Barriers and facilitators to the implementation of additive manufacturing in cardiology: A qualitative study

Q3 Medicine
Anders Brantnell , Simon Sandgren , Annette Wolff , Serdar Temiz
{"title":"Barriers and facilitators to the implementation of additive manufacturing in cardiology: A qualitative study","authors":"Anders Brantnell ,&nbsp;Simon Sandgren ,&nbsp;Annette Wolff ,&nbsp;Serdar Temiz","doi":"10.1016/j.stlm.2022.100067","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Additive manufacturing (AM) is a fast-developing technology with possible applications in cardiology. Existing research has identified two general factors that can influence implementing AM in cardiology: economics and technology.</p></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><p>In this study we aimed to identify barriers and facilitators to implementing AM in cardiology.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>We conducted a multiple case study of two Swedish cardiac surgery departments representing implementers and non-implementers of AM. We interviewed key stakeholders (n=8) who had been or were involved in implementing AM in cardiology or AM in general at the hospitals: cardiologists, physicians working with AM but not specialized in cardiology such as radiologists, company representatives, and individuals involved in the 3D-printing facilities. A combination of an inductive and deductive approach was used to analyze the interviews.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Several barriers and facilitators influenced implementing AM in cardiology. Most barriers (n=4) were related to innovation factors, whereas most facilitators (n=4) were related to healthcare professionals. No barriers and facilitators were related to patients.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Our findings show that AM in cardiology is in its very early phases in both hospitals and mostly the work of a few individuals. In the two hospitals studied, there were some unique differences in terms of barriers that could explain the low level of implementation. These barriers could be important to address when supporting implementation of AM at hospitals where AM use is still low.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":72210,"journal":{"name":"Annals of 3D printed medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666964122000236/pdfft?md5=59d723ad91bd3a89dbfd9de365a44219&pid=1-s2.0-S2666964122000236-main.pdf","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of 3D printed medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666964122000236","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Background

Additive manufacturing (AM) is a fast-developing technology with possible applications in cardiology. Existing research has identified two general factors that can influence implementing AM in cardiology: economics and technology.

Objective

In this study we aimed to identify barriers and facilitators to implementing AM in cardiology.

Methods

We conducted a multiple case study of two Swedish cardiac surgery departments representing implementers and non-implementers of AM. We interviewed key stakeholders (n=8) who had been or were involved in implementing AM in cardiology or AM in general at the hospitals: cardiologists, physicians working with AM but not specialized in cardiology such as radiologists, company representatives, and individuals involved in the 3D-printing facilities. A combination of an inductive and deductive approach was used to analyze the interviews.

Results

Several barriers and facilitators influenced implementing AM in cardiology. Most barriers (n=4) were related to innovation factors, whereas most facilitators (n=4) were related to healthcare professionals. No barriers and facilitators were related to patients.

Conclusion

Our findings show that AM in cardiology is in its very early phases in both hospitals and mostly the work of a few individuals. In the two hospitals studied, there were some unique differences in terms of barriers that could explain the low level of implementation. These barriers could be important to address when supporting implementation of AM at hospitals where AM use is still low.

在心脏病学中实施增材制造的障碍和促进因素:一项定性研究
增材制造(AM)是一项快速发展的技术,在心脏病学方面有可能应用。现有的研究已经确定了两个可以影响在心脏病学中实施AM的一般因素:经济和技术。目的在本研究中,我们旨在确定在心脏病学中实施AM的障碍和促进因素。方法我们对瑞典两个心脏外科进行了多例研究,分别代表AM的实施者和非实施者。我们采访了主要利益相关者(n=8),他们曾经或曾经参与在心脏病学或医院中实施AM:心脏病专家,与AM合作但不专门从事心脏病学的医生,如放射科医生,公司代表和参与3d打印设施的个人。采用归纳和演绎相结合的方法来分析访谈。结果影响AM在心脏病学实施的障碍和促进因素有几个。大多数障碍(n=4)与创新因素有关,而大多数促进因素(n=4)与医疗保健专业人员有关。没有与患者相关的障碍和辅助因素。结论AM在心脏病学中的应用在两家医院都处于非常早期的阶段,主要是少数人的工作。在所研究的两家医院中,在障碍方面存在一些独特的差异,这可以解释执行水平较低的原因。在增材制造使用率仍然很低的医院支持实施增材制造时,解决这些障碍可能很重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Annals of 3D printed medicine
Annals of 3D printed medicine Medicine and Dentistry (General), Materials Science (General)
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
131 days
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信