A theory-informed mixed-methods approach for early implementation assessment in clinical trials of complex interventions

Background Clinical trials of complex interventions often face challenges when translating interventions developed under research conditions into routine practice. Implementation science offers approaches to examine this research-to-practice gap, but strategies for assessing early implementation within clinical trials remain limited. This is particularly relevant to rehabilitation interventions, which are individualized, context-dependent, and delivered through interactions among patients, healthcare professionals, and organizations. Methods A hybrid type 1 design was used to evaluate a palliative rehabilitation intervention. A theory-informed methodological approach was developed to guide early implementation assessment within the clinical trial. The EPIS process model structured assessment across trial phases, while Proctor’s taxonomy guided selection of implementation outcomes. Outcome measures were mapped and reviewed, prioritizing validated measures where available. Quantitative questionnaires and qualitative topic guides were developed for patients, healthcare professionals, and institutional representatives. The approach was designed to remain adaptable to trial phase and objectives. Results The resulting mixed-methods strategy combined quantitative assessment of selected implementation outcomes with qualitative exploration of stakeholder experiences. Three questionnaires incorporated the Acceptability of Intervention Measure, Intervention Appropriateness Measure, and Feasibility of Intervention Measure, alongside context-specific items addressing additional outcomes. Three qualitative topic guides supported integration across data sources. Data were collected at time points to capture anticipatory and experience-based perceptions of implementation. The approach aligned implementation outcomes, stakeholder perspectives, trial phases, and mixed-methods data collection without treating the strategy as a fixed or universally applicable instrument. Conclusions This study describes a theory-informed, mixed-methods approach for integrating early implementation assessment within clinical trials of complex interventions. Rather than proposing a new standardized instrument, it provides a transparent framework for selecting implementation outcomes, stakeholders, measures, and data collection strategies according to trial stage and objectives. Developed for a palliative rehabilitation intervention, the approach may be adapted to other complex intervention trials requiring implementation assessment alongside effectiveness evaluation.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Open Research Europe
Published
2026-10-17
DOI
https://doi.org/10.12688/openreseurope.25168.1
Primary Topic
Health Policy Implementation Science
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

A theory-informed mixed-methods approach for early implementation assessment in clinical trials of complex interventions

Matthew M Maddocks, Joanne Bayly, Guillaume Pierre Serge Economos, Anne-Sophie Belmont et al.
Open Research Europe
Health Policy Implementation Science
article

A theory-informed mixed-methods approach for early implementation assessment in clinical trials of complex interventions

Matthew M Maddocks, Joanne Bayly, Guillaume Pierre Serge Economos, Anne-Sophie Belmont, Julia Romeyer
article en

Abstract

Background Clinical trials of complex interventions often face challenges when translating interventions developed under research conditions into routine practice. Implementation science offers approaches to examine this research-to-practice gap, but strategies for assessing early implementation within clinical trials remain limited. This is particularly relevant to rehabilitation interventions, which are individualized, context-dependent, and delivered through interactions among patients, healthcare professionals, and organizations. Methods A hybrid type 1 design was used to evaluate a palliative rehabilitation intervention. A theory-informed methodological approach was developed to guide early implementation assessment within the clinical trial. The EPIS process model structured assessment across trial phases, while Proctor’s taxonomy guided selection of implementation outcomes. Outcome measures were mapped and reviewed, prioritizing validated measures where available. Quantitative questionnaires and qualitative topic guides were developed for patients, healthcare professionals, and institutional representatives. The approach was designed to remain adaptable to trial phase and objectives. Results The resulting mixed-methods strategy combined quantitative assessment of selected implementation outcomes with qualitative exploration of stakeholder experiences. Three questionnaires incorporated the Acceptability of Intervention Measure, Intervention Appropriateness Measure, and Feasibility of Intervention Measure, alongside context-specific items addressing additional outcomes. Three qualitative topic guides supported integration across data sources. Data were collected at time points to capture anticipatory and experience-based perceptions of implementation. The approach aligned implementation outcomes, stakeholder perspectives, trial phases, and mixed-methods data collection without treating the strategy as a fixed or universally applicable instrument. Conclusions This study describes a theory-informed, mixed-methods approach for integrating early implementation assessment within clinical trials of complex interventions. Rather than proposing a new standardized instrument, it provides a transparent framework for selecting implementation outcomes, stakeholders, measures, and data collection strategies according to trial stage and objectives. Developed for a palliative rehabilitation intervention, the approach may be adapted to other complex intervention trials requiring implementation assessment alongside effectiveness evaluation.

Open Research EuropeVol. 6
Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1 (FR), Hospices Civils de Lyon (FR)
HORIZON EUROPE Framework Programme, Innovate UK
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 8%
Health Policy Implementation Science
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.