Effectiveness of Implementation Interventions in Musculoskeletal Healthcare: A Systematic Review

Author:

Hansen Peter BechORCID,Bahnsen MikkelORCID,Nørgaard Mikkel SlothORCID,Jepsen Jette Frost,Rathleff Michael SkovdalORCID,Lyng Kristian DamgaardORCID

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundImplementing 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

Publisher

Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory

Reference85 articles.

1. Global estimates of the need for rehabilitation based on the Global Burden of Disease study 2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019

2. Global burden of 369 diseases and injuries in 204 countries and territories, 1990–2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019

3. Prevalence, Deaths, and Disability[Adjusted Life Years Due to Musculoskeletal Disorders for 195 Countries and Territories 1990–2017;Arthritis & Rheumatology,2021

4. The Economic Costs of Pain in the United States

5. Mairey I , Rosenkilde S , Klitgaard MB , Thygesen LC . Sygdomsbyrden i Danmark: sygdomme [Internet]. Version 2.0. Statens Institut for Folkesundhed, Syddansk Universitet. Sygdomsbyrden i Danmark – sygdomme. København: Sundhedsstyrelsen; 2022; 2023 [cited 2023 May 25]. Available from: https://www.sst.dk/-/media/Udgivelser/2023/Sygdomsbyrden-2023/Sygdomme-Sygdomsbyrden-2023.ashx

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3