Theories, models, and frameworks in implementation science in the context of rehabilitation research: a scoping review
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.2340/jrm.v58.46016Keywords:
Evidence-based practice, Implementation science, Knowledge translation, Rehabilitation research, Scoping review, Theories models and frameworksAbstract
Objective: This review explores the use of implementation science theories, models, and frameworks in rehabilitation research by describing study characteristics and assessing how the applied theories, models, and frameworks align with study purposes.
Methods: In the scoping review, peer-reviewed articles published in English between January 2010 and October 2023 were identified from 5 datbases. Eligible studies applied or were informed by implementation science theories, models, and frameworks in any rehabilitation cotext. Data extraction covered publication characteristics, target populations, setings, study designs, used theories, models, and frameworks, and study purposes. Descriptive statistics and deductive analysis were used to synthesize findings.
Results: Of 2,277 citations, 121 articles met the inclusion criteria. Most of the articles focused on neurological and paediatric rehabilitation, with qualitative and mixed-methods designs predominating. A total of 34 theories, models, and frameworks were identified, mainly determinant frameworks and process models. Theories, models, and frameworks were primarily used to identify barriers and facilitators, evaluate implementation outcomes, and describe implementation processes. However, theories, models, and frameworks selection did not always align with the study purpose.
Conclusion: The use of theories, models, and frameworks in rehabilitation research is increasing but remains limited. Their systematic and purposeful application is needed to enhance the usability and transferability of research findings, thereby bridging the research–practice gap, sustaining evidence-based interventions, and informing policy.
Downloads
References
Campbell M, Fitzpatrick R, Haines A, Kinmonth AL, Sandercock P, Spiegelhalter D, et al. Framework for design and evaluation of complex interventions to improve health. BMJ 2000; 321: 694–696. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.321.7262.694
World Health Organization. Rehabilitation. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2024 (cited 2026 Jun 7). Available from: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/rehabilitation
Wade DT. Defining rehabilitation: an exploration of why it is attempted, and why it will always fail. Clin Rehabil 2021; 35: 1650–1656. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/02692155211028018
Wade DT. A general theory of rehabilitation? Rehabilitation catalyses and assists adaptation to illness. Clin Rehabil 2024; 38: 429–442. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/02692155231210151
Law M, MacDermid J. Evidence-based rehabilitation: a guide to practice. 3rd ed. New York: Routledge; 2013.
Minary L, Trompette J, Kivits J, Cambon L, Tarquinio C, Alla F. Which design to evaluate complex interventions? Toward a methodological framework through a systematic review. BMC Med Res Methodol 2019; 19: 92. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-019-0736-6
Damschroder LJ. Clarity out of chaos: use of theory in implementation research. Psychiatry Res 2020; 283: 112461. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2019.06.036
Peters DH, Adam T, Alonge O, Akua Agyepong I, Tran N. Implementation research: what it is and how to do it. BMJ 2013; 347: f6753.
Tan WW, Jeffreys C, Parolini A. Implementing implementation: integrating the measurement of implementation and effectiveness in complex service systems. In: Complex systems and implementation. Cham: Springer; 2020. p. 253–273. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-03874-8_10
Moullin JC, Dickson KS, Stadnick NA, Albers B, Broder-Fingert S, Mukasa B, et al. Ten recommendations for using implementation frameworks in re-search and practice. Implement Sci Commun 2020; 1: 42. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s43058-020-00023-7
Powell BJ, Waltz TJ, Chinman MJ, Damschroder LJ, Smith JL, Matthieu MM, et al. A refined compilation of implementation strategies: results from the ERIC project. Implement Sci 2015; 10: 21. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-015-0209-1
Birken SA, Haines ER, Hwang S, Chambers DA, Bunger AC, Nilsen P, et al. Advancing understanding and identifying strategies for sustaining evidence-based practices: a review of reviews. Implement Sci 2020; 15: 88. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-020-01040-9
Kinney AR, Stearns-Yoder KA, Hoffberg AS, Middleton A, Weaver JA, Roseen EJ, et al. Barriers and facilitators to the adoption of evidence-based inter-ventions for adults within occupational and physical therapy practice settings: a systematic review. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2023; 104: 1132–1151. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2023.03.005
Murrell JE, Pisegna JL, Juckett LA. Implementation strategies and outcomes for occupational therapy in adult stroke rehabilitation: a scoping review. Implement Sci 2021; 16: 105. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-021-01178-0
Nilsen P. Making sense of implementation theories, models and frameworks. Implement Sci 2015; 10: 53. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-015-0242-0
Heinijoki H, Karhula M, Seppanen Jarvela R. The use of implementation research frameworks in rehabilitation: a scoping review. J Soc Medic 2023; 60: 192–206. DOI: https://doi.org/10.23990/sa.120634
