RT Journal Article SR Electronic T1 Effectiveness of Implementation Interventions in Musculoskeletal Healthcare: A Systematic Review JF medRxiv FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press SP 2023.11.29.23299209 DO 10.1101/2023.11.29.23299209 A1 Hansen, Peter Bech A1 Bahnsen, Mikkel A1 Nørgaard, Mikkel Sloth A1 Jepsen, Jette Frost A1 Rathleff, Michael Skovdal A1 Lyng, Kristian Damgaard YR 2023 UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2023/11/30/2023.11.29.23299209.abstract AB Background Implementing new knowledge into clinical practice is a challenge, but nonetheless crucial to improve our healthcare system related to the management of musculoskeletal pain. This systematic review aimed to assess the effectiveness of implementation interventions within musculoskeletal healthcare.Methods We searched Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Scopus. Any type of randomised controlled trials investigating implementation strategies or interventions in relation to musculoskeletal pain conditions were included. Risk of bias were assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool. Data analysis was done using frameworks from Powell et al. 2015, and Waltz et al. 2015 and outcomes were identified by Thompson et al. 2022 or self-made outcome domains were established.Results The literature search yielded 14,265 original studies, of which 38 studies from 31 trials, with 13,203 participating healthcare professionals and 30,320 participating patients were included in the final synthesis. Nineteen studies had a high risk of bias, sixteen had a moderate risk of bias, and three had a low risk of bias. Twenty distinct implementation interventions were identified. A significant heterogeneity in the utilised outcome measurements was observed, thereby rendering a meta-analysis infeasible; consequently, all outcomes were classified into six outcome domains for healthcare professionals, seven for patients and one for cost-effectiveness.Conclusions Our findings suggest that some implementation interventions may have a tendency towards a statistically significant positive effect in favour of the intervention group on the outcome domain “Adherence to the implemented interventions” for healthcare professionals in the included studies. The remaining outcome domains yielded varying results; therefore, these findings should be interpreted with caution. Future high-quality trials with clear reporting and rationale of implementation strategies and interventions utilising standardised nomenclature are needed to further advance our understanding of this area.Trial registration Open Science Framework, DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/SRMP2Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Clinical Protocols https://osf.io/sxct8/ Funding StatementThis study did not receive any funding.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesI confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.YesAll data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors.