Table 2. Facilitators and barriers to the implementation of CALM, according to the Proctor et al [9] model.
| Implementation outcomes | Participants’ perceptions | |
|---|---|---|
| Facilitators | Acceptability | The content of CALM is a contribution to clinical practice, both for patients and therapists. |
| Fidelity | There is a perceived consistency between what the intervention describes and what the professionals observe in their practice. | |
| Feasibility | The CALM structure may be applied by Chilean therapists. | |
| Barriers | Penetration/escalation | There is a perceived difficulty in disseminating what has been learned, and training other professionals and teams due to time constraints and workload. |
| The institutional organisation is perceived as resistant to change and to the adoption of new interventions, despite the possible interest of other professionals. | ||
| Sustainability | Difficulty in continuing with CALM training. |