Table 5.
Barriers and Facilitators of Implementing KT Interventions
| Facilitators | ||
|---|---|---|
| Types of Facilitators | List of Common Facilitators | Studies Reporting the Facilitator |
| Communication | - Presence of a team member who acted as a liaison among the team | (18,19,22,25) |
| - Consensus that the KT intervention in question will improve care | (22) | |
| - Regular team meetings | (18,19) | |
| - Stakeholder engagement prior to the implementation to get buy-ins and identify facilitators and barriers | (21,23,30) | |
| - Continued training through ongoing educational inservices and new employee orientation | (21,23,30) | |
| - Strong leadership and support from administration and local champion | (21,23,30) | |
| Study Design | - KT intervention was flexible enough to adapt to the wishes of stakeholders | (22) |
| - Tests required by the KT intervention were easy to follow | (22) | |
| Resources (Funding, Personnel) | - Had resources dedicated to the KT intervention | (18,19,22) |
| - Presence of a pre-existing program with a similar purpose [ie. Commission for Accreditation of Rehabilitation facilities (CARF)] | (23) | |
| Barriers | ||
| Type of Barriers | List of Common Barriers | Studies Reporting the Barrier |
| Resources (Funding, Personnel) | - KT intervention required additional ability that staff didn’t have at the beginning of the implementation | (18,19,27,28) |
| - Structure in the system that made it difficult to carry out the KT intervention | (18,19,21,23,27,28,30) | |
| - Lack of time staff had for the KT intervention | (18,19,21,23,30) | |
| - Frequent changing of staff/procedure resulted in repeated program introduction | (21,30) | |
| Communication | - Lack of consensus from health practitioners on the effectiveness of the treatment | (21–23,30) |
| - Lack of specific guidance in how the KT intervention should be carried out | (21,23,30) | |
| Study Design | - The KT intervention was difficult to carry out/took too much time/stressful for the patients | (22,27,28) |