A scoping review of de-implementation frameworks and models

Implementation Science

Sheyna Gifford¹  Edward Tsai²  Wynne E. Norton³  Virginia R. McKay⁴  Callie Walsh-Bailey⁴  Rachel G. Tabak⁴  Alexandra B. Morshed⁵  Ross C. Brownson⁶ 

[1] Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Washington University in St. Louis, 4444 Forest Park Ave, Campus Box 8518, 63108, St. Louis, MO, USA;Department of Surgery, Division of Public Health Sciences, Washington University School of Medicine, 660 S. Euclid Ave, 63110, St. Louis, MO, USA;Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, 9609 Medical Center Drive, 20850, Bethesda, MD, USA;Prevention Research Center, Brown School, Washington University in St. Louis, One Brookings Drive, Campus Box 1196, 63130, St. Louis, MO, USA;Prevention Research Center, Brown School, Washington University in St. Louis, One Brookings Drive, Campus Box 1196, 63130, St. Louis, MO, USA;Department of Behavioral, Social, and Health Education Sciences, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, 1518 Clifton Rd NE, 30322, Atlanta, GA, USA;Prevention Research Center, Brown School, Washington University in St. Louis, One Brookings Drive, Campus Box 1196, 63130, St. Louis, MO, USA;Department of Surgery (Division of Public Health Sciences) and Alvin J. Siteman Cancer Center, Washington University School of Medicine, 4921 Parkview Place, 63110, Saint Louis, MO, USA;

关键词: De-implementation;    De-adoption;    Disinvestment;    Obsolescence;    Low-value;    Health;    Model;    Framework;    Scoping review;   

DOI  :  10.1186/s13012-021-01173-5

来源: Springer

【 摘 要 】

BackgroundReduction or elimination of inappropriate, ineffective, or potentially harmful healthcare services and public health programs can help to ensure limited resources are used effectively. Frameworks and models (FM) are valuable tools in conceptualizing and guiding the study of de-implementation. This scoping review sought to identifyand characterize FM that can be used to study de-implementation as a phenomenon and identify gaps in the literature to inform future model development and application for research.MethodsWe searched nine databases and eleven journals from a broad array of disciplines (e.g., healthcare, public health, public policy) for de-implementation studies published between 1990 and June 2020. Two raters independently screened titles and abstracts, and then a pair of raters screened all full text records. We extracted information related to setting, discipline, study design, methodology, and FM characteristics from included studies.ResultsThe final search yielded 1860 records, from which we screened 126 full text records. We extracted data from 27 articles containing 27 unique FM. Most FM (n = 21) were applicable to two or more levels of the Socio-Ecological Framework, and most commonly assessed constructs were at the organization level (n = 18). Most FM (n = 18) depicted a linear relationship between constructs, few depicted a more complex structure, such as a nested or cyclical relationship. Thirteen studies applied FM in empirical investigations of de-implementation, while 14 articles were commentary or review papers that included FM.ConclusionDe-implementation is a process studied in a broad array of disciplines, yet implementation science has thus far been limited in the integration of learnings from other fields. This review offers an overview of visual representations of FM that implementation researchers and practitioners can use to inform their work. Additional work is needed to test and refine existing FM and to determine the extent to which FM developed in one setting or for a particular topic can be applied to other contexts. Given the extensive availability of FM in implementation science, we suggest researchers build from existing FM rather than recreating novel FM.RegistrationNot registered

【 授权许可】

CC BY