Cargando…
Supporting translation of research evidence into practice—the use of Normalisation Process Theory to assess and inform implementation within randomised controlled trials: a systematic review
BACKGROUND: The status of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) as the ‘gold standard’ for evaluating efficacy in healthcare interventions is increasingly debated among the research community, due to often insufficient consideration for implementation. Normalisation Process Theory (NPT), which focuses...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10612208/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37891671 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13012-023-01311-1 |
_version_ | 1785128651281399808 |
---|---|
author | Williams, Allison Lennox, Laura Harris, Matthew Antonacci, Grazia |
author_facet | Williams, Allison Lennox, Laura Harris, Matthew Antonacci, Grazia |
author_sort | Williams, Allison |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The status of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) as the ‘gold standard’ for evaluating efficacy in healthcare interventions is increasingly debated among the research community, due to often insufficient consideration for implementation. Normalisation Process Theory (NPT), which focuses on the work required to embed processes into practice, offers a potentially useful framework for addressing these concerns. While the theory has been deployed in numerous RCTs to date, more work is needed to consolidate understanding of if, and how, NPT may aid implementation planning and processes within RCTs. Therefore, this review seeks to understand how NPT contributes to understanding the dynamics of implementation processes within RCTs. Specifically, this review will identify and characterise NPT operationalisation, benefits and reported challenges and limitations in RCTs. METHODS: A qualitative systematic review with narrative synthesis of peer-reviewed journal articles from eight databases was conducted. Studies were eligible for inclusion if they reported sufficient detail on the use of NPT within RCTs in a healthcare domain. A pre-specified data extraction template was developed based on the research questions of this review. A narrative synthesis was performed to identify recurrent findings. RESULTS: Searches identified 48 articles reporting 42 studies eligible for inclusion. Findings suggest that NPT is primarily operationalised prospectively during the data collection stage, with limited sub-construct utilisation overall. NPT is beneficial in understanding implementation processes by aiding the identification and analysis of key factors, such as understanding intervention fidelity in real-world settings. Nearly three-quarters of studies failed to report the challenges and limitations of utilising NPT, though coding difficulties and data falling outside the NPT framework are most common. CONCLUSIONS: NPT appears to be a consistent and generalisable framework for explaining the dynamics of implementation processes within RCTs. However, operationalisation of the theory to its full extent is necessary to improve its use in practice, as it is currently deployed in varying capacities. Recommendations for future research include investigation of NPT alongside other frameworks, as well as earlier operationalisation and greater use of NPT sub-constructs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The protocol for this systematic review was accepted for public registration on PROSPERO (registration number: CRD42022345427) on 26 July 2022. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13012-023-01311-1. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10612208 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-106122082023-10-29 Supporting translation of research evidence into practice—the use of Normalisation Process Theory to assess and inform implementation within randomised controlled trials: a systematic review Williams, Allison Lennox, Laura Harris, Matthew Antonacci, Grazia Implement Sci Systematic Review BACKGROUND: The status of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) as the ‘gold standard’ for evaluating efficacy in healthcare interventions is increasingly debated among the research community, due to often insufficient consideration for implementation. Normalisation Process Theory (NPT), which focuses on the work required to embed processes into practice, offers a potentially useful framework for addressing these concerns. While the theory has been deployed in numerous RCTs to date, more work is needed to consolidate understanding of if, and how, NPT may aid implementation planning and processes within RCTs. Therefore, this review seeks to understand how NPT contributes to understanding the dynamics of implementation processes within RCTs. Specifically, this review will identify and characterise NPT operationalisation, benefits and reported challenges and limitations in RCTs. METHODS: A qualitative systematic review with narrative synthesis of peer-reviewed journal articles from eight databases was conducted. Studies were eligible for inclusion if they reported sufficient detail on the use of NPT within RCTs in a healthcare domain. A pre-specified data extraction template was developed based on the research questions of this review. A narrative synthesis was performed to identify recurrent findings. RESULTS: Searches identified 48 articles reporting 42 studies eligible for inclusion. Findings suggest that NPT is primarily operationalised prospectively during the data collection stage, with limited sub-construct utilisation overall. NPT is beneficial in understanding implementation processes by aiding the identification and analysis of key factors, such as understanding intervention fidelity in real-world settings. Nearly three-quarters of studies failed to report the challenges and limitations of utilising NPT, though coding difficulties and data falling outside the NPT framework are most common. CONCLUSIONS: NPT appears to be a consistent and generalisable framework for explaining the dynamics of implementation processes within RCTs. However, operationalisation of the theory to its full extent is necessary to improve its use in practice, as it is currently deployed in varying capacities. Recommendations for future research include investigation of NPT alongside other frameworks, as well as earlier operationalisation and greater use of NPT sub-constructs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The protocol for this systematic review was accepted for public registration on PROSPERO (registration number: CRD42022345427) on 26 July 2022. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13012-023-01311-1. BioMed Central 2023-10-27 /pmc/articles/PMC10612208/ /pubmed/37891671 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13012-023-01311-1 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Systematic Review Williams, Allison Lennox, Laura Harris, Matthew Antonacci, Grazia Supporting translation of research evidence into practice—the use of Normalisation Process Theory to assess and inform implementation within randomised controlled trials: a systematic review |
title | Supporting translation of research evidence into practice—the use of Normalisation Process Theory to assess and inform implementation within randomised controlled trials: a systematic review |
title_full | Supporting translation of research evidence into practice—the use of Normalisation Process Theory to assess and inform implementation within randomised controlled trials: a systematic review |
title_fullStr | Supporting translation of research evidence into practice—the use of Normalisation Process Theory to assess and inform implementation within randomised controlled trials: a systematic review |
title_full_unstemmed | Supporting translation of research evidence into practice—the use of Normalisation Process Theory to assess and inform implementation within randomised controlled trials: a systematic review |
title_short | Supporting translation of research evidence into practice—the use of Normalisation Process Theory to assess and inform implementation within randomised controlled trials: a systematic review |
title_sort | supporting translation of research evidence into practice—the use of normalisation process theory to assess and inform implementation within randomised controlled trials: a systematic review |
topic | Systematic Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10612208/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37891671 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13012-023-01311-1 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT williamsallison supportingtranslationofresearchevidenceintopracticetheuseofnormalisationprocesstheorytoassessandinformimplementationwithinrandomisedcontrolledtrialsasystematicreview AT lennoxlaura supportingtranslationofresearchevidenceintopracticetheuseofnormalisationprocesstheorytoassessandinformimplementationwithinrandomisedcontrolledtrialsasystematicreview AT harrismatthew supportingtranslationofresearchevidenceintopracticetheuseofnormalisationprocesstheorytoassessandinformimplementationwithinrandomisedcontrolledtrialsasystematicreview AT antonaccigrazia supportingtranslationofresearchevidenceintopracticetheuseofnormalisationprocesstheorytoassessandinformimplementationwithinrandomisedcontrolledtrialsasystematicreview |