Gray-Burrows Kara A, El-Yousfi Sarab, Hudson Kristian, Watt Samantha, Lloyd Ellen, El Shuwihdi Hanin, Broomhead Tom, Day Peter F, Marshman Zoe
School of Dentistry, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
School of Clinical Dentistry, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.
Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2025 Jun;53(3):256-264. doi: 10.1111/cdoe.13026. Epub 2025 Jan 29.
Supervised toothbrushing programmes (STPs), whereby children brush their teeth at nursery or school with a fluoride toothpaste under staff supervision, are a clinically and cost-effective intervention to reduce dental caries. However, uptake is varied, and the reasons unknown. The aim was to use an implementation science approach to explore the perspectives of key stakeholders on the barriers and facilitators at each level of implementation of STPs.
This qualitative study involved individual interviews and focus groups with a purposive sample of stakeholders involved at all levels of implementation of STPs: (1) policymakers; (2) providers of STPs; (3) nursery/school staff; (4) parents/carers; and (5) children (aged 2-6 years old) across England. Data collection and analysis were guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR).
A total of 159 stakeholders were interviewed (40 individual interviews and 17 focus groups) across all levels of implementation. Barriers and facilitators to STP implementation were identified across 35 of the 39 CFIR constructs. Four themes were identified that determined STP implementation: (1) acceptability of STPs; (2) external 'make or break' conditions; (3) the importance of engagement across the system; and (4) desire for centralised support.
This is the first study to qualitatively explore the barriers and facilitators to STP at all levels of implementation underpinned by an implementation science framework. The findings have strong implications for policymakers who wish to implement STPs, highlighting the need for careful consideration of the adaptability of the programmes, the role of formal and informal engagement systems, and the need for centralised support. This work has facilitated the co-design and piloting of a supervised toothbrushing implementation toolkit, which provides a central hub of resources and good practice to optimise implementation of STPs at scale.
监督刷牙计划(STPs)是一种在临床和成本效益上都很有效的干预措施,可减少龋齿,即儿童在托儿所或学校在工作人员监督下使用含氟牙膏刷牙。然而,其采用情况各不相同,原因不明。本研究旨在运用实施科学方法,探讨关键利益相关者对STPs实施各层面的障碍和促进因素的看法。
这项定性研究包括对参与STPs实施各层面的利益相关者进行有目的抽样的个人访谈和焦点小组讨论:(1)政策制定者;(2)STPs提供者;(3)托儿所/学校工作人员;(4)家长/照顾者;以及(5)英格兰各地2至6岁的儿童。数据收集和分析以实施研究综合框架(CFIR)为指导。
在实施的各个层面共访谈了159名利益相关者(40次个人访谈和17个焦点小组)。在CFIR的39个构建要素中的35个中确定了STP实施的障碍和促进因素。确定了决定STP实施的四个主题:(1)STPs的可接受性;(2)外部的“成败”条件;(3)系统内参与的重要性;以及(4)对集中支持的渴望。
这是第一项在实施科学框架支持下,对STP实施各层面的障碍和促进因素进行定性探索的研究。研究结果对希望实施STPs的政策制定者具有重要意义,强调需要仔细考虑计划的适应性、正式和非正式参与系统的作用以及集中支持的必要性。这项工作促进了监督刷牙实施工具包的共同设计和试点,该工具包提供了一个资源和良好实践的中心枢纽,以优化大规模STPs的实施。