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
. 2023 Oct 27;18(1):55.
doi: 10.1186/s13012-023-01311-1.

Supporting translation of research evidence into practice-the use of Normalisation Process Theory to assess and inform implementation within randomised controlled trials: a systematic review

Allison Williams  1 , Laura Lennox  2   3 , Matthew Harris  2   4 , Grazia Antonacci  2   3
Affiliations

Supporting translation of research evidence into practice-the use of Normalisation Process Theory to assess and inform implementation within randomised controlled trials: a systematic review

Allison Williams et al. Implement Sci. .

Abstract

Background: The status of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) as the 'gold standard' for evaluating efficacy in healthcare interventions is increasingly debated among the research community, due to often insufficient consideration for implementation. Normalisation Process Theory (NPT), which focuses on the work required to embed processes into practice, offers a potentially useful framework for addressing these concerns. While the theory has been deployed in numerous RCTs to date, more work is needed to consolidate understanding of if, and how, NPT may aid implementation planning and processes within RCTs. Therefore, this review seeks to understand how NPT contributes to understanding the dynamics of implementation processes within RCTs. Specifically, this review will identify and characterise NPT operationalisation, benefits and reported challenges and limitations in RCTs.

Methods: A qualitative systematic review with narrative synthesis of peer-reviewed journal articles from eight databases was conducted. Studies were eligible for inclusion if they reported sufficient detail on the use of NPT within RCTs in a healthcare domain. A pre-specified data extraction template was developed based on the research questions of this review. A narrative synthesis was performed to identify recurrent findings.

Results: Searches identified 48 articles reporting 42 studies eligible for inclusion. Findings suggest that NPT is primarily operationalised prospectively during the data collection stage, with limited sub-construct utilisation overall. NPT is beneficial in understanding implementation processes by aiding the identification and analysis of key factors, such as understanding intervention fidelity in real-world settings. Nearly three-quarters of studies failed to report the challenges and limitations of utilising NPT, though coding difficulties and data falling outside the NPT framework are most common.

Conclusions: NPT appears to be a consistent and generalisable framework for explaining the dynamics of implementation processes within RCTs. However, operationalisation of the theory to its full extent is necessary to improve its use in practice, as it is currently deployed in varying capacities. Recommendations for future research include investigation of NPT alongside other frameworks, as well as earlier operationalisation and greater use of NPT sub-constructs.

Trial registration: The protocol for this systematic review was accepted for public registration on PROSPERO (registration number: CRD42022345427) on 26 July 2022.

Keywords: Implementation science; NPT; Normalisation Process Theory; RCT; Randomised controlled trials.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
PRISMA flow diagram [62]
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Frequency of NPT core constructs and sub-constructs used across included studies with totalled summaries
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Number of studies per grouping of operationalisation
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Example illustration adapted from Vos et al. [112] of the non-linear relationship between the NPT constructs
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Braithwaite J, Marks D, Taylor N. Harnessing implementation science to improve care quality and patient safety: A systematic review of targeted literature. Int J Qual Health Care. 2014;26(3):321–329. doi: 10.1093/intqhc/mzu047. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Murofushi K, Badaracco C, County C, Gonzales-Pacheco D, Silzle C, Watowicz R, et al. Implementation Science in Evidence-based Nutrition Practice: Considerations for the Registered Dietitian Nutritionist. J Acad Nutr Diet. 2021;121(7):1392–1400. doi: 10.1016/j.jand.2020.08.093. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Balas EA, Boren SA. Managing Clinical Knowledge for Health Care Improvement. Yearb Med Inform. 2000;1:65–70. - PubMed
    1. Grant J, Green L, Mason B. Basic research and health: a reassessment of the scientific basis for the support of biomedical science. Research evaluation. 2003;12(3):217–224. doi: 10.3152/147154403781776618. - DOI
    1. Morris ZS, Wooding S, Grant J. The answer is 17 years, what is the question: understanding time lags in translational research. J R Soc Med. 2011;104(12):510–520. doi: 10.1258/jrsm.2011.110180. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types