment, Scale-Up, Spread and Sustainability) framework use over time: A scoping review 94%
- Suitability of just-in-time adaptive intervention in post-COVID-19-related symptoms: A systematic scoping review 93%
- Impact of electronic medical records on healthcare delivery in Nigeria: A Review 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- The Stress-Pain Connection in Chronic Primary Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Physiological Stress Markers in Relation to Experimental Pain Responses 85%
- The neuroprotective effects of estrogen and estrogenic compounds in spinal cord injury 85%
- Problematic usage of the internet and eating disorders: a multifaceted, systematic review and meta-analysis 84%
Similar papers in this journal
- Remote working in mental health services: a rapid umbrella review of pre-COVID-19 literature 91%
- Artificial Intelligence (AI)-based Chatbots in Promoting Health Behavioral Changes: A Systematic Review 91%
- Understanding how the design and implementation of Online Consultations influence primary care outcomes: Systematic review of evidence with recommendations for designers, providers, and researchers 90%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.