Skip to main content
Download PDF
Download ePub

Enhancing implementation of information and communication technologies for post-discharge care among hospitalized older adult patients: development of a multifaceted implementation intervention package using the behavior change wheel and implementation research logic model

Implementation Science Communications volume 6, Article number: 52 (2025) Cite this article

Abstract

Background

The integration of information and communication technologies in clinical practice can supplement traditional care pathways on discharge education and has exhibited evident benefits in improving patient health outcomes. However, healthcare providers have reported difficulties in adopting such technologies. The existing evidence on implementation interventions supporting the implementation of information and communication technologies is insufficient, characterized by infrequent utilization or reporting of implementation theories in implementation intervention designs. This study aims to outline the creation of a theory-informed implementation intervention package to enhance the clinical implementation of information and communication technologies for post-discharge self-care among hospitalized older adults.

Methods

This study systematically applies the Behavior Change Wheel (BCW) approach, involving behavior diagnosis, identification of intervention options, and intervention content selection, informed by conceptual frameworks, empirical data, and relevant literature. Additionally, the Implementation Research Logic Model is utilized to synthesize, organize, and visually present the collected data.

Results

This structured process identified and selected five intervention functions, 11 behavior change techniques, and four policy categories. A multifaceted implementation intervention package was developed, containing four components: (i) flexible and sustainable training, (ii) mass media and opinion leader campaign, (iii) technology and workflow redesign, and (iv) regular corporate-level audit and feedback.

Conclusions

The study addresses the incomplete evidence base for implementation interventions supporting clinical information and communication technology implementation, presenting a practical, evaluable, and scalable theory-informed implementation intervention package. By providing an example of the application of the BCW approach and logic model, this study contributes to the knowledge on implementation intervention design, offering valuable insights for researchers and practitioners aiming to improve healthcare providers' behavior change and post-discharge care management with technology-based interventions.

Peer Review reports

Background

The period of transitioning from hospitals to home is marked by increased risks of drug-related readmissions [1,2,3], highlighting the importance of promoting post-discharge medication self-management among older adults [4]. Incorporating information and communication technologies, such as Electronic Health Record-based interventions, Clinical Decision Support System, mHealth and eHealth, into inpatient settings has demonstrated the potential to enhance care quality and efficiency [5]. Information and communication technology adoption can supplement traditional care pathways in discharge education [6], enabling effective patient-provider communication regarding discharge instructions [7, 8]. Nonetheless, studies suggest that health providers often encounter difficulties implementing information and communication technologies [9]. Merely providing health providers with technologies is insufficient to bring about the envisioned healthcare transformation [10]. Integrating information and communication technologies into patient care pathways necessitates changes in health providers’ practices [11]. The process of practice change is influenced by various intrinsic and extrinsic factors such as individual health professional and patient related factors, professional interactions, organizational capacity to change, and social and political factors, as evidenced by a comprehensive review [12]. The current evidence base for implementation interventions targeting information and communication technologies remains incomplete [13], with haphazard and poorly specified designs [14], minimal attention to changes across individual, organizational, and system levels [15], and seldomly employed or reported theories in such implementation intervention design [15].

Behavior change is more likely to occur when decisions regarding implementation intervention content adhere to systematic guidelines. Behavior Change Wheel (BCW) serves as a systematic approach explicitly listing each step of implementation intervention design, encompassing understanding the behavior that needs to be changed, identifying implementation intervention options, and determining the implementation intervention content [16]. In addition, BCW provides a theory-driven approach to link the choice of implementation interventions to relevant determinants of change. Tailored implementation interventions targeting barriers to change have been associated with improved professional behavior [17], which is often overlooked or not reported [18]. While the BCW provides a framework for implementation intervention development, it requires judgment to determine the most suitable approach for a given context [16]. Explicitly describing the implementation intervention and its anticipated effects facilitates assessments necessary for understanding how implementation interventions work and predict outcomes [19]. Developing a pragmatic theory of change helps comprehend how an implementation intervention and its components will bring about successful implementation. However, there is a lack of utilization of the theory of change, program theory, or logic model [20]. The Implementation Research Logic Model (IRLM) can enhance the rigor and transparency of implementation studies by providing a common structure and specifying links and pathways for testing theories [21].

Information and communication technology implementation in Hong Kong

Patient experience surveys conducted in Hong Kong have shed light on the suboptimal provision of comprehensive discharge information, especially regarding medication side effects [22]. These challenges are not unique to Hong Kong and have been observed in other countries [23,24,25,26,27]. The existing evidence base highlights various types of interventions designed to improve the transfer of discharge medication information and enhance patient recall. These interventions employ different methods, either singularly or in combination, including verbal, written, and technology-based approaches [28]. Examples include audio or visual materials, mobile applications or tablets, discharge summary letters, written medication management plan, and oral consultations provided by professionals such as pharmacists, physicians, and nurses [29].

In Hong Kong, in response to this issue, the Hospital Authority, which is a statutory body to manage Hong Kong's public hospitals, specialist clinics, and outpatient facilities, developed an information and communication technology called the post-discharge information summary (PDIS) in 2017. The aim of the PDIS is to enhance patient-provider communication on discharge medications and empower patients to self-manage medication side effects after discharge home. Our research team also had prior involvement in the development of the PDIS, as we led the annual patient experience survey commissioned by the Hospital Authority. Through this survey, we identified opportunities to improve the provision of discharge information, particularly regarding medication side effects [30]. The PDIS includes a salient medication reminder, an online drug database, and future follow-up appointments. The salient medication reminder was validated through Delphi surveys and discussions among 13 geriatric medical experts, generating a database covering 80% of the prescribed discharge medications alongside 235 most relevant and important side effects and warning signal items adapted to local older adult patients [31]. To ensure readability, the content is translated into Chinese and displayed in larger font sizes. The PDIS system is integrated into the electronic health record, enabling the generation of personalized discharge information. In 2018, the PDIS was piloted in four public tertiary hospitals and has gradually expanded to over 30 public hospitals in Hong Kong. Nurses designated as front-line implementers received pre-implementation training on how to use the system. They are required to print the written PDIS form and explain the content, including side effects and follow-up information, to patients or their caregivers upon discharge. Teach-back is not required. However, a staff survey among the four pilot hospitals conducted by our research team revealed inconsistent use of the PDIS, with only 78% of nurses consistently printing PDIS forms and 57% consistently explaining the content [32]. Therefore, two behavior targets were found: (i) to encourage nurses’ uptake of the PDIS and (ii) to support nurses in explaining PDIS information to each patient upon discharge.

