Clinical interventions, implementation interventions, and the potential greyness in between -a discussion paper.

Area of Science:

• Health Services Research
• Implementation Science
• Clinical Practice Improvement

Background:

• Effective implementation of clinical interventions into practice is essential for patient benefit.
• Confusion exists between clinical interventions and implementation interventions due to conceptual and application ambiguity.
• Greater clarity is needed for both scientific and clinical communities regarding intervention types.

Purpose of the Study:

• To address the concepts of clinical interventions and implementation interventions.
• To explore the 'grey area' and potential hybridity between clinical and implementation interventions.
• To enhance precision in healthcare research terminology and study design.

Main Methods:

• Conceptual overview of similarities, differences, and ambiguities.
• Analysis of examples of clinical and implementation intervention studies.
• Discussion of strategies including theories, frameworks, models, and reporting guidelines.

Main Results:

• Semantics can improve precision in defining 'intervention' versus 'implementation'.
• Study design, theory, and reporting guidelines aid in distinguishing intervention types.
• Some aspects of hybrid clinical-implementation studies may remain unclear.

Conclusions:

• Improved precision in terminology can enhance healthcare research.
• Strategies exist to distinguish clinical and implementation interventions.
• Acknowledging ambiguity in hybrid studies can inform future research and practice.