A scoping review of de-implementation frameworks and models

Abstract Background Reduction 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-im...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Callie Walsh-Bailey, Edward Tsai, Rachel G. Tabak, Alexandra B. Morshed, Wynne E. Norton, Virginia R. McKay, Ross C. Brownson, Sheyna Gifford
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	BMC 2021
Materias:	De-implementation De-adoption Disinvestment Obsolescence Low-value Health Medicine (General) R5-920
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/d7883593cfc74b4d9ec7da000bfb796b
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:d7883593cfc74b4d9ec7da000bfb796b
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:d7883593cfc74b4d9ec7da000bfb796b2021-11-28T12:23:54ZA scoping review of de-implementation frameworks and models10.1186/s13012-021-01173-51748-5908https://doaj.org/article/d7883593cfc74b4d9ec7da000bfb796b2021-11-01T00:00:00Zhttps://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-021-01173-5https://doaj.org/toc/1748-5908Abstract Background Reduction 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 identify and 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. Methods We 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. Results The 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. Conclusion De-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. Registration Not registeredCallie Walsh-BaileyEdward TsaiRachel G. TabakAlexandra B. MorshedWynne E. NortonVirginia R. McKayRoss C. BrownsonSheyna GiffordBMCarticleDe-implementationDe-adoptionDisinvestmentObsolescenceLow-valueHealthMedicine (General)R5-920ENImplementation Science, Vol 16, Iss 1, Pp 1-18 (2021)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	De-implementation De-adoption Disinvestment Obsolescence Low-value Health Medicine (General) R5-920
spellingShingle	De-implementation De-adoption Disinvestment Obsolescence Low-value Health Medicine (General) R5-920 Callie Walsh-Bailey Edward Tsai Rachel G. Tabak Alexandra B. Morshed Wynne E. Norton Virginia R. McKay Ross C. Brownson Sheyna Gifford A scoping review of de-implementation frameworks and models
description	Abstract Background Reduction 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 identify and 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. Methods We 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. Results The 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. Conclusion De-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. Registration Not registered
format	article
author	Callie Walsh-Bailey Edward Tsai Rachel G. Tabak Alexandra B. Morshed Wynne E. Norton Virginia R. McKay Ross C. Brownson Sheyna Gifford
author_facet	Callie Walsh-Bailey Edward Tsai Rachel G. Tabak Alexandra B. Morshed Wynne E. Norton Virginia R. McKay Ross C. Brownson Sheyna Gifford
author_sort	Callie Walsh-Bailey
title	A scoping review of de-implementation frameworks and models
title_short	A scoping review of de-implementation frameworks and models
title_full	A scoping review of de-implementation frameworks and models
title_fullStr	A scoping review of de-implementation frameworks and models
title_full_unstemmed	A scoping review of de-implementation frameworks and models
title_sort	scoping review of de-implementation frameworks and models
publisher	BMC
publishDate	2021
url	https://doaj.org/article/d7883593cfc74b4d9ec7da000bfb796b
work_keys_str_mv	AT calliewalshbailey ascopingreviewofdeimplementationframeworksandmodels AT edwardtsai ascopingreviewofdeimplementationframeworksandmodels AT rachelgtabak ascopingreviewofdeimplementationframeworksandmodels AT alexandrabmorshed ascopingreviewofdeimplementationframeworksandmodels AT wynneenorton ascopingreviewofdeimplementationframeworksandmodels AT virginiarmckay ascopingreviewofdeimplementationframeworksandmodels AT rosscbrownson ascopingreviewofdeimplementationframeworksandmodels AT sheynagifford ascopingreviewofdeimplementationframeworksandmodels AT calliewalshbailey scopingreviewofdeimplementationframeworksandmodels AT edwardtsai scopingreviewofdeimplementationframeworksandmodels AT rachelgtabak scopingreviewofdeimplementationframeworksandmodels AT alexandrabmorshed scopingreviewofdeimplementationframeworksandmodels AT wynneenorton scopingreviewofdeimplementationframeworksandmodels AT virginiarmckay scopingreviewofdeimplementationframeworksandmodels AT rosscbrownson scopingreviewofdeimplementationframeworksandmodels AT sheynagifford scopingreviewofdeimplementationframeworksandmodels
_version_	1718408047521431552

A scoping review of de-implementation frameworks and models

Ejemplares similares