Our research team conducted a comprehensive implementation evaluation project to identify the implementation barriers and facilitators and develop corresponding implementation interventions to enhance the PDIS implementation [33]. This project has assisted in identifying barriers and enablers that hinder or facilitate progress within this specific context, serving as the foundation for the implementation intervention design discussed in this paper [34]. Key facilitators included knowledge and skills, beliefs about the capability to implement the PDIS, beliefs about the value of the PDIS, willingness to implement, and goal setting. Key barriers included professional role, memory and decision processes, and environmental context and resources.

This study is part of this large implementation evaluation project, aiming to explicitly outline the steps taken to create a theory-informed multifaceted implementation intervention package to enhance health providers’ adherence to implementing the PDIS for post-discharge self-management among hospitalized older adults. This implementation intervention package aimed to be practical, evaluable, and scalable, utilizing a combination of conceptual frameworks, empirical data, relevant literature, and a logic model to gain a comprehensive understanding of the context and inform the selection of appropriate implementation interventions.

Methods

Theoretical frameworks used to develop the implementation intervention package

The design of the implementation intervention package was multistage (Fig. 1), primarily grounded in the BCW and its Guide to Designing Interventions [16]. The BCW is a comprehensive framework integrating 19 behavior change theories. At the hub of the BCW is the COM-B model, encompassing three key components: capability, opportunity, and motivation. To further explore the implementation determinants, the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) is applied [35, 36]. The TDF, derived from 33 theories and 84 constructs, provides a comprehensive framework with 14 domains, each corresponding to a specific COM-B component. The second layer of the BCW consists of nine intervention functions aiming to address the COM-B and TDF-informed determinants. The outer layer consists of seven policy categories supporting the delivery of intervention functions. The behavior change techniques were identified to further enact the selected intervention functions. behavior change techniques are the active ingredients of interventions, allowing them to be evaluated and replicated [37]. Finally, IRLM is applied to visualize the causal pathways between implementation determinants, implementation interventions, mechanisms of action, and implementation outcomes [21]. This study was approved by the Joint Chinese University of Hong Kong – New Territories East Cluster Clinical Research Ethics Committees (CREC Ref: 2019.436). The Standard for Reporting Implementation Studies (STaRI) was applied to report the results [38] (see Additional file 1).

Fig. 1
figure 1

PDIS implementation intervention package design process. Abbreviations: PDIS: Post-discharge Information Summary; APEASE: Affordability, Practicability, Effectiveness, Acceptability, Side effects/safety, Equity

Full size image

Data collection (stage 1): understand the behavior

A mixed-method study was conducted to investigate the factors influencing PDIS implementation among nurses [39]. The qualitative arm of the study recruited 53 nurses from the four pilot hospitals, participating in TDF-informed semi-structured interviews. The participants'statements were deductively coded into 14 TDF domains, and belief statements were generated within each domain. During the interview phase, it was observed that the PDIS system had expanded to over 30 hospitals across different geographical areas of Hong Kong. To enhance the generalizability of the qualitative findings, a quantitative arm was designed, employing a cross-sectional survey methodology. The survey instrument was developed based on the qualitative results obtained earlier. A total of 482 nurses completed the survey, providing their perceptions regarding the agreement and importance of each implementation determinant. The regression analysis identified nine TDF domains as potential significant predictors associated with an increased likelihood of performing the target behavior, which in this case is the distribution and explanation of PDIS. These domains were mapped into three COM-B components: nurses'capabilities (knowledge, skills, memory, and decision processes), motivations (role agreement, beliefs in PDIS consequences, beliefs in capabilities to implement, intentions, and goal setting), and opportunities (environmental context). The results have been published elsewhere and presented in detail in Additional file 2.

Data analysis (stage 2 and 3): identify intervention options and content

An iterative process was undertaken by the research team with multiple meetings throughout the implementation intervention package development phase. Empirical data and relevant literature were continuously examined during these discussions. The primary focus of this stage was to determine which types of implementation interventions are most likely to address the determinants relating to PDIS implementation and what should be the specific implementation intervention content for the selected type of implementation interventions.

A paper-based exercise was conducted to map the COM-B components onto intervention functions, aligning with the BCW guideline [16]. The evaluation of each intervention function, utilizing the APEASE criteria [16] (Affordability, Practicability, Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness, Acceptability, Side effects and safety, and Equity), was independently carried out by the first author (DYXW). Potential alternative intervention functions were identified and presented during group meetings. Following this, iterative group discussions were initiated, involving two professionals with extensive clinical experience in nursing, medicine, and implementation science (ELYW and EKY) and two senior researchers engaged in the identification of the implementation determinants (AWLC and ZPYT). Each intervention function was subjected to thorough examination, and disagreements were resolved through discussions. The BCW framework encompasses seven comprehensive policy-level interventions, expected to be effective in supporting intervention functions. Similar to the assessment of intervention functions, the policy categories were assessed based on the APEASE criteria, and those perceived as most suitable to the local public inpatient care setting were carefully selected.

To specify the intervention content, first, the most frequently used behavior change techniques linked with our selected intervention functions were identified from the taxonomy of 93 behavior change techniques according to the BCW guidance [16]. Secondly, the appropriateness of each behavior change technique was evaluated based on the nurses’ comments obtained in stage 1, findings from literature reviews highlighting effective behavior change techniques in clinical behavior change implementation interventions in similar settings [10, 40], and considerations regarding the local context based on the APEASE criteria. The final selection of behavior change techniques was determined through group discussions. Subsequently, the intervention functions, along with the chosen behavior change techniques and broad-level policies, were transformed and operationalized into a comprehensive list of implementation intervention items.

Data synthesis (stage 4): develop the logic model

The results were synthesized through the utilization of the IRLM framework [21]. In order to align with our findings, modifications were made to the original determinants category provided by IRLM from “intervention characteristics, inner setting, outer setting, characteristics of individuals, processes” to “capability, motivation, opportunity”. Subsequently, implementation interventions were filled in alongside the implementation determinants. To shed light on the underlying mechanisms of action through which these implementation interventions lead to the expected implementation outcomes, multiple classical theories and peer-reviewed literature were drawn upon [41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51]. The selection of implementation outcomes, service outcomes, and patient outcomes was guided by considerations of the local context, expert opinions (ELYW and EKY), and the existing research gap in implementation outcome studies [52].

