Race and Equity in Statewide Implementation Programs: An Application of the Policy Ecology of Implementation Framework

Addressing health equity during design and implementation of health system reform initiatives: a scoping review and framework

BACKGROUND

Health equity is a commonly asserted goal of health systems. However, there is a limited understanding on how best to promote equity as a part of health system reform initiatives. We conducted a scoping review to (1) identify and characterise strategies that promote health equity during the design and implementation of health system reform initiatives; and (2) determine opportunities to strengthen health equity informed policy design and implementation processes and outcomes.

METHOD

We systematically searched peer-reviewed literature from 2013 to 2022 focussing on four search domains: (1) health equity; (2) implementation; (3) health system; and (4) reform, policy, or theories, and only included papers that represented a population health or system-wide intention. Health equity promoting strategies were categorised into those occurring at national, regional, state, or local levels. Themes common across system levels were mapped, which alongside theory, informed the development of a health equity promoting framework for reform initiatives.

RESULTS

The search returned 10,999 articles after duplicates were removed. 384 articles underwent full text review and 68 met the inclusion criteria. Thematic analysis of results identified health equity promoting themes derived from numerous strategies, with a median of 10 strategies (interquartile range 7,15) per article. Accountability, commitment, shared power, and adaptability emerged as some of the most prominent equity promoting themes applicable at all system levels. Across strategies, two cardinal conditions were identified: (1) the need for health equity implementation strategies to be made explicit, and (2) the need for alignment and complementarity of strategies. The framework developed demonstrates equity-oriented reform implementation, which embeds broader equity change throughout the system through inclusive and reflexive governance.

CONCLUSION

This review synthesises diverse literature about how health equity has been considered across levels of the health system during reform design and implementation, providing to our knowledge, the first comprehensive multi-level approach to this issue. Our resulting framework presents policymakers, implementers, and researchers a novel cross-scholarship perspective and process to support the implementation of health equity within system reform initiatives. Throughout design and implementation, consistent vision and a coordinated approach for equity across system levels, underpinned by reflexive governance, will be vital to ensuring that those most in need of healthcare benefit equitably.

Revisiting the policy ecology framework for implementation of evidence-based practices in mental health settings

BACKGROUND

Over the past three decades, policy actors and actions have been highly influential in supporting the implementation of evidence-based practices (EBPs) in mental health settings. An early examination of these actions resulted in the Policy Ecology Framework (PEF), which was originally developed as a tactical primer for state and local mental health regulators in the field of child mental health. However, the policy landscape for implementation has evolved significantly since the original PEF was published. An interrogation of the strategies originally proposed in the PEF is necessary to provide an updated menu of strategies to improve our understanding of the mechanisms of policy action and promote system improvement.

OBJECTIVES

This paper builds upon the original PEF to address changes in the policy landscape for the implementation of mental health EBPs between 2009 and 2022. We review the current state of policy strategies that support the implementation of EBPs in mental health care and outline key areas for policy-oriented implementation research. Our review identifies policy strategies at federal, state, agency, and organizational levels, and highlights developments in the social context in which EBPs are implemented. Furthermore, our review is organized around some key changes that occurred across each PEF domain that span organizational, agency, political, and social contexts along with subdomains within each area.

DISCUSSION

We present an updated menu of policy strategies to support the implementation of EBPs in mental health settings. This updated menu of strategies considers the broad range of conceptual developments and changes in the policy landscape. These developments have occurred across the organizational, agency, political, and social contexts and are important for policymakers to consider in the context of supporting the implementation of EBPs. The updated PEF expands and enhances the specification of policy levers currently available, and identifies policy targets that are underdeveloped (e.g., de-implementation and sustainment) but are becoming visible opportunities for policy to support system improvement. The updated PEF clarifies current policy efforts within the field of implementation science in health to conceptualize and better operationalize the role of policy in the implementation of EBPs.

