Background Alcohol screening and brief intervention (SBI) is an evidence-based intervention recommended by the World Health Organization. This study applied the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to understand facilitators and barriers of SBI implementation in primary care settings in Hong Kong, China.Methods This was a sequential mixed-method study. In-depth interviews of 21 physicians and 20 nurses working in the primary care settings from the public and private sectors were first conducted to identify CFIR constructs that were relevant to SBI implementation in the Chinese context and potential factors not covered by the CFIR. A questionnaire was then developed based on the qualitative findings to investigate factors associated with SBI implementation among 282 physicians and 295 nurses.Results The in-depth interviews identified 22 CFIR constructs that were facilitators or barriers of SBI implementation in Hong Kong. In addition, the stigmatization of alcohol dependence was a barrier and the belief that it was important for people to control the amount of alcohol intake in any situation was mentioned as a facilitator to implement SBI. In the survey, 22% of the participants implemented SBI in the past year. Factors associated with the SBI implementation echoed most of the qualitative findings. Among physicians and nurses in both sectors, they were more likely to implement SBI when perceiving stronger evidence supporting SBI, better knowledge and self-efficacy to implement SBI, more available resources, and clearer planning for SBI implementation in the clinics but less likely to do so when perceiving SBI implementation to be complicated and of higher cost, and drinking approved by the Chinese culture. Participants were more likely to implement SBI when perceiving SBI fit better with the existing practice and better leadership engagement in the public sector, but not in the private sector. Perceiving a stronger need and greater importance to implement SBI were associated with higher likelihood of SBI implementation among physicians, but not among nurses. Perceiving better organizational culture supporting SBI was positively associated with SBI implementation among nurses, but not among physicians.Conclusions There was a significant gap between SBI evidence and its implementation. Some strategies to improve SBI implementation may be different between physicians and nurses and between those in the public and private sectors. The CFIR is a useful framework for understanding facilitators and barriers of SBI implementation in primary care settings.

Background: There is overwhelming evidence for the preventive effects of regular physical activity and healthy eating habits on the risk for developing a non-communicable disease (NCD). Increasing attention has been paid to community-wide approaches in the battle against NCDs. Communities can create supportive policies, modify physical environments, and foster local stakeholder engagement through intersectoral collaboration to encourage communities to support healthy lifestyles. The Pep initiative is based on intersectoral community-wide collaboration among Sweden’s municipalities. Primary targets are municipality professionals who work with children and young people as well as parents of children <18 years. The goal is to spread knowledge and create commitment to children’s and young people’s health with a special focus on physical activity and healthy eating habits to facilitate and support a healthy lifestyle. The overarching aim of the research project described in this study protocol is to investigate factors that influence the implementation of the Pep initiative in Sweden, to inform tailored implementation strategies addressing the needs and local prerequisites of the different municipalities.

Methods: The project includes a qualitative and a quantitative study and is framed by a theoretical model involving four complementary forms of knowledge, explicitly recognized in the Pep initiative: knowledge about the issue; knowledge about interventions; knowledge about the context; and knowledge about implementation. Study 1 is a focus group study exploring barriers and facilitators for implementing the Pep initiative. The study will be carried out in six municipalities, selected purposively to provide wide variation in municipality characteristics, including population size and geographical location. Data will be analyzed using thematic analysis. Study 2 is a cross-sectional web-based survey investigating the implementability of the Pep initiative in Sweden’s 290 municipalities. Conditions for implementing different areas of the Pep initiative will be examined in terms of the acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility, three predictors of implementation success. Data will be analyzed using non-parametric statistics.

Discussion: The findings of the two studies will increase understanding of the prerequisites for implementing the Pep initiative in Swedish municipalities, which will provide valuable input into how implementation of the Pep initiative can best be facilitated in the different municipality settings.