Results

Identify intervention options and content

After conducting the mapping exercise, we identified five intervention functions that are most suitable for facilitating the implementation of PDIS: education, training, enablement, persuasion, and environmental restructuring, as summarized in Additional file 3. An intervention function would be excluded if three or more aspects of APEASE were uncertain or if any one aspect was not met. Specifically, education focuses on enhancing the nurses’ understanding of PDIS background, responsibilities, and positive outcomes. Training is to enhance operation skills in manipulating the PDIS system and communicating medication risks. Enablement is characterized by increasing means, such as involving pharmacists as aids to increase nurses’ capabilities to make PDIS explanations and establishing a bidirectional feedback platform to increase opportunities for information circulation. Persuasion through opinion leaders to foster positive feelings. Lastly, restructuring the physical environment by modifications to the PDIS design. Four intervention functions were considered unsuitable in the current context either due to potential unwanted side effects on nurses or because three or more aspects of APEASE were uncertain. Subsequently, four policy categories were identified: communication/marketing, service provision, environmental/social planning, and guidelines, as summarized in Additional file 4. Marketing through utilizing mass media to educate staff by delivering comprehensive background information related to PDIS. Additionally, communication was employed by involving opinion leaders in advocating the benefits of PDIS. The provision of diverse training services and the integration of referral services by pharmacists to assist in explaining medication side effects should be considered. Furthermore, it is crucial to plan the organizational environment to foster a culture of continuous learning and to refine the PDIS system accordingly. Lastly, the establishment of implementation guidelines is recommended to standardize processes and ensure consistency in PDIS implementation. Following this, eleven behavior change techniques were identified to enact each intervention function, which is summarized in Additional file 5. A multifaceted implementation intervention package was developed and shown in Tables 1 and 2. This implementation intervention package had four components: flexible and sustainable training, communication and marketing, environment redesign, and implementation guidelines. Table 3 presents the key features of each of the implementation intervention components with illustrative quotes from nurses.

Table 1 PDIS implementation strategy package to address barriers
Full size table
Table 2 PDIS implementation strategy package to enhance facilitators
Full size table
Table 3 Key features of the strategy package
Full size table

Develop the logic model

The logic model was developed, illuminating the theory of change and theory of action underlying the implementation intervention package (Fig. 2). In the subsequent section, each component of the implementation intervention package will be explored, providing a detailed explanation of their potential to address implementation determinants and shed light on the underlying mechanisms leading to the expected implementation outcomes.

Fig. 2
figure 2

Theory of change of the PDIS implementation intervention package. Abbreviation: PDIS, Post-Discharge Information Summary; HA, Hospital Authority; ED, Emergency Department

Full size image

Flexible and sustainable training

The behavior diagnosis highlighted the importance of nurses'professional knowledge in effectively explaining PDIS medication side effects. Additionally, the lack of integration of PDIS into routine discharge practice presents a challenge for implementation. To address this, the implementation intervention package includes the provision of training services to demonstrate the behaviors, aligning with commonly employed approaches for implementing evidence-based nursing [53,54,55]. Previous studies recommend that training should encompass diverse formats to accommodate different learning styles and staff adaptability to new technologies [56, 57]. Consequently, three levels of training were suggested. Firstly, new staff can receive PDIS training as part of their regular orientation, covering how to operate the PDIS system and explain medication side effects. Secondly, all nurses can engage in regular informal training through group sharing sessions, which have been shown to be highly effective for training purposes [58, 59]. These sessions facilitate reflection, debriefing, and sharing techniques to address challenges. Thirdly, establishing a training system allowing continuous staff training is proposed to ensure their PDIS skills remain up-to-date. Integrating training opportunities within a practical structure has been proven to increase the likelihood of behavior change [60]. Considering the time constraints frequently reported by nurses in clinical settings, a hybrid approach, which includes written materials, online learning, and face-to-face workshops, is suggested to provide a sustainable and convenient training method.

The first underlying mechanism can be elucidated through the concept of self-efficacy. When nurses possess the necessary skills, they tend to exhibit confidence and comfort in engaging with the PDIS process, thereby enhancing its acceptability and adoption. The second mechanism can be attributed to habit theory, wherein the successful integration of PDIS distribution and explanation into nurses’ routine practice becomes habitual. By automating this behavior through habit formation, cognitive capacity can be freed up amidst competing demands, potentially resulting in an increased uptake rate [41]. Thirdly, the establishment of sharing groups and a training system can cultivate an organizational culture that embraces change, which serves as a pivotal factor in modifying practitioner behavior [42, 43] and has the potential to contribute to PDIS sustainability.

Mass media and opinion leader campaign

One of the implementation barriers is that nurses tend to prioritize alternative materials over PDIS when it comes to discharge education. However, several potential facilitators were identified, including positive beliefs about the benefits of PDIS for their work and patients, self-confidence in implementing PDIS, intention to implement, agreement on responsibilities, clear goals, and knowledge of the program background. To address these barriers and enhance facilitators, a range of communication and marketing strategies have been suggested. Notably, social norms interventions, which involve exposing healthcare workers to the values, beliefs, attitudes, or behaviors of reference individuals or groups, have shown effectiveness in multiple settings [61]. This can be achieved by engaging opinion leaders, including patients and peers, to advocate for PDIS and foster positive beliefs in PDIS values and implementation capabilities. Credible sources have been proven effective in changing health providers’ clinical behavior [61]. Combining reinforcement of new practice norms and peer group advocation is particularly effective as it establishes clear rules and encourages individuals to emulate their peers, according to a previous review [62]. Therefore, inviting nursing leaders to reinforce PDIS implementation and emphasize the importance of nurses as responsible individuals to induce positive emotions in role agreement is suggested. In order to make information visible, disseminating written reports to showcase the positive outcomes of PDIS for both nurses and patients can serve as educational and persuasive tools, promoting more positive beliefs. Lastly, the development of brochures and videos that effectively communicate the background and objectives of PDIS can enhance nurses'knowledge and understanding.

Social identity and social comparison serve as the mechanism of these implementation interventions [44, 45], wherein nurses evaluate their own abilities and compare themselves to their peers. This evaluation leads them to engage in behaviors that are congruent with the group norms and serve to maintain their social identity. Additionally, the theory of planned behavior [46] can explain prospective implementation outcomes as nurses are motivated to conform to the expectations of esteemed individuals, such as patients and leaders, in order to uphold their personal beliefs. The third mechanism is outcome expectations [10], whereby nurses perceive PDIS as beneficial for enhancing their workflow and improving patient outcomes to induce desired behaviors. These mechanisms have the potential to lead to a higher acceptability, adoption, appropriateness, and uptake rate.

