Nurse-Driven mHealth Implementation Using the Technology Inpatient Program for Smokers (TIPS): Mixed Methods Study

Blok, Amanda C.; Sadasivam, Rajani S.; Hogan, Timothy P.; Patterson, Angela; Day, Nicole; Houston, Thomas K.

doi:10.2196/14331

Cited by 1 publication

(4 citation statements)

References 49 publications

(56 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Table 3 presents an overview of each study 36‐98 . A summary of the characteristics of the 56 studies is presented in Table 4.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Each study was categorized into one of 7 groups based on implementation strategies. Table 6 presents an overview of the groups, listing the implementation strategy for each group and subsequently providing a breakdown of each implementation outcome (acceptability, adoption, appropriateness, cost, feasibility, fidelity, penetration, and sustainability) 31,36,37,39‐52,56,58,60‐62,64‐71,73,75,76,82,86‐89,91,92,94‐96 . A more comprehensive list of implementation outcomes for all included studies is presented in Supporting Table .…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Only one study measured sustainability, with results indicating reduced sustainability over time. Across outcomes, externally led, one‐off training programs showed limited potential for implementation into usual practice. Externally led, one‐off training programs with reinforcement studies (n = 10 44,49‐51,61,64‐66,73,76,82 ) evaluated training programs supplemented by other implementation strategies, such as reminders, supervision, feedback, or other reinforcement. Studies in this category had an average study period of 0.8 years.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Table 6 presents an overview of the groups, listing the implementation strategy for each group and subsequently providing a breakdown of each implementation outcome (acceptability, adoption, appropr iateness, cost, feasibility, fidelity, penetration, and sustainability). 31,36,37,[39][40][41][42][43][44][45][46][47][48][49][50][51][52]56,58,[60][61][62][64][65][66][67][68][69][70][71]73,75,76,82,[86][87][88][89]91,92,[94][95][96] A more comprehensive list of implementation outcomes for all included studies is presented in Supporting Table 2. A summary of results is presented below:…”

Section: Implementation Outcomes By Implementation Groupmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

How can hospitals change practice to better implement smoking cessation interventions? A systematic review

Ugalde

White

Rankin

et al. 2021

CA A Cancer J Clinicians

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Smoking cessation reduces the risk of death, improves recovery, and reduces the risk of hospital readmission. Evidence and policy support hospital admission as an ideal time to deliver smoking‐cessation interventions. However, this is not well implemented in practice. In this systematic review, the authors summarize the literature on smoking‐cessation implementation strategies and evaluate their success to guide the implementation of best‐practice smoking interventions into hospital settings. The CINAHL Complete, Embase, MEDLINE Complete, and PsycInfo databases were searched using terms associated with the following topics: smoking cessation, hospitals, and implementation. In total, 14,287 original records were identified and screened, resulting in 63 eligible articles from 56 studies. Data were extracted on the study characteristics, implementation strategies, and implementation outcomes. Implementation outcomes were guided by Proctor and colleagues' framework and included acceptability, adoption, appropriateness, cost, feasibility, fidelity, penetration, and sustainability. The findings demonstrate that studies predominantly focused on the training of staff to achieve implementation. Brief implementation approaches using a small number of implementation strategies were less successful and poorly sustained compared with well resourced and multicomponent approaches. Although brief implementation approaches may be viewed as advantageous because they are less resource‐intensive, their capacity to change practice in a sustained way lacks evidence. Attempts to change clinician behavior or introduce new models of care are challenging in a short time frame, and implementation efforts should be designed for long‐term success. There is a need to embrace strategic, well planned implementation approaches to embed smoking‐cessation interventions into hospitals and to reap and sustain the benefits for people who smoke.

show abstract

“…Table 3 presents an overview of each study 36‐98 . A summary of the characteristics of the 56 studies is presented in Table 4.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%