Abstract Aim To explore the implementation contexts and strategies that influence the uptake and selection of alternative peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) materials and design. Design Qualitative evaluation of end user perspectives within a randomized control trial of different PICC materials and design. Methods Semi‐structured interviews with key stakeholders were undertaken via an adapted, rapid‐analytic approach using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Outcomes were mapped against the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) tool for strategies to guide innovation in PICC practice. Results Participants ( n = 23) represented a combination of users and inserters/purchasers, from adult and paediatric settings. Dominant themes included intervention characteristics (intervention source), inner setting (structural characteristics) and individuals involved (self‐efficacy). Strategies emerging to support a change from ERIC mapping ( n = 16) included promotion of intervention adaptability, inclusion of staff and consumer perspectives and sufficient funding. Implementation contexts such as inner setting and individuals involved equally impacted PICC success and implementation effectiveness and enabled a greater understanding of barriers and facilitators to intervention implementation in this trial. Conclusion Trial evidence is important, but healthcare decision‐making requires consideration of local contexts especially resourcing. Implementation contexts for Australian healthcare settings include a practical, strategic toolkit for the implementation of alternative PICC materials and designs. Reporting Method This study adhered to COREQ guidelines. Patient or Public Contribution No patient or public contribution.