Technology and workflow redesign

The behavior diagnosis has revealed that the current design of the PDIS system hinders the implementation process for nurses. There is a lack of transparent information exchange between the program committee and frontline implementers. Time constraints also frequently arise as a barrier to implementation, particularly when there are multiple tasks to be completed. To address these issues, it is recommended, based on previous research, that technology-based interventions should complement the current workload of health providers and consider the diverse settings in which they operate [10]. Therefore, the PDIS system should be upgraded to better accommodate the needs of nurses, such as expanding the drug database and providing multiple language versions to facilitate their explanation. Furthermore, the use of default settings has been found to effectively change providers'behaviors in various contexts [63], particularly within electronic systems [64]. Therefore, incorporating PDIS information as a default setting in the discharge summary can alleviate cognitive overload for nurses who need to refer to multiple information sources for printing discharge forms. To facilitate smooth information flow, it is suggested that a bidirectional platform be established that facilitates communication and information exchange between nurses and the program committee. It’s emphasized that nurses should actively engage with information and communication technologies as managers and designers rather than having a passive relationship as mere users [65]. Additionally, a prior review highlighted the multidisciplinary team approach is crucial to integrating new interventions into routine practice, fostering collaborations, and leveraging specialized skills [66]. Therefore, establishing a referral mechanism to direct PDIS inquiries to the pharmacy, which can assist in explaining medication side effects to patients or caregivers, is recommended.

The first underlying mechanism aligns with the theory of diffusion of innovation [47], which suggests that improving the quality of PDIS design can positively influence perceived usefulness and subsequently impact the intention to use the technology. Secondly, drawing from the nudge theory in the field of behavioral economics [48], altering default choices to reduce the physical effort required to select among alternatives can facilitate uptake. Additionally, based on the theory of organizational readiness to change [49], end-user involvement is emphasized in effective implementation by increasing the change valence and realistically appraising the intervention fit. Lastly, social support serves as a mechanism characterized by creating a supportive environment to alleviate nurses'stress in explaining PDIS, thereby increasing the acceptability and uptake.

Regular corporate-level audit and feedback

The behavior diagnosis has brought attention to the variation in nurses’ implementation due to inadequate knowledge regarding PDIS responsibility and its target population, resulting in implementation barriers. Furthermore, nurses with ample experience in discharge education and procedures are better equipped with clear action plans to effectively implement PDIS. Taking into account previous research that has highlighted the advantages of audit and feedback [51], as well as the effectiveness of action plans in enhancing the impact of such feedback [50], it is recommended to develop implementation guidelines that not only standardize the PDIS implementation process to educate nurses regarding their roles and PDIS content but also outline concrete contingency plans to address potential implementation challenges, accompanied by regular corporate-wide evaluations to ensure consistent implementation.

Initiating guidelines serves as the mechanism to regulate behaviors and promote adherence to desired practices. Guiding and directing individuals to solve implementation problems can enhance nurses’ self-efficacy and further increase possible adoption. An additional mechanism centers around applying audit and feedback techniques to impose external pressure, such as performance measures, to exert nurses’ motivation to perform desired behaviors.

Discussion

Guided by BCW and IRLM, this study undertook a structured process of designing a theory-informed multifaceted implementation intervention package, aiming to enhance health providers’ implementation of a new information and communication technology for facilitating post-discharge self-management among hospitalized older adults. These components include the provision of flexible and sustainable training services to enhance nurses'skills, the utilization of opinion leaders and mass media for persuasive and educational purposes, the redesign of technology features and restructuring of the organizational environment, and the establishment of implementation guidelines that cover standardized procedures and concrete action plans. Each component was developed with explicit intervention functions, such as education, enablement, and persuasion. These functions were enacted through multiple behavior change techniques, including the use of credible sources, behavior demonstration, restructuring of the social environment, and problem-solving. Additionally, these components are supported by broader policies such as service provision, communication/marketing, and guidelines. The implementation intervention components are directly linked to desired implementation outcomes through the mechanisms of action underlying these components, which are drawn from various theories and facilitate future evaluation. By successfully achieving these implementation outcomes, it is anticipated that the implementation intervention will also lead to favorable service outcomes and clinical outcomes.

Reflections on the BCW approach

It was confirmed by our study experience that the BCW framework proved to be valuable in formulating implementation interventions, particularly in addressing implementation determinants at the provider level. However, several pitfalls were identified that should be anticipated by practitioners and researchers engaged in implementation projects. Firstly, the mapping processes exhibited dynamic characteristics, with iterations occurring between the mapping of implementation determinants and intervention functions, as well as intervention functions and behavior change techniques during research team discussions to reach consensus on the appropriateness of the implementation intervention. Secondly, while BCW guidelines position policy category identification between intervention function identification and behavior change technique identification, it may be more logically placed after behavior change technique identification, as highlighted in previous studies that have applied the BCW [67, 68]. Thirdly, although the BCW allows for the specification of the smallest components of the implementation intervention, further attention should be given to operationalization details. For instance, the impact of dosage on implementation intervention effectiveness should be considered. Previous studies have indicated that delivering the implementation intervention once may be sufficient [61], particularly in the busy clinical environment, where allocation of time to support implementation competes with numerous demands [69]. The application of the Template for Intervention Description and Replication checklist can serve as a viable solution as it allows for a comprehensive consideration encompassing various aspects, including the underpinning theory, materials used, who provided, mode of delivery, location, timing, and dosage [70]. Finally, the TDF predominantly focus on individual and interpersonal factors, potentially overlooking broader organizational, systemic, and policy-level influences that can have an impact on behavior change. Organizational culture, socioeconomic situation, and policy directives are critical elements that may not be fully encapsulated within the framework’s domains. This underscores the need for an approach that incorporates additional models or frameworks to provide a more comprehensive understanding of the influential factors. For example, several studies combined the TDF with the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research [71] to explore the multi-level nature of the implementation processes [72].

In addition, as the BCW was developed within a Western context, it is important to apply it with caution when applying it to the Eastern Asia area such as Hong Kong with a different cultural context and healthcare system. The APEASE criteria is especially useful when selecting the potential intervention functions and policy categories as we can take our cultural context into consideration to see the feasibility and acceptability and make cultural adapted and fit decision towards the final list of implementation interventions.