Background Implementation science in health is an interdisciplinary field with an emphasis on supporting behavior change required when clinicians and other actors implement evidence-based practices within organizational constraints. Behavioral economics has emerged in parallel and works towards developing realistic models of how humans behave and categorizes a wide range of features of choices that can influence behavior. We argue that implementation science can be enhanced by the incorporation of approaches from behavioral economics. Main body First, we provide a general overview of implementation science and ways in which implementation science has been limited to date. Second, we review principles of behavioral economics and describe how concepts from BE have been successfully applied to healthcare including nudges deployed in the electronic health record. For example, de-implementation of low-value prescribing has been supported by changing the default in the electronic health record. We then describe what a behavioral economics lens offers to existing implementation science theories, models and frameworks, including rich and realistic models of human behavior, additional research methods such as pre-mortems and behavioral design, and low-cost and scalable implementation strategies. We argue that insights from behavioral economics can guide the design of implementation strategies and the interpretation of implementation studies. Key objections to incorporating behavioral economics are addressed, including concerns about sustainment and at what level the strategies work.Background Implementation science in health is an interdisciplinary field with an emphasis on supporting behavior change required when clinicians and other actors implement evidence-based practices within organizational constraints. Behavioral economics has emerged in parallel and works towards developing realistic models of how humans behave and categorizes a wide range of features of choices that can influence behavior. We argue that implementation science can be enhanced by the incorporation of approaches from behavioral economics. Main body First, we provide a general overview of implementation science and ways in which implementation science has been limited to date. Second, we review principles of behavioral economics and describe how concepts from BE have been successfully applied to healthcare including nudges deployed in the electronic health record. For example, de-implementation of low-value prescribing has been supported by changing the default in the electronic health record. We then describe what a behavioral economics lens offers to existing implementation science theories, models and frameworks, including rich and realistic models of human behavior, additional research methods such as pre-mortems and behavioral design, and low-cost and scalable implementation strategies. We argue that insights from behavioral economics can guide the design of implementation strategies and the interpretation of implementation studies. Key objections to incorporating behavioral economics are addressed, including concerns about sustainment and at what level the strategies work.Background Implementation science in health is an interdisciplinary field with an emphasis on supporting behavior change required when clinicians and other actors implement evidence-based practices within organizational constraints. Behavioral economics has emerged in parallel and works towards developing realistic models of how humans behave and categorizes a wide range of features of choices that can influence behavior. We argue that implementation science can be enhanced by the incorporation of approaches from behavioral economics. Main body First, we provide a general overview of implementation science and ways in which implementation science has been limited to date. Second, we review principles of behavioral economics and describe how concepts from BE have been successfully applied to healthcare including nudges deployed in the electronic health record. For example, de-implementation of low-value prescribing has been supported by changing the default in the electronic health record. We then describe what a behavioral economics lens offers to existing implementation science theories, models and frameworks, including rich and realistic models of human behavior, additional research methods such as pre-mortems and behavioral design, and low-cost and scalable implementation strategies. We argue that insights from behavioral economics can guide the design of implementation strategies and the interpretation of implementation studies. Key objections to incorporating behavioral economics are addressed, including concerns about sustainment and at what level the strategies work.Conclusion Scholars should consider augmenting implementation science theories, models, and frameworks with relevant insights from behavioral economics. By drawing on these additional insights, implementation scientists have the potential to boost efforts to expand the provision and availability of high quality care.

BackgroundIntegrative oncology (IO) appears to be beneficial to patients with cancer, but its implementation remains a challenge. Guided by the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) and the Capability-Opportunity-Motivation-Behaviour (COM-B) model, this systematic review identified the barriers to and facilitators of IO implementation in conventional cancer care settings. MethodsWe searched eight electronic databases from their inception until February 2022 for qualitative, quantitative or mixed-methods empirical studies reporting the implementation outcomes for IO services. Critical appraisal approach was tailored according to study types. The identified implementation barriers and facilitators were mapped onto TDF domains and the COM-B model, and subsequently onto the behavioural change wheel (BCW) for formulating behavioural change interventions. ResultsWe included 28 studies (11 qualitative, 6 quantitative, 9 mixed-methods and 2 Delphi studies) of satisfied methodological quality. The main implementation barriers were the lack of IO knowledge, the absence of funding and healthcare professionals low level of IO receptiveness. The key implementation facilitators were the dissemination of evidence on IO clinical benefits, the equipping of professionals with IO service delivery skills and the provision of a supportive organisational climate. ConclusionMultifaceted implementation strategies are needed to address the determinants influencing IO service delivery. Based on our BCW-based analysis of the included studies, the key behavioural change techniques are: (1) educating healthcare professionals about the value and application of traditional and complementary medicine; (2) ensuring access to actionable clinical evidence on IO effectiveness and safety and (3) designing guidelines on communicating traditional and complementary medicine interventions with patients and caregivers for biomedically trained doctors and nurses.

With the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, Denmark and Sweden's governments and health authorities implemented social distancing measures as the main strategy to limit the spread of the coronavirus. In Denmark, these were mostly mandatory, whereas in Sweden they were primarily voluntarily based. The aim of this study was to explore how young adults in Denmark and Sweden retrieved and perceived information during the COVID-19 pandemic and what their experiences of everyday life were with the implemented social distancing measures. To this end, 30 Danish and Swedish young adults between 18 and 25 years were interviewed. The participants considered themselves informed and reflected on multiple sources of information. However, social distancing measures were translated in different ways and had both negative and positive implications for their everyday lives. Many participants felt that their youth - as a significant phase in life - became restricted.

Background: Despite the extensive hopes and expectations for value creation resulting from the implementation of artificial intelligence (AI) applications in healthcare, research has predominantly been technology-centric rather than focused on the many changes that are required in clinical practice for the technology to be successfully implemented. The importance of leaders in the successful implementation of innovations in healthcare is well recognised, yet their perspectives on the specific innovation characteristics of AI are still unknown. The aim of this study was therefore to explore the perceptions of leaders in healthcare concerning the innovation characteristics of AI intended to be implemented into their organisation.

Methods: The study had a deductive qualitative design, using constructs from the innovation domain in the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Interviews were conducted with 26 leaders in healthcare.

Results: Participants perceived that AI could provide relative advantages when it came to care management, supporting clinical decisions, and the early detection of disease and risk of disease. The development of AI in the organisation itself was perceived as the main current innovation source. The evidence base behind AI technology was questioned, in relation to its transparency, potential quality improvement, and safety risks. Although the participants acknowledged AI to be superior to human action in terms of effectiveness and precision in some situations, they also expressed uncertainty about the adaptability and trialability of AI. Complexities such as the characteristics of the technology, the lack of conceptual consensus about AI, and the need for a variety of implementation strategies to accomplish transformative change in practice were identified, as were uncertainties about the costs involved in AI implementation.

Conclusion: Healthcare leaders not only saw potential in the technology and its use in practice, but also felt that AI's opacity limits its evidence strength and that complexities in relation to AI itself and its implementation influence its current use in healthcare practice. More research is needed based on actual experiences using AI applications in real-world situations and their impact on clinical practice. New theories, models, and frameworks may need to be developed to meet challenges related to the implementation of AI in healthcare.

BackgroundThe initial responses to the COVID-19 pandemic in Denmark and Sweden differed markedly. Balancing disparate concerns was crucial to generate trust in the COVID-19 restrictions. The aim was to investigate the extent to which there was trust in the handling of the pandemic by the Danish and Swedish governments and public health authorities in each country. A further aim was also to investigate the characteristics of those in Denmark and Sweden who expressed the lowest degree of trust.

MethodsCross-sectional surveys were conducted in 2021, using web panels that are nationally representative of the socio-demographic characteristics. The population consisted of 2619 individuals from Denmark and 2633 from Sweden, representative of the age, sex and region of residence of the populations aged ≥ 18 years. Trust in government and health authorities was captured in two separate trust questions on a 5-point Likert scale and dichotomized into low trusters and non-low trusters for analysis.

ResultsApproximately, 61% of the Danish respondents expressed moderately large or very large trust in the government’s handling of the pandemic. The corresponding proportion for Sweden was 42%. The proportion of low trusters was 11% in Denmark and 34% in Sweden (p < 0.001). Moderately large or very large trust in the public health authority’s handling was expressed by 83% of the Danish respondents and 74% of the Swedish respondents. The proportion of low trusters was 5% in Denmark and 17% in Sweden (p < 0.001). In both countries, trust was lower among men than among women. Age and education were associated with trust but differed between countries (p <  = 0.011).

ConclusionsIn this study, differences in trust between Denmark and Sweden and both overall and within socio-demographic factors were observed. However, given the limitations and bias in the study, it is difficult to determine the cause and true size of these differences. With that in mind, we still believe specific populations and subgroups within those populations have the potential to affect trust in handling of the COVID-19 pandemic, and that these should be kept in mind when developing and communicating responses to pandemics.

BackgroundThe international development of health care, an ageing population and rapid technical development mean that more care is being performed in patient homes. This care environment is often unpredictable and involves both formal and informal caregivers, making it potentially unsafe. There is sparse knowledge about how patient safety is protected in home health care in Sweden and how registered nurses work to prevent risks and promote safe care.AimThe aim of the study was to explore registered nurses efforts to reduce perceived risks for home-dwelling older patients and ensure safe home health care.MethodWe used a qualitative design with individual interviews with 13 registered nurses working in municipalities in southeast Sweden. The narratives were analysed with inductive content analysis.FindingsThe findings showed that the registered nurses tried to secure a safe care environment and took an active role in care, striving to stay one step ahead of the patient. These three types of efforts are likely interdependent, suggesting they are all needed to reduce perceived risks for home-dwelling older patients and ensure patient safety in home health care.ConclusionsIt is a challenge for registered nurses to maintain patient safety when performing care in patient homes. Continuity of care is required and must be based not only on self-reliance among registered nurses but also on trusting relationships with patients, next of kin, colleagues and other personnel, as well as on the development of organisational conditions adapted to patient needs.

Objectives: To examine the association between educational level and attitudes towards alcohol conversations in healthcare using population-based surveys of adults in England, the Netherlands, Norway, and Sweden; and to compare attitudes towards alcohol conversations in healthcare between these four countries. Methods: Cross-sectional surveys were conducted amongst adults in the general population in England (n = 3,499), the Netherlands (n = 2,173), Norway (n = 1,208), and Sweden (n = 3,000). Logistic regression analysis was used to examine associations between attitudes towards alcohol conversations in healthcare and educational level, key demographic variables, alcohol consumption, and country of residence. Results: In all four countries, low educational level (p < 0.001) and male gender (p < 0.001) were associated with holding negative attitudes towards discussing alcohol in healthcare. Risky drinkers had more negative attitudes than low risky drinkers towards discussing alcohol in healthcare (p < 0.001) in all countries except England (p = 0.48), and also reported low levels of perceived honesty and confidence in healthcare (p < 0.001). Conclusion: These findings highlight the importance of considering patients’ socio-economic status when developing and implementing alcohol prevention interventions in healthcare. Copyright © 2023 Karlsson, Skagerström, O’Donnell, Abidi, Thomas, Nilsen and Lid.