↓ Skip to main content

Effectiveness of multifaceted implementation strategies for the implementation of back and neck pain guidelines in health care: a systematic review

Overview of attention for article published in Implementation Science, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (85th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (65th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
12 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
135 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Effectiveness of multifaceted implementation strategies for the implementation of back and neck pain guidelines in health care: a systematic review
Published in
Implementation Science, September 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13012-016-0482-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Arnela Suman, Marije F. Dikkers, Frederieke G. Schaafsma, Maurits W. van Tulder, Johannes R. Anema

Abstract

For the optimal use of clinical guidelines in daily practice, mere distribution of guidelines and materials is not enough, and active implementation is needed. This review investigated the effectiveness of multifaceted implementation strategies compared to minimal, single, or no implementation strategy for the implementation of non-specific low back and/or neck pain guidelines in health care. The following electronic databases were searched from inception to June 1, 2015: MEDLINE, Embase, PsycInfo, the Cochrane Library, and CINAHL. The search strategy was restricted to low back pain, neck pain, and implementation research. Studies were included if their design was a randomized controlled trial, reporting on patients (age ≥18 years) with non-specific low back pain or neck pain (with or without radiating pain). Trials were eligible if they reported patient outcomes, measures of healthcare professional behaviour, and/or outcomes on healthcare level. The primary outcome was professional behaviour. Guidelines that were evaluated in the studies had to be implemented in a healthcare setting. No language restrictions were applied, and studies had to be published full-text in peer-reviewed journals, thus excluding abstract only publications, conference abstracts, and dissertation articles. Two researchers independently screened titles and abstract, extracted data from included studies, and performed risk of bias assessments. After removal of duplicates, the search resulted in 4750 abstracts to be screened. Of 43 full-text articles assessed for eligibility, 12 were included in this review, reporting on 9 individual studies, and separate cost-effectiveness analyses of 3 included studies. Implementation strategies varied between studies. Meta-analyses did not reveal any differences in effect between multifaceted strategies and controls. This review showed that multifaceted strategies for the implementation of neck and/or back pain guidelines in health care do not significantly improve professional behaviour outcomes. No effects on patient outcomes or cost of care could be found. More research is necessary to determine whether multifaceted implementation strategies are conducted as planned and whether these strategies are effective in changing professional behaviour and thereby clinical practice.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 135 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 135 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 22 16%
Researcher 14 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 7%
Student > Postgraduate 8 6%
Other 31 23%
Unknown 37 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 33 24%
Nursing and Health Professions 30 22%
Sports and Recreations 5 4%
Psychology 3 2%
Social Sciences 3 2%
Other 15 11%
Unknown 46 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 April 2022.
All research outputs
#2,620,630
of 22,788,370 outputs
Outputs from Implementation Science
#595
of 1,721 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#46,350
of 319,971 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Implementation Science
#9
of 26 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,788,370 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,721 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 319,971 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 26 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.