As we proceed to test the implementation interventions developed in our study, we recognize that while the BCW offers a detailed understanding of behavioral determinants and aids in implementation intervention development, it does not provide guidance on formulating hypotheses to test the effectiveness of these implementation interventions. The IRLM complements this by enhancing planning and evaluation, allowing for a systematic assessment of implementation interventions. It helps to identify implementation outcomes and the mechanisms through which implementation interventions may lead to these outcomes [73]. Integrating the IRLM with the BCW allows us to clearly articulate the program theory, facilitating communication among stakeholders through a standardized structure. This combined approach can enhance the overall efficiency of our research efforts.

Strengths and limitations

During the process of developing the implementation intervention package, several strengths were identified. Firstly, the detailed recording of multiple available options and the application of APEASE criteria enhanced the transparency and generalizability of the methods by illustrating the reasoning behind the selection or exclusion of options. Secondly, the mapping process facilitated the evaluation of each implementation intervention component's effectiveness by referring to the logic model. Lastly, considering the scarce evidence on the effectiveness of implementation theory-informed implementation intervention design [53], our study facilitates the comparison of the benefits between implementation interventions with and without implementation theory. However, limitations exist when employing this approach. Firstly, the application of the BCW approach has been recognized to have a specific weakness wherein the absence of designated chances for stakeholder involvement, which is considered a fundamental principle in modern healthcare, is acknowledged [74]. To address this, a Delphi expert discussion will be conducted in the next step to formulate contextually adapted implementation interventions, ensuring expert consensus on their relevancy, acceptability, and feasibility within the Hong Kong public healthcare setting. Secondly, adhering to all steps listed in the BCW guideline consumed a substantial amount of time, especially during the behavior diagnosis phase. However, this meticulous approach ensured the consideration of all potential implementation determinants and implementation intervention components for effective behavior change. Future research could explore the use of rapid assessment procedures [75], which employ a team approach and iterative data collection and analysis to produce contextually rich evaluative information within shorter timelines, typically spanning weeks to months from start to finish.

Implications for future research and implementation practice

Given the complexity of our implementation intervention package, delivering all components simultaneously is not feasible. To optimize the use of resources, the Multiphase Optimization Strategy framework offers a valuable approach for determining the most effective combination and sequence of components or items to achieve optimal implementation outcomes [76]. This three-step framework involves screening the isolated effect of each component, refining effective components through experimentation to identify the optimal level of exposure, and validating the final version through a standard randomized control trial. Additionally, Adaptive Interventions and the Sequential Multiple Assignment Randomized Trial can be applied [76] in conjunction with a pre-implementation evaluation at the hospital level, allowing for the customization of components based on individual and organizational characteristics. This iterative process involves step-wise adaptation of the implementation intervention and continuous assessment of the variables. The IRLM can be employed to streamline this specific design by categorizing the status of each implementation intervention component into four types [21]: (i) already in place prior to the study, (ii) initiated prospectively for the study, (iii) removed due to ineffective or onerous, and (iv) introduced during the study to address emerging barriers or complement other implementation interventions.

The comprehensive documentation of our implementation intervention development process serves as a valuable resource for researchers seeking to develop their own information and communication technology implementation interventions. It highlights critical considerations to which they should pay close attention. Given the rapid evolution inherent to technology, it is essential to adopt a dynamic and iterative approach when implementing information and communication technologies in clinical setting. Our study rigorously adhered to all steps of the BCW approach. However, the COVID- 19 pandemic imposed significant challenges, particularly in conducting individual interviews, resulting in an around three-year timeline to design the implementation intervention. This duration may lead to discrepancies with the most current clinical needs of nurses. Therefore, we recommend that researchers and implementation practitioners prospectively plan for successful information and communication technology implementation by conducting pre-implementation and ongoing assessments of contextual factors, and allowing flexibility in implementation intervention design by identifying core components and permitting adaptability in others. Additionally, we advocate for building implementation capacity among clinical staff to empower them to proactively engage in planning and evaluation during implementation, given their firsthand experience and ability to respond swiftly to issues.

In addition, our implementation intervention development process embraced the concept of co-creation, incorporating nurses'suggestions for enhancing the implementation process into the selection and operationalization phase of behavior change techniques. Engaging stakeholders in healthcare initiatives is strongly recommended [77]. This inclusion is vital to enhance the chances of successful implementation and ensure the feasibility of the developed implementation interventions [78]. While some implementation intervention developers engage stakeholders throughout the development process (e.g., selecting intervention functions, policy categories, and behavior change techniques) [79, 80], our approach offers efficiency gains in research efforts. Recognizing the limited familiarity with implementation science concepts among clinical staff, we simplified our inquiries to focus on their perceptions of barriers and facilitators and ways for process enhancement. This approach not only reduces cognitive load but also logically elicits suggestions based on their reflections on implementation issues. To further ensure that the designed implementation interventions align with their preferences, we plan to conduct a Best Worst Scaling survey to capture their priorities for implementation interventions [81].

Conclusions

The utilization of technology by health providers in their clinical practice is increasingly recognized, yet the current evidence base for implementation interventions supporting the clinical implementation of information and communication technologies remains incomplete. In order to address this gap, this study employed a systematic approach to develop a theory-informed multifaceted implementation intervention package aiming to improve health providers'implementation of a new information and communication technology designed to facilitate post-discharge self-management among hospitalized older adults. By offering a worked example of the application of the BCW approach in conjunction with the logic model, this study contributes to the existing knowledge base on the design of implementation interventions. Furthermore, the findings of this study can serve as a valuable reference for organizations seeking to improve health providers'behavior change and enhance the overall quality of post-discharge care management, particularly through the utilization of technology-based interventions.

