Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 Jul 20;22(7):e15591.
doi: 10.2196/15591.

Implementation Strategies for Web-Based Apps for Screening: Scoping Review

Affiliations

Implementation Strategies for Web-Based Apps for Screening: Scoping Review

Chor Yau Ooi et al. J Med Internet Res. .

Abstract

Background: Screening is an effective primary prevention strategy in health care, as it enables the early detection of diseases. However, the uptake of such screening remains low. Different delivery methods for screening have been developed and found to be effective in increasing the uptake of screening, including the use of web-based apps. Studies have shown that web-based apps for screening are effective in increasing the uptake of health screening among the general population. However, not much is known about the effective implementation of such web-based apps in the real-world setting. Implementation strategies are theory-based methods or techniques used to enhance the adoption, implementation, and sustainability of evidence-based interventions. Implementation strategies are important, as they allow us to understand how to implement an evidence-based intervention. Therefore, a scoping review to identify the various implementation strategies for web-based apps for screening is warranted.

Objective: This scoping review aims to identify (1) strategies used to implement web-based apps for health screening, (2) frameworks used for implementing web-based apps for health screening, (3) outcome measures of implementation strategies, and (4) effective implementation strategies.

Methods: This scoping review was conducted based on Arksey and O'Malley's framework. After identifying the review question, two researchers independently screened and selected relevant literature from PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature, PsycINFO, International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number Registry, OpenGrey, ClinicalTrials.gov, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and Web of Science. This was followed by charting the data using a standardized form. Finally, we collated, summarized, and reported the results quantitatively and qualitatively based on the review objectives.

Results: A total of 16,476 studies were retrieved, of which 5669 were duplicates. From a total of 10,807 studies, 10,784 studies were excluded based on their titles and abstracts. There were 23 full-text articles reviewed, and 4 articles were included in the final analysis. Many studies were excluded because they focused on the effectiveness and not on the implementation of web-based apps. Facilitation was the most cited implementation strategy used, followed by reminders, clinical champions, and educational meetings and materials. Only 2 studies used implementation frameworks to guide the evaluation of their studies. Common outcome measures for implementation strategies were feasibility, fidelity, and penetration. Implementation strategies reported to be effective were quality improvement meetings, facilitation, educational meetings, and clinical champions.

Conclusions: There is a dearth of literature on the implementation of web-based apps for health screening. Implementation strategies were developed without any reported use of implementation theories or frameworks in most studies. More research on the development and evaluation of web-based screening app implementations is needed.

Keywords: eHealth; implementation strategies; internet; mHealth; mass screening.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: None declared.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flow diagram of selection of studies.

References

    1. NHS population screening explained. Public Health England. [2019-03-04]. https://www.gov.uk/guidance/nhs-population-screening-explained.
    1. Wilson J, Jungner G. Principles and practice of screening for disease. World Health Organization. 1968. https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/37650/WHO_PHP_34.pdf?se....
    1. Lee H, Cho J, Shin DW, Lee S, Hwang S, Oh J, Yang H, Hwang S, Son KY, Chun SH, Cho B, Guallar E. Association of cardiovascular health screening with mortality, clinical outcomes, and health care cost: a nationwide cohort study. Prev Med. 2015 Jan;70:19–25. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2014.11.007. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Hewitson P, Glasziou P, Watson E, Towler B, Irwig L. Cochrane systematic review of colorectal cancer screening using the fecal occult blood test (hemoccult): an update. Am J Gastroenterol. 2008 Jun;103(6):1541–9. - PubMed
    1. Bell NR, Grad R, Dickinson JA, Singh H, Moore AE, Kasperavicius D, Kretschmer KL. Better decision making in preventive health screening: balancing benefits and harms. Can Fam Physician. 2017 Jul;63(7):521–524. http://www.cfp.ca/cgi/pmidlookup?view=long&pmid=28701439 - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources