Skip to main content

Table 4 A summary of the key results organised by their corresponding NPT construct

From: Exploring the factors affecting the implementation of tobacco and substance use interventions within a secondary school setting: a systematic review

Factors affecting implementation Papers NPT construct
Distinguishing from current practice [34, 40] Coherence
Fitting with school ethos [34] Coherence
Providers seeing the value or benefit of an intervention [34, 36, 38, 44] Coherence
Providers not delivering or not understanding how to deliver (use of specialist knowledge) [38, 41, 42, 44] Coherence
Collective Action
Training [32, 34, 41, 42] Coherence
Collective Action
Implementation driving force [34, 37, 42,43,44] Cognitive Participation
Role identity—provider ‘agreeing’ it should be part of their role [30, 34, 40, 43, 44] Cognitive Participation
Provider supporting intervention [30, 33, 34, 39, 41] Cognitive Participation
Provider motivation [43] Cognitive Participation
Sustainability [30] Cognitive Participation
Young people behaviour [42] Cognitive Participation
Providers feeling uncomfortable with delivery [38] Cognitive Participation
Collective Action
Budget cuts or limited resources [41] Collective Action
Disruption to school timetable [34] Collective Action
Favourable organisational climate/host support [32, 34, 40, 41, 44] Collective Action
Fidelity [30, 31, 33, 36,37,38,39, 41,42,43,44] Collective Action
Importance of staff skills, knowledge or characteristics [35, 42] Collective Action
Involving schools; monitoring outcomes [40] Collective Action
Schools prepared for implementation [44] Collective Action
Staff turnover [41] Collective Action
Modifying practice (from feedback) [38] Reflexive monitoring
Negative implementation experience [41] Reflexive monitoring
Positive feedback [36] Reflexive monitoring
Back to article page

Implementation Science

ISSN: 1748-5908