Data availability

Data generated or analyzed during this study are included in this published article and its supplementary information files. Additional datasets are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Abbreviations

PDIS:

Post Discharge Information Summary

BCW:

Behavior Change Wheel

TDF:

Theoretical Domains Framework

COM-B model:

Capability, Opportunity, Motivation, Behavior model

IRLM:

Implementation Research Logic Model

References

  1. Coleman EA. Falling through the cracks: challenges and opportunities for improving transitional care for persons with continuous complex care needs. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2003;51(4):549–55.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Koehler BE, Richter KM, Youngblood L, Cohen BA, Prengler ID, Cheng D, et al. Reduction of 30-day postdischarge hospital readmission or emergency department (ED) visit rates in high-risk elderly medical patients through delivery of a targeted care bundle. J Hosp Med. 2009;4(4):211–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Forster AJ, Murff HJ, Peterson JF, Gandhi TK, Bates DW. The incidence and severity of adverse events affecting patients after discharge from the hospital. Ann Intern Med. 2003;138(3):161–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Look KA, Stone JA. Medication management activities performed by informal caregivers of older adults. Res Social Adm Pharm. 2018;14(5):418–26.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Rouleau G, Gagnon M-P, Côté J, Payne-Gagnon J, Hudson E, Dubois C-A. Impact of information and communication technologies on nursing care: results of an overview of systematic reviews. J Med Internet Res. 2017;19(4): e122.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. While A, Dewsbury G. Nursing and information and communication technology (ICT): a discussion of trends and future directions. Int J Nurs Stud. 2011;48(10):1302–10.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Hsu HH, Wu YH. Investigation of the Effects of a Nursing Information System by Using the Technology Acceptance Model. Comput Inform Nurs. 2017;35(6):315–22.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. McKibbon KA, Lokker C, Handler SM, Dolovich LR, Holbrook AM, O’Reilly D, et al. Enabling medication management through health information technology (Health IT). Evid Rep Technol Assess (Full Rep). 2011;201:1–951.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Gagnon MP, Légaré F, Labrecque M, Frémont P, Pluye P, Gagnon J, et al. Interventions for promoting information and communication technologies adoption in healthcare professionals. Cochrane database system rev. 2009;(1):CD006093.

  10. Keyworth C, Hart J, Armitage CJ, Tully MP. What maximizes the effectiveness and implementation of technology-based interventions to support healthcare professional practice? A systematic literature review. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2018;18(1):1–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Grimshaw JM, Eccles MP, Lavis JN, Hill SJ, Squires JE. Knowledge translation of research findings. Implement Sci. 2012;7(1):1–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Flottorp SA, Oxman AD, Krause J, Musila NR, Wensing M, Godycki-Cwirko M, et al. A checklist for identifying determinants of practice: a systematic review and synthesis of frameworks and taxonomies of factors that prevent or enable improvements in healthcare professional practice. Implement Sci. 2013;8(1):1–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Bero LA, Grilli R, Grimshaw JM, Harvey E, Oxman AD, Thomson MA. Closing the gap between research and practice: an overview of systematic reviews of interventions to promote the implementation of research findings. BMJ. 1998;317(7156):465–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Michie S, Johnston M. Theories and techniques of behaviour change: Developing a cumulative science of behaviour change. Health Psychol Rev. 2012;6(1):1–6.

  15. Colquhoun HL, Squires JE, Kolehmainen N, Fraser C, Grimshaw JM. Methods for designing interventions to change healthcare professionals’ behaviour: a systematic review. Implement Sci. 2017;12(1):1–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Michie S, Atkins L, West R. The behaviour change wheel. A guide to designing interventions 1st ed Great Britain: Silverback Publishing. 2014.

  17. Baker R, Camosso‐Stefinovic J, Gillies C, Shaw EJ, Cheater F, Flottorp S, et al. Tailored interventions to overcome identified barriers to change: effects on professional practice and health care outcomes. Cochrane Database System Rev. 2010;(3):CD005470.

  18. van Achterberg T. Nursing implementation science: 10 ways forward. Int. J. Nurs. Stud. 2013;50(4):445–7.

  19. Reed JE, McNicholas C, Woodcock T, Issen L, Bell D. Designing quality improvement initiatives: the action effect method, a structured approach to identifying and articulating programme theory. BMJ Qual Saf. 2014;23(12):1040–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Wilson P, Kislov R. Learning how and why complex improvement interventions work: insights from implementation science. BMJ Publishing Group Ltd; 2023. p. 438–40.

  21. Smith JD, Li DH, Rafferty MR. The implementation research logic model: a method for planning, executing, reporting, and synthesizing implementation projects. Implement Sci. 2020;15:1–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Wong EL, Coulter A, Cheung AW, Yam CH, Yeoh EK, Griffiths SM. Patient experiences with public hospital care: first benchmark survey in Hong Kong. Hong Kong Med J. 2012;18(5):371–80.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Glintborg B, Andersen SE, Dalhoff K. Insufficient communication about medication use at the interface between hospital and primary care. Qual Saf Health Care. 2007;16(1):34–9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Kerzman H, Baron-Epel O, Toren O. What do discharged patients know about their medication? Patient Educ Couns. 2005;56(3):276–82.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Nair K, Dolovich L, Cassels A, McCormack J, Levine M, Gray J, et al. What patients want to know about their medications. Focus group study of patient and clinician perspectives. Can Fam Physician. 2002;48:104–10.

  26. Tarn DM, Heritage J, Paterniti DA, Hays RD, Kravitz RL, Wenger NS. Physician communication when prescribing new medications. Arch Intern Med. 2006;166(17):1855–62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Witherington EM, Pirzada OM, Avery AJ. Communication gaps and readmissions to hospital for patients aged 75 years and older: observational study. Qual Saf Health Care. 2008;17(1):71–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Becker C, Zumbrunn S, Beck K, Vincent A, Loretz N, Müller J, et al. Interventions to improve communication at hospital discharge and rates of readmission: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Network Open. 2021;4(8):e2119346-e.

  29. Menichetti J, Lie HC, Mellblom AV, Brembo EA, Eide H, Gulbrandsen P, et al. Tested communication strategies for providing information to patients in medical consultations: a scoping review and quality assessment of the literature. Patient Educ Couns. 2021;104(8):1891–903.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Wang Y, Wong EL-Y, Qiu H, Cheung AW-L, Tang K-S, Yeoh E-K. The influence of written medication reminder on patient experience among older adult patients: a repeat cross-sectional study. BMC Geriatrics. 2024;24(1):662.

  31. Wong EL, Tang KS, Cheung AW, Sze RK, Lau JC, Mok FC, et al. Development of salient medication reminders to facilitate information transfer during transition from inpatient to primary care: the Delphi process. BMJ Open. 2021;11(5): e041336.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Wang DY, Wong EL-Y, Cheung AW-L, Tang K-S, Yeoh E-K. A Comparison of Patient and Provider Perspectives on an Electronic Health Record–Based Discharge Communication Tool: Survey Study. JMIR aging. 2025;8(1):e60506.

  33. Wong EL, Tang KS, Dong D, Mo PK, Cheung AW, Lau JC, et al. Evaluation of the implementation of information system for postdischarge with the theoretical domains framework by healthcare professionals: a multistage design with qualitative inquiry and Delphi expert discussion protocol. BMJ Open. 2021;11(12): e046081.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Wang DY, Wong EL-Y, Cheung AW-L, Tam ZP-Y, Tang K-S, Yeoh E-K. Implementing the information system for older adult patients post-discharge self-management: a qualitative study. Age and Ageing. 2024;53(7):afae136.

