Search

Background: Infection control practitioners face several challenges when implementing infection control link nurse (ICLN) programmes. Identification of strategies to address these can improve the impact of current ICLN programmes and guide their future implementation. Aim: We aimed to identify implementation strategies for ICLN programmes in acute-care hospitals with the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR)-Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) Implementation Strategy Matching tool. Methods: An expert panel matched 19 implementation and sustainment barriers, identified in our previous studies, to the most fitting CFIR constructs. Subsequently, we applied the CFIR-ERIC Matching Tool and generated a list of implementation strategies to address these barriers. Findings: Barriers were predominantly found within the CFIR domains ‘inner setting’ (characteristics of the implementing organization) and ‘process’ (stages of implementation). With the ERIC Matching Tool, we identified the 10 most important strategies to address barriers of implementation of ICLN programmes: identify and prepare champions, conduct local consensus discussions, assess for readiness and identify barriers and facilitators, inform local opinion leaders, use facilitation, create a learning collaborative, conduct local needs assessments, develop a formal implementation blueprint, build a coalition, and identify early adopters. Conclusion: The CFIR domains ‘inner setting’ and ‘process’ appeared to be the most important to impede implementation of ICLN programmes in acute-care hospitals. Application of the CFIR-ERIC tool highlighted the identification and preparation of champions as the leading strategy for the successful implementation of these programmes. With this tool, strategies can be specifically tailored towards local implementation and sustainment barriers.

Additional file 2: Appendix II: Quality appraisal of included studies.

Additional file 1: Appendix I: Search strategy.

The authors regret that a few lines in Tables 1 and 2 were formatted incorrectly in the published version of the article with numbers all appearing in one line instead of being in separate lines. The correctly formatted tables are shown below. The authors would like to apologise for any inconvenience caused.

Background: Interactions between polymorphisms of the melatonin receptor 1B (MTNR1B) gene and lifestyle intervention for gestational diabetes have been described. Whether these are specific for physical activity or the healthy eating intervention is unknown. Objectives: The aim was to assess the interaction between MTNR1B rs10830962 and rs10830963 polymorphisms and lifestyle interventions during pregnancy. Methods: Women with a BMI (in kg/m2) of ≥29 (n = 436) received counseling on healthy eating (HE), physical activity (PA), or both. The control group received usual care. This secondary analysis had a factorial design with comparison of HE compared with no HE and PA compared with no PA. Maternal outcomes at 24-28 wk were gestational weight gain (GWG), maternal fasting glucose, insulin, insulin resistance (HOMA-IR), disposition index, and development of GDM. Neonatal outcomes were cord blood leptin and C-peptide and estimated neonatal fat percentage. The interaction between receiving either the HE or PA intervention and genotypes of both rs10830962 and rs10830963 was assessed using multilevel regression analysis. Results: GDM risk was increased in women homozygous for the G allele of rs10830962 (OR: 2.60; 95% CI: 1.34, 5.06) or rs10830963 (OR: 2.83; 95% CI: 1.24, 6.47). Significant interactions between rs10830962 and interventions were found: in women homozygous for the G allele but not in the other genotypes, the PA intervention reduced maternal fasting insulin (β: -0.16; 95% CI: -0.33, 0.02; P = 0.08) and HOMA-IR (β: -0.17; 95% CI: -0.35, 0.01; P = 0.06), and reduced cord blood leptin (β: -0.84; 95% CI: -1.42, -0.25; P = 0.01) and C-peptide (β: -0.62; 95% CI: -1.07, -0.17; P = 0.01). In heterozygous women, the HE intervention had no effect, whereas in women homozygous for the C allele, HE intervention reduced GWG (β: -1.6 kg; 95% CI: -2.4, -0.8 kg). No interactions were found. Conclusions: In women homozygous for the risk allele of MTNR1B rs10830962, GDM risk was increased and PA intervention might be more beneficial than HE intervention for reducing maternal insulin resistance, cord blood C-peptide, and cord blood leptin.