Evidence mapPaperPMID 40033247Full record

SynthesisBMC health services research2025

Staff-reported barriers and facilitators to the implementation of healthcare interventions within regional and rural areas: a rapid review.

Anna Chapman, Alison Buccheri, Devdini Mohotti, Anna Wong Shee, Catherine E Huggins, Laura Alston, Alison M Hutchinson, Sze Lin Yoong, Hannah Beks, Kevin Mc Namara and 2 more

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC health services research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

26 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Patient and Professional Perspectives on Long COVID: A Systematic Literature Review and Meta-Synthesis.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Anna ChapmanCentre for Quality and Patient Safety Research, Institute for Health Transformation, School of Nursing & Midwifery, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, Building Y, 221 Burwood Hwy, Burwood, VIC, 3125, Australia. a.chapman@deakin.edu.au.
Alison BuccheriResearch Unit, Colac Area Health, Colac, VIC, Australia.
Devdini MohottiCentre for Quality and Patient Safety Research, Institute for Health Transformation, School of Nursing & Midwifery, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, Building Y, 221 Burwood Hwy, Burwood, VIC, 3125, Australia.
Anna Wong SheeDeakin Rural Health, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, Warrnambool, VIC, Australia.
Catherine E HugginsGlobal Centre for Preventive Health and Nutrition, Institute for Health Transformation, School of Health and Social Development, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC, Australia.
Laura AlstonResearch Unit, Colac Area Health, Colac, VIC, Australia.
Alison M HutchinsonCentre for Quality and Patient Safety Research, Institute for Health Transformation, School of Nursing & Midwifery, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, Building Y, 221 Burwood Hwy, Burwood, VIC, 3125, Australia.
Sze Lin YoongGlobal Centre for Preventive Health and Nutrition, Institute for Health Transformation, School of Health and Social Development, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC, Australia.
Hannah BeksDeakin Rural Health, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, Warrnambool, VIC, Australia.
Kevin Mc NamaraDeakin Rural Health, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, Warrnambool, VIC, Australia.
Anna PeetersInstitute for Health Transformation, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC, Australia.
Anna UgaldeCentre for Quality and Patient Safety Research, Institute for Health Transformation, School of Nursing & Midwifery, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, Building Y, 221 Burwood Hwy, Burwood, VIC, 3125, Australia.

Funding

MRFF Rapid Applied Research Translation Grant RARUR000072
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIndividuals in rural areas consistently demonstrate higher mortality and morbidity rates, and poorer access to healthcare, compared to their metropolitan counterparts. Optimizing the implementation of evidence-based interventions can reduce these inequities. Existing literature outlines numerous barriers and facilitators to the implementation of healthcare interventions, but these are generally not specific to rural areas. This rapid review aims to synthesize barriers and facilitators to the implementation of healthcare interventions in regional and rural healthcare services as reported by healthcare staff, including clinicians, managers, and administrators.

methodsA systematic search for peer-reviewed publications was conducted using CINAHL, PsycINFO, Medline, and Embase databases (1/1/2000-29/08/2023). Eligible publications were primary research articles published in English, assessing staff-reported barriers and facilitators to implementing healthcare interventions within regional and rural areas of high-income countries. Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed-methods designs were included. Eligible healthcare settings encompassed acute, sub-acute, primary care, community health, and aged care. Barrier and facilitator data were coded and grouped into sub-themes and broader themes, with results presented narratively.

resultsThirty-nine publications met the inclusion criteria. Most studies were conducted in Australia or the USA (both n = 18, 46%), within primary care (n = 13, 33%) or hospital settings (n = 12, 31%) in rural (n = 22, 56%) or regional (n = 9, 23%) locations. Implementation barriers and facilitators were grouped into four overarching themes: intervention-level (intervention feasibility and fit; complexity; privacy and confidentiality); staff-level (staff attitudes and beliefs; knowledge, skills, and confidence; staff roles and professional identity), patient-level (patient characteristics; attitudes), and system-level (leadership support; environmental resources and context; geographic vastness; networks and communication).

conclusionsThese findings provide essential guidance for policymakers, healthcare leaders, and researchers in planning and designing future implementation efforts in regional and rural healthcare settings. By considering factors across intervention, staff, patient, and system levels, stakeholders can address challenges and leverage local strengths to enhance implementation success and reduce health disparities.

trial registrationPROSPERO registration number: CRD42023470736. Registered 19/10/2023.

Indexed as

Health PersonnelRural Health ServicesAttitude of Health PersonnelHealth Services AccessibilityHumansBarriersFacilitatorsHealthcareImplementation scienceReviewRural health

Identifiers

PMID40033247
PMCPMC11877690

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.