  35. Cane J, O’Connor D, Michie S. Validation of the theoretical domains framework for use in behaviour change and implementation research. Implement Sci. 2012;7(1):37.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Atkins L, Francis J, Islam R, O’Connor D, Patey A, Ivers N, et al. A guide to using the Theoretical Domains Framework of behaviour change to investigate implementation problems. Implement Sci. 2017;12(1):77.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Michie S, Richardson M, Johnston M, Abraham C, Francis J, Hardeman W, et al. The behavior change technique taxonomy (v1) of 93 hierarchically clustered techniques: building an international consensus for the reporting of behavior change interventions. Ann Behav Med. 2013;46(1):81–95.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Pinnock H, Barwick M, Carpenter CR, Eldridge S, Grandes G, Griffiths CJ, et al. Standards for Reporting Implementation Studies (StaRI) Statement. BMJ. 2017;356: i6795.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. Wang DY WE, Cheung AWL, Tam ZPY, Tang KS, Yeoh EK. Applying Theoretical Domains Framework to investigate barriers and facilitators implementing an information system for elder’s post-discharge self-care: an exploratory sequential mixed-methods study. JMIR Preprints. 2024:56576.

  40. Virtanen L, Kaihlanen A-M, Laukka E, Gluschkoff K, Heponiemi T. Behavior change techniques to promote healthcare professionals’ eHealth competency: A systematic review of interventions. Int J Med Informatics. 2021;149: 104432.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Potthoff S, Presseau J, Sniehotta FF, Johnston M, Elovainio M, Avery L. Planning to be routine: habit as a mediator of the planning-behaviour relationship in healthcare professionals. Implement Sci. 2017;12:1–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Grol R, Grimshaw J. From best evidence to best practice: effective implementation of change in patients’ care. The lancet. 2003;362(9391):1225–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Kennedy A, Bower P, Reeves D, Blakeman T, Bowen R, Chew-Graham C, et al. Implementation of self management support for long term conditions in routine primary care settings: cluster randomised controlled trial. Bmj. 2013;346:f2882.

  44. Festinger L. A theory of social comparison processes. Human relations. 1954;7(2):117–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Tajfel H, Turner JC. The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. Political psychology: Psychology Press; 2004. p. 276–93.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Ajzen I. The theory of planned behavior. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process. 1991;50(2):179–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Rogers EM, Singhal A, Quinlan MM. Diffusion of innovations. An integrated approach to communication theory and research: Routledge; 2014. p. 432–48.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Thaler, Richard H, Cass R Sunstein, and Amazon.com. Nudge Improving Decisions about Health, Wealth, and Happiness. Rev. and Expanded ed. New York: Penguin Books; 2009.

  49. Weiner BJ. A theory of organizational readiness for change. Implement Sci. 2009;4(1):67.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  50. Gardner B, Whittington C, McAteer J, Eccles MP, Michie S. Using theory to synthesise evidence from behaviour change interventions: the example of audit and feedback. Soc Sci Med. 2010;70(10):1618–25.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Ivers N, Jamtvedt G, Flottorp S, Young JM, Odgaard‐Jensen J, French SD, et al. Audit and feedback: effects on professional practice and healthcare outcomes. Cochrane database of systematic reviews. 2012;(6):CD000259.

  52. Wang Y, Wong EL-Y, Nilsen P, Chung VC-h, Tian Y, Yeoh E-K. A scoping review of implementation science theories, models, and frameworks — an appraisal of purpose, characteristics, usability, applicability, and testability. Implementation Science. 2023;18(1):43.

  53. Spoon D, Rietbergen T, Huis A, Heinen M, van Dijk M, van Bodegom-Vos L, et al. Implementation strategies used to implement nursing guidelines in daily practice: A systematic review. Int J Nurs Stud. 2020;111: 103748.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Häggman-Laitila A, Mattila LR, Melender HL. A systematic review of the outcomes of educational interventions relevant to nurses with simultaneous strategies for guideline implementation. J Clin Nurs. 2017;26(3–4):320–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Thompson DS, Estabrooks CA, Scott-Findlay S, Moore K, Wallin L. Interventions aimed at increasing research use in nursing: a systematic review. Implement Sci. 2007;2:1–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Powell BJ, Waltz TJ, Chinman MJ, Damschroder LJ, Smith JL, Matthieu MM, et al. A refined compilation of implementation strategies: results from the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) project. Implement Sci. 2015;10(1):21.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  57. Sipanoun P, Oulton K, Gibson F, Wray J. The experiences and perceptions of users of an electronic patient record system in a pediatric hospital setting: a systematic review. Int J Med Inform. 2022;160: 104691.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Forsetlund L, O'Brien MA, Forsen L, Mwai L, Reinar LM, Okwen MP, et al. Continuing education meetings and workshops: effects on professional practice and healthcare outcomes. Cochrane database of systematic reviews. 2021;9(9):CD003030.

  59. Tilburgs B, Rood PJ, Zegers M, Van den Boogaard M, group U-Is. The implementation of nUrsiNg DEliRium preventive INterventions in the Intensive Care Unit (UNDERPIN-ICU): A qualitative evaluation. International Journal of Nursing Studies. 2023;137:104386.

  60. Grimshaw JM, Shirran L, Thomas R, Mowatt G, Fraser C, Bero L, et al. Changing provider behavior: an overview of systematic reviews of interventions. Medical care. 2001;39(8):II-2-II-45.

  61. Tang MY, Rhodes S, Powell R, McGowan L, Howarth E, Brown B, et al. How effective are social norms interventions in changing the clinical behaviours of healthcare workers? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Implement Sci. 2021;16:1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Johnson MJ, May CR. Promoting professional behaviour change in healthcare: what interventions work, and why? A theory-led overview of systematic reviews. BMJ Open. 2015;5(9): e008592.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  63. Jachimowicz JM, Duncan S, Weber EU, Johnson EJ. When and why defaults influence decisions: A meta-analysis of default effects. Behavioural Public Policy. 2019;3(2):159–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Wang SY, Groene O. The effectiveness of behavioral economics-informed interventions on physician behavioral change: a systematic literature review. PLoS ONE. 2020;15(6): e0234149.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  65. Forbes A, While A. The nursing contribution to chronic disease management: a discussion paper. Int J Nurs Stud. 2009;46(1):120–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Zhou Y, Wang A, Ellis-Smith C, Braybrook D, Harding R. Mechanisms and contextual influences on the implementation of advance care planning for older people in long-term care facilities: A realist review. Int J Nurs Stud. 2022;133: 104277.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Mc Sharry J, Murphy PJ, Byrne M. Implementing international sexual counselling guidelines in hospital cardiac rehabilitation: development of the CHARMS intervention using the Behaviour Change Wheel. Implement Sci. 2016;11(1):134.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  68. Sinnott C, Mercer SW, Payne RA, Duerden M, Bradley CP, Byrne M. Improving medication management in multimorbidity: development of the MultimorbiditY COllaborative Medication Review And DEcision Making (MY COMRADE) intervention using the Behaviour Change Wheel. Implement Sci. 2015;10(1):132.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  69. Li S-A, Jeffs L, Barwick M, Stevens B. Organizational contextual features that influence the implementation of evidence-based practices across healthcare settings: a systematic integrative review. Syst Rev. 2018;7:1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Hoffmann TC, Glasziou PP, Boutron I, Milne R, Perera R, Moher D, et al. Better reporting of interventions: template for intervention description and replication (TIDieR) checklist and guide. BMJ. 2014;348: g1687.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Damschroder LJ, Aron DC, Keith RE, Kirsh SR, Alexander JA, Lowery JC. Fostering implementation of health services research findings into practice: a consolidated framework for advancing implementation science. Implement Sci. 2009;4(1):50.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  72. Birken SA, Powell BJ, Presseau J, Kirk MA, Lorencatto F, Gould NJ, et al. Combined use of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) and the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF): a systematic review. Implement Sci. 2017;12(1):2.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  73. Smith JD, Li DH, Rafferty MR. The Implementation Research Logic Model: a method for planning, executing, reporting, and synthesizing implementation projects. Implement Sci. 2020;15(1):84.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  74. O’Cathain A, Croot L, Sworn K, Duncan E, Rousseau N, Turner K, et al. Taxonomy of approaches to developing interventions to improve health: a systematic methods overview. Pilot and feasibility studies. 2019;5(1):1–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Palinkas LA, Zatzick D. Rapid assessment procedure informed clinical ethnography (RAPICE) in pragmatic clinical trials of mental health services implementation: methods and applied case study. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research. 2019;46:255–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Collins LM, Murphy SA, Strecher V. The multiphase optimization strategy (MOST) and the sequential multiple assignment randomized trial (SMART): new methods for more potent eHealth interventions. Am J Prev Med. 2007;32(5):S112–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  77. Faija CL, Gellatly J, Barkham M, Lovell K, Rushton K, Welsh C, et al. Enhancing the Behaviour Change Wheel with synthesis, stakeholder involvement and decision-making: a case example using the ‘Enhancing the Quality of Psychological Interventions Delivered by Telephone’ (EQUITy) research programme. Implement Sci. 2021;16(1):53.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  78. Mangurian C, Niu GC, Schillinger D, Newcomer JW, Dilley J, Handley MA. Utilization of the Behavior Change Wheel framework to develop a model to improve cardiometabolic screening for people with severe mental illness. Implement Sci. 2017;12(1):134.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  79. Bennett RJ, Bucks RS, Saulsman L, Pachana NA, Eikelboom RH, Meyer CJ. Use of the Behaviour Change Wheel to design an intervention to improve the provision of mental wellbeing support within the audiology setting. Implementation Science Communications. 2023;4(1):46.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  80. Hubeishy MH, Rossen CB, Dannapfel P, Thomas K, Jensen TS, Maribo T, et al. Developing a low back pain guideline implementation programme in collaboration with physiotherapists and chiropractors using the Behaviour Change Wheel: a theory-driven design study. Implementation Science Communications. 2024;5(1):33.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  81. Hollin IL, Paskett J, Schuster ALR, Crossnohere NL, Bridges JFP. Best-Worst Scaling and the Prioritization of Objects in Health: A Systematic Review. Pharmacoeconomics. 2022;40(9):883–99.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to the steering committee members for their professional advice regarding the implementation of PDIS. We acknowledge the assistance of Ms Tang PF. We would also like to thank HA Head Office and the cluster coordinators for their kind assistance in the logistics for conducting the study. We would like to acknowledge the Health and Medical Research Fund, Health Bureau, Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region for the funding support.

Funding

This work was supported by the Health and Medical Research Fund by Health Bureau (No. 17180721), The Government of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. JC School of Public Health and Primary Care, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China

    Dorothy Yingxuan Wang, Eliza Lai-Yi Wong, Annie Wai-Ling Cheung, Zoe Pui-Yee Tam & Eng-Kiong Yeoh

  2. Centre for Health Systems & Policy Research, JC School of Public Health and Primary Care, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China

    Dorothy Yingxuan Wang, Eliza Lai-Yi Wong, Annie Wai-Ling Cheung, Zoe Pui-Yee Tam & Eng-Kiong Yeoh

  3. Kwong Wah Hospital, Hospital Authority, Hong Kong SAR, China

    Kam-Shing Tang

Authors
  1. Dorothy Yingxuan Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  2. Eliza Lai-Yi Wong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  3. Annie Wai-Ling Cheung
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  4. Zoe Pui-Yee Tam
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  5. Kam-Shing Tang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  6. Eng-Kiong Yeoh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

ELYW, EKY, KST, DYXW conceived the study design. DYXW, ELYW, EKY, AWLC, ZPYT acquired, analyzed, and interpretated the data. DYXW drafted the manuscript. All authors critically reviewed and approved the manuscript for important intellectual content. ELYW, EKY, KST, AWLC obtained the funding. DYXW, AWLC, ZPYT provided administrative, technical, or material support. ELYW and KST were project in-charge and supervised the study.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Eliza Lai-Yi Wong.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

This study was approved by the Joint Chinese University of Hong Kong – New Territories East Cluster Clinical Research Ethics Committees (CREC Ref: 2019.436).

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

We have no conflict of interest to declare.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wang, D.Y., Wong, E.LY., Cheung, A.WL. et al. Enhancing implementation of information and communication technologies for post-discharge care among hospitalized older adult patients: development of a multifaceted implementation intervention package using the behavior change wheel and implementation research logic model. Implement Sci Commun 6, 52 (2025). https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1186/s43058-025-00739-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1186/s43058-025-00739-4

Keywords

Implementation Science Communications

ISSN: 2662-2211