Applying concepts from "rapid" and "agile" implementation to advance implementation research

Background

The translation of research findings into practice can be improved to maximize benefits more quickly and with greater flexibility. To expedite translation, researchers have developed innovative approaches to implementation branded as “rapid” and “agile” implementation. Rapid implementation has roots in precision medicine and agile implementation has roots in systems engineering and software design. Research has shown that innovation often derives from learning and applying ideas that have impacted other fields.

Implications for implementation researchers

This commentary examines “rapid” and “agile” approaches to implementation and provides recommendations to implementation researchers stemming from these approaches. Four key ideas are synthesized that may be broadly applicable to implementation research, including (1) adopting a problem orientation, (2) applying lessons from behavioral economics, (3) using adaptive study designs and adaptive interventions, and (4) using multi-level models to guide implementation. Examples are highlighted from the field where researchers are applying these key ideas to illustrate their potential impact.

Conclusions

“Rapid” and “agile” implementation approaches to implementation stem from diverse fields. Elements of these approaches show potential for advancing implementation research, although adopting them may entail shifting scientific norms in the field.

Racial/Ethnic, Sex, Sexual Orientation, and Socioeconomic Disparities in Suicidal Trajectories and Mental Health Treatment Among Adolescents Transitioning to Young Adulthood in the USA: A Population-Based Cohort Study

Suicide is the second leading cause of death for people aged 10-34 years old. Limited research has documented extant heterogeneities in suicide across the life course and among diverse sociodemographic groups. There is also limited research on the influences of mental health utilization on suicidal trajectories across the life course. This study aims to: (1) identify racial/ethnic, sex, sexual orientation, socioeconomic status, and intersectional differences in suicidal trajectories among adolescents transitioning to adulthood; and (2) examine influences of mental health service utilization on disparities in suicidal trajectories. The study included 9421 respondents (Mage = 14.99 [SD = 1.61]) from Waves I-IV National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent to Adult Health (1994-2008). Latent class growth analyses were used to identify trajectories of suicidal ideation and suicide attempts. Multivariate multinomial logistic regression was used to examine the influences of mental health treatment and sociodemographic characteristics on suicidal trajectories. Three suicidal ideation (low-stable, high-decreasing, moderate-decreasing-increasing) and two suicide attempt (low-stable, moderate-decreasing) trajectories were identified. Compared with the low-stable trajectories, the risks of being in high-decreasing suicidal ideation trajectories were higher among females (AOR = 1.45, 95% CI 1.01-2.13) and sexual minorities (AOR = 1.82, 95% CI 1.21-2.74). Sexual minorities (AOR = 2.63, 95% CI 1.69-4.08) and low-SES adolescents (AOR = 1.79, 95% CI 1.08-2.98) were more likely to be in the moderate-decreasing suicide attempt group. Mental health service utilization predicted engagement in high-risk suicidal trajectories. Sociodemographic disparities in suicidal trajectories initiate early and persist over time. Individuals in high-risk trajectories received mental health treatment during adolescence. Suicide prevention should target vulnerable subpopulations and mental health service utilization in the early stage.

A systematic review of school health policy measurement tools: implementation determinants and outcomes

BACKGROUND

Governments in some countries or states/provinces mandate school-based policies intended to improve the health and well-being of primary and secondary students and in some cases the health of school staff. Examples include mandating a minimum time spent per week in programmed physical activity, mandating provision of healthy foods and limiting fat content of school meals, and banning tobacco products or use on school campuses. Although school health researchers have studied whether schools, districts, or states/provinces are meeting requirements, it is unclear to what extent implementation processes and determinants are assessed. The purposes of the present systematic review of quantitative measures of school policy implementation were to (1) identify quantitative school health policy measurement tools developed to measure implementation at the school, district, or state/provincial levels; (2) describe the policy implementation outcomes and determinants assessed and identify the trends in measurement; and (3) assess pragmatic and psychometric properties of identified implementation measures to understand their quality and suitability for broader application.

