Barriers and facilitators to the uptake of new medicines into clinical practice: a systematic review

Abstract

Background Implementation and uptake of novel and cost-effective medicines can improve patient health outcomes and healthcare efficiency. However, the uptake of new medicines into practice faces a wide range of obstacles. Earlier reviews provided insights into determinants for new medicine uptake (such as medicine, prescriber, patient, organization, and external environment factors). However, the methodological approaches used had limitations (e.g., single author, narrative review, narrow search, no quality assessment of reviewed evidence). This systematic review aims to identify barriers and facilitators affecting the uptake of new medicines into clinical practice and identify areas for future research. Method A systematic search of literature was undertaken within seven databases: Medline, EMBASE, Web of Science, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, SCOPUS, and PsychINFO. Included in the review were qualitative, quantitative, and mixed-methods studies focused on adult participants (18 years and older) requiring or taking new medicine(s) for any condition, in the context of healthcare organizations and which identified factors affecting the uptake of new medicines. The methodological quality was assessed using QATSDD tool. A narrative synthesis of reported factors was conducted using framework analysis and a conceptual framework was utilised to group them. Results A total of 66 studies were included. Most studies (n = 62) were quantitative and used secondary data (n = 46) from various databases, e.g., insurance databases. The identified factors had a varied impact on the uptake of the different studied new medicines. Differently from earlier reviews, patient factors (patient education, engagement with treatment, therapy preferences), cost of new medicine, reimbursement and formulary conditions, and guidelines were suggested to influence the uptake. Also, the review highlighted that health economics, wider organizational factors, and underlying behaviours of adopters were not or under explored. Conclusion This systematic review has identified a broad range of factors affecting the uptake of new medicines within healthcare organizations, which were grouped into patient, prescriber, medicine, organizational, and external environment factors. This systematic review also identifies additional factors affecting new medicine use not reported in earlier reviews, which included patient influence and education level, cost of new medicines, formulary and reimbursement restrictions, and guidelines. Registration PROSPERO database (CRD42018108536).

How are new drugs disseminated in Japan? Analysis using the National Database of Health Insurance Claims of Japan

“…A recent systematic review of new drug uptake for, but not limited to, cancer drugs, summarized the influencing factors into broad categories of patient, prescriber, medicine, and organizational and environmental factors. 9 The geographic variation observed in our study could represent a combination of these factors. Additionally, the review found that the influence of each factor appeared to be different across drug types.…”

Hybrid effectiveness-implementation study designs in sports injury prevention research

“…Previous research has grouped factors that influence implementation into patient, provider, innovation, structural and organizational factors (Chaudoir et al, 2013 ). For example, an efficacious intervention may fail in clinical practice because: the patient is an inappropriate fit, time constraints within the provider's role prevent adding or changing daily tasks and/or the organization culturally does not promote the use of a given intervention (Chaudoir et al, 2013 ; Medlinskiene et al, 2021 ). The multitude of factors contributing to sub-optimal implementation and the disproportional research focus on the external validity of interventions deeply impacts the adoption, sustainability, and scale-up of best practice evidence (Glasgow et al, 2019 ).…”

Implementation of evidence on management of pleural diseases: insights from a territory-wide survey of clinicians in Hong Kong

“…In particular, there are major breakthroughs in the understanding, investigation and treatments of common pleural diseases [ 6 ], which can reduce morbidity and improve quality of care for patients. However, the incorporation of major advances into clinical practice can vary tremendously across different healthcare systems [ 7 , 8 ], and there are a number of possible barriers contributing to the insufficient update and lack of implementation of guidelines and advances [ 9 ].…”