Birken SA, Powell BJ, Shea CM, Haines ER, Kirk MA, Leeman J, et al. Criteria for selecting implementation science theories and frameworks: results from an international survey. Implement Sci 2017; 12: 124. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-017-0656-y
Arksey H, O’Malley L. Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. Int J Soc Res Methodol 2005; 8: 19–32. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/1364557032000119616
Levac D, Colquhoun H, O’Brien KK. Scoping studies: advancing the methodology. Implement Sci 2010; 5: 69. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-5-69
Colquhoun HL, Levac D, O’Brien KK, Straus S, Tricco AC, Perrier L, et al. Scoping reviews: time for clarity in definition, methods, and reporting. J Clin Epidemiol 2014; 67: 1291–1294. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.03.013
Tricco AC, Lillie E, Zarin W, O’Brien KK, Colquhoun H, Levac D, et al. PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA ScR): checklist and explanation. Ann Intern Med 2018; 169: 467–473. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7326/M18-0850
Atzmon O, Crowther ME, Bei B, O’Connor DA. The use of implementation science theoretical approaches in hybrid effectiveness–implementation type 1 randomised trials of healthcare interventions: a scoping review. Implement Sci 2025; 20: 23. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-025-01435-6
Nilsen P, editor. Implementation science: theory and practice. New York: Routledge; 2024. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003318125
Wang Y, Wong ELY, Nilsen P, Chi-ho Chung V, Tian Y, Yeoh E-K. A scoping review of implementation science theories, models, and frameworks. Imple-ment Sci 2023; 18: 43. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-023-01296-x
Chambers DA, Emmons KM. Navigating the field of implementation science towards maturity: challenges and opportunities. Implement Sci 2024; 19: 26. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-024-01352-0
Morris ZS, Wooding S, Grant J. The answer is 17 years, what is the question: understanding time lags in translational research. J R Soc Med 2011; 104: 510–520. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1258/jrsm.2011.110180
Goldstein H, Olswang L. Is there a science to facilitate implementation of evidence-based practices and programs? Evid Based Commun Assess Interv 2017; 11: 55–60. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17489539.2017.1416768
Jiang H, Lin B, Liu Z, Mei Y, Li X, Ma L, et al. Patient engagement in rehabilitation: an evolutionary concept analysis. Clin Rehabil 2025; 39:224–235. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/02692155241309188
Walker A, Boaz A, Hurley MV. The role of leadership in implementing and sustaining an evidence-based intervention for osteoarthritis in NHS physi-otherapy services. Disabil Rehabil 2022; 44: 1313–1320. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09638288.2020.1803997
Crable EL, Lengnick-Hall R, Stadnick NA, Moullin JC, Aarons GA. Where is “policy” in dissemination and implementation science? Recommendations to advance theories, models, and frameworks: EPIS as a case example. Implement Sci 2022; 17: 80. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-022-01256-x
Fontaine G, Mooney M, Porat-Dahlerbruch J, Cahir K, Ellen M, Spinewine A. et al. Advancing the selection of implementation science theories, models, and frameworks: a scoping review and the development of the SELECT-IT meta-framework. Implement Sci 2025; 20: 24. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-025-01436-5
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: 2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-016-0534-z
Skolarus TA, Lehmann T, Tabak RG, Harris J, Lecy J, Sales AE, et al. Assessing citation networks for dissemination and implementation research frameworks. Implement Sci 2017; 12: 97. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-017-0628-2
Meyers DC, Durlak JA, Wandersman A. The quality implementation framework: a synthesis of critical steps in the implementation process. Am J Com-munity Psychol 2012; 50: 462–480. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10464-012-9522-x
Birken SA, Rohweder CL, Powell BJ, Shea CM, Scott J, Leeman J, et al. T-CaST: an implementation theory comparison and selection tool. Implement Sci 2018; 13: 143. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-018-0836-4
Westerlund A, Sundberg L, Nilsen P. Implementation of implementation science knowledge: the research–practice gap paradox. Worldviews Evid Based Nurs 2019; 16: 332–334. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/wvn.12403
Downloads
Additional Files
Published
How to Cite
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Maarit Karhula, Hennariikka Heinijoki, Riitta Seppänen-Järvelä
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
All digitalized JRM contents is available freely online. The Foundation for Rehabilitation Medicine owns the copyright for all material published until volume 40 (2008), as from volume 41 (2009) authors retain copyright to their work and as from volume 49 (2017) the journal has been published Open Access, under CC-BY-NC licences (unless otherwise specified). The CC-BY-NC licenses allow third parties to copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format and to remix, transform, and build upon the material for non-commercial purposes, provided proper attribution to the original work.
From 2024, articles are published under the CC-BY licence. This license permits sharing, adapting, and using the material for any purpose, including commercial use, with the condition of providing full attribution to the original publication.