METHODS

Peer-reviewed journal articles published 1995-2020 were included if they (1) had multiple-item quantitative measures of school policy implementation and (2) addressed overall wellness, tobacco, physical activity, nutrition, obesity prevention, or mental health/bullying/social-emotional learning. The final sample comprised 86 measurement tools from 67 peer-review articles. We extracted study characteristics, such as psychometric and pragmatic measure properties, from included articles based on three frameworks: (1) Implementation Outcomes Framework, (2) Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, and (3) Policy Implementation Determinants Framework.

RESULTS

Most implementation tools were developed to measure overall wellness policies which combined multiple policy topics (n = 35, 40%) and were in survey form (n = 75, 87%). Fidelity was the most frequently prevalent implementation outcome (n = 70, 81%), followed by adoption (n = 32, 81%). The implementation determinants most assessed were readiness for implementation, including resources (n = 43, 50%), leadership (n = 42, 49%), and policy communication (n = 41, 48%). Overall, measures were low-cost and had easy readability. However, lengthy tools and lack of reported validity/reliability data indicate low transferability.

CONCLUSIONS

Implementation science can contribute to more complete and rigorous assessment of school health policy implementation processes, which can improve implementation strategies and ultimately the intended health benefits. Several high-quality measures of implementation determinants and implementation outcomes can be applied to school health policy implementation assessment. Dissemination and implementation science researchers can also benefit from measurement experiences of school health researchers.

Implementation science should give higher priority to health equity

Background

There is growing urgency to tackle issues of equity and justice in the USA and worldwide. Health equity, a framing that moves away from a deficit mindset of what society is doing poorly (disparities) to one that is positive about what society can achieve, is becoming more prominent in health research that uses implementation science approaches. Equity begins with justice—health differences often reflect societal injustices. Applying the perspectives and tools of implementation science has potential for immediate impact to improve health equity.

Main text

We propose a vision and set of action steps for making health equity a more prominent and central aim of implementation science, thus committing to conduct implementation science through equity-focused principles to achieve this vision in U.S. research and practice. We identify and discuss challenges in current health disparities approaches that do not fully consider social determinants. Implementation research challenges are outlined in three areas: limitations of the evidence base, underdeveloped measures and methods, and inadequate attention to context. To address these challenges, we offer recommendations that seek to (1) link social determinants with health outcomes, (2) build equity into all policies, (3) use equity-relevant metrics, (4) study what is already happening, (5) integrate equity into implementation models, (6) design and tailor implementation strategies, (7) connect to systems and sectors outside of health, (8) engage organizations in internal and external equity efforts, (9) build capacity for equity in implementation science, and (10) focus on equity in dissemination efforts.

Conclusions

Every project in implementation science should include an equity focus. For some studies, equity is the main goal of the project and a central feature of all aspects of the project. In other studies, equity is part of a project but not the singular focus. In these studies, we should, at a minimum, ensure that we “leave no one behind” and that existing disparities are not widened. With a stronger commitment to health equity from funders, researchers, practitioners, advocates, evaluators, and policy makers, we can harvest the rewards of the resources being invested in health-related research to eliminate disparities, resulting in health equity.

Funding Diversity: A Case Study of A State-initiated, Funding-driven Program to Diversify Mental Health Service Provision in Minnesota

Human service organizations are reconfiguring to address diversifying populations and widening inequality. However, institutional change is challenging to implement and fund; resource scarcity and stakeholder buy-in are barriers. In this case study, we analyze a funding-driven, state-initiated program that supports mental health professionals who are people of color in order to decrease health disparities. Analyses of interviews and documents depict how the program struggled with high turnover and uninspired, halfhearted messaging, but was nevertheless well loved. Findings illustrate how the 'pitch' and leadership matter in programming for institutional change and its contested nature, a contestation that funding alone cannot temper.