OBJECTIVE: This review explores the use of implementation science theories, models, and frameworks in rehabilitation research by describing study characteristics and assessing how the applied theories, models, and frameworks align with study purposes. METHODS: In the scoping review, peer-reviewed articles published in English between January 2010 and October 2023 were identified from 5 datbases. Eligible studies applied or were informed by implementation science theories, models, and frameworks in any rehabilitation cotext. Data extraction covered publication characteristics, target populations, setings, study designs, used theories, models, and frameworks, and study purposes. Descriptive statistics and deductive analysis were used to synthesize findings. RESULTS: Of 2,277 citations, 121 articles met the inclusion criteria. Most of the articles focused on neurological and paediatric rehabilitation, with qualitative and mixed-methods designs predominating. A total of 34 theories, models, and frameworks were identified, mainly determinant frameworks and process models. Theories, models, and frameworks were primarily used to identify barriers and facilitators, evaluate implementation outcomes, and describe implementation processes. However, theories, models, and frameworks selection did not always align with the study purpose. CONCLUSION: The use of theories, models, and frameworks in rehabilitation research is increasing but remains limited. Their systematic and purposeful application is needed to enhance the usability and transferability of research findings, thereby bridging the research-practice gap, sustaining evidence-based interventions, and informing policy.
Karhula et al. (Fri,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: