Systematic review
Measuring factors affecting implementation of health innovations: a systematic review of structural, organizational, provider, patient, and innovation level measures
1 Department of Psychology, College of the Holy Cross, 1 College St., Worcester, MA, 01610, USA
2 Connecticut Institute for Clinical and Translational Science, University of Connecticut, Dowling South, Suite 1030, UConn Health Center, 263 Farmington Ave, MC 6233, Farmington, CT, 06030-6233, USA
3 Center for Health, Intervention, and Prevention, University of Connecticut, 2006 Hillside Road, Unit 1248, Storrs, CT, 06269, USA
Implementation Science 2013, 8:22 doi:10.1186/1748-5908-8-22
Published: 17 February 2013Abstract
Background
Two of the current methodological barriers to implementation science efforts are the lack of agreement regarding constructs hypothesized to affect implementation success and identifiable measures of these constructs. In order to address these gaps, the main goals of this paper were to identify a multi-level framework that captures the predominant factors that impact implementation outcomes, conduct a systematic review of available measures assessing constructs subsumed within these primary factors, and determine the criterion validity of these measures in the search articles.
Method
We conducted a systematic literature review to identify articles reporting the use or development of measures designed to assess constructs that predict the implementation of evidence-based health innovations. Articles published through 12 August 2012 were identified through MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO and the journal Implementation Science. We then utilized a modified five-factor framework in order to code whether each measure contained items that assess constructs representing structural, organizational, provider, patient, and innovation level factors. Further, we coded the criterion validity of each measure within the search articles obtained.
Results
Our review identified 62 measures. Results indicate that organization, provider, and innovation-level constructs have the greatest number of measures available for use, whereas structural and patient-level constructs have the least. Additionally, relatively few measures demonstrated criterion validity, or reliable association with an implementation outcome (e.g., fidelity).
Discussion
In light of these findings, our discussion centers on strategies that researchers can utilize in order to identify, adapt, and improve extant measures for use in their own implementation research. In total, our literature review and resulting measures compendium increases the capacity of researchers to conceptualize and measure implementation-related constructs in their ongoing and future research.
