Implementation Strategies for Frontline Healthcare Professionals: People, Process Mapping, and Problem Solving

The difference-making role of staff support in implementing nurse care management for opioid use disorder treatment: A configurational analysis

INTRODUCTION

Understanding conditions in which interventions succeed or fail is critical. The PRimary care Opioid Use Disorders treatment (PROUD) trial, a cluster-randomized hybrid study, tested whether implementation of office-based addiction treatment supported by a nurse increased medication of OUD. Six health systems each provided two primary care (PC) clinics that were randomly assigned to implement the intervention or usual care. This secondary, exploratory study used an innovative mixed methods approach to understand contextual factors that consistently distinguished intervention clinics that increased OUD treatment from those that did not.

METHODS

The study collected contextual information through field notes, health system debriefs, and nurse interviews. Rapid qualitative analysis using a template based on the Practical, Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model identified themes reflecting the external environment, recipients, and implementation infrastructure. The study used qualitative themes to create binary factors reflecting barriers and facilitators potentially critical to implementation success and assigned clinics a factor value of 1 if present and 0 if absent. Two clinic-level outcomes were defined: 1) significant increase in patient-years of OUD treatment from baseline to two-year follow-up; and 2) high rate of OUD treatment at two-year follow-up (≥20 per 10,000 patient-years). Coincidence analysis, a cross-case configurational method, identified difference-makers for both OUD outcomes across intervention clinics.

RESULTS

Qualitative analysis yielded 11 themes which were dichotomized and consolidated into 9 factors. Two factor values perfectly distinguished between intervention clinics with and without increased OUD treatment (outcome #1): (a) presence of strong support from PC staff and providers and (b) lack of OUD treatment in the community. Intervention clinics increased OUD treatment when either factor value was present; when both were absent, clinics did not increase treatment. Strong support from PC staff and providers was independently sufficient to achieve high rates of OUD treatment (outcome #2) while the absence of support explained low rates of treatment. Importantly, strong support from leadership was not sufficient for either outcome.

CONCLUSION

Strong support from staff and providers consistently differentiated between clinics with increased OUD treatment across both outcomes in the PROUD trial from those without. OUD programs should consider increasing support across clinic roles.

Implementation of ERAS Protocols: In Theory and Practice

The enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathway is a perioperative care pathway intended to facilitate early recovery and minimize hospital stays among patients undergoing major surgery. Critical factors for successful ERAS implementation, which may vary depending on care processes, include a multidisciplinary team, organizational commitment to change, and a real-time system for compliance and outcome audits. As most clinicians and health organizations can attest, incorporating and implementing new evidence-based practice changes almost always involves overcoming systemic challenges and obstacles. The same holds true for ERAS programs. The main barriers to ERAS protocol implementation have been resistance to change, lack of time and resources, and inadequate communication and coordination among departments. According to evidence-based ERAS guidelines, the best way to efficiently implement all recommendations into practice is to discover. Implementation science aims to identify and address care gaps, support change in practice, and enhance healthcare quality. Implementation research should also build a robust and generalizable evidence base to inform implementation practice. Most implementation investigations focus on one of two approaches to achieving change. Implementation can progress through top-down or bottom-up processes depending on factors such as national policies, organizational properties, or the implementation culture of society, especially for health issues. Although the ERAS guidelines are based on evidence-based knowledge, only a limited number of health centers around the world have officially been able to implement them. The purpose of this review is to analyze the implementation of the ERAS pathways in theory and practice in Turkey, considering the absence of an ERAS-qualified center in Turkey.

Holyoke Early Access to Recovery and Treatment (HEART): A case study of a court-based intervention to reduce opioid overdose

The District Court in Holyoke, Massachusetts, is among the first courts nationwide to provide access to medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) and other treatment. The program uses an innovative multisectoral approach to serve a primarily Latinx population living in communities of concentrated poverty with high opioid overdose rates. We document the origins, adaptations, and current status of program operations, including the use of on-site peer recovery specialists and robust data collection efforts. From August 16, 2021, to February 28, 2022, of the 1040 individuals who entered the court for an arraignment, 47.9% (n = 498) were eligible for program participation. Of those 498 individuals, 54.2% (n = 270) spoke with a recovery specialist. Many self-identified as Latinx (53.0%) and male (69.3%). Over one-fourth (27.0%) were connected to a long-term peer recovery specialist and 11.5% were directly connected to a MOUD provider. Semi-structured interviews with key implementers and participants revealed a shared appreciation for the life-saving efforts of the program. We conclude with practical and theoretical considerations required to offer linkage to MOUD in court-based contexts. Future efforts will assess participant outcomes to determine whether the program is an effective and feasible intervention that can be adopted by other court-based settings.

Optimizing process flow diagrams to guide implementation of a colorectal cancer screening intervention in new settings

PURPOSE

The goal of this study was to assess acceptability of using process flow diagrams (or process maps) depicting a previously implemented evidence-based intervention (EBI) to inform the implementation of similar interventions in new settings.

METHODS

We developed three different versions of process maps, each visualizing the implementation of the same multicomponent colorectal cancer (CRC) screening EBI in community health centers but including varying levels of detail about how it was implemented. Interviews with community health professionals and practitioners at other sites not affiliated with this intervention were conducted. We assessed their preferences related to the map designs, their potential utility for guiding EBI implementation, and the feasibility of implementing a similar intervention in their local setting given the information available in the process maps.

RESULTS

Eleven community health representatives were interviewed. Participants were able to understand how the intervention was implemented and engage in discussions around the feasibility of implementing this type of complex intervention in their local system. Potential uses of the maps for supporting implementation included staff training, role delineation, monitoring and quality control, and adapting the components and implementation activities of the existing intervention.

CONCLUSION

Process maps can potentially support decision-making about the adoption, implementation, and adaptation of existing EBIs in new contexts. Given the complexities involved in deciding whether and how to implement EBIs, these diagrams serve as visual, easily understood tools to inform potential future adopters of the EBI about the activities, resources, and staffing needed for implementation.

Development and Evaluation of the Fuld Institute Evidence-based Implementation and Sustainability Toolkit for Health Care Settings

Routine implementation and sustainability of evidence-based practices (EBPs) into health care is often the most difficult stage in the change process. Despite major advances in implementation science and quality improvement, a persistent 13- to 15-year research-to-practice gap remains. Nurse leaders may benefit from tools to support implementation that are based on scientific evidence and can be readily integrated into complex health care settings. This article describes development and evaluation of an evidence-based implementation and sustainability toolkit used by health care clinicians seeking to implement EBPs. For this project, implementation science and EBP experts created initial iterations of the toolkit based on Rogers' change theory, the Advancing Research through Close Collaboration (ARCC) model, and phases and strategies from implementation science. Face validity and end-user feedback were obtained after piloting the tool with health care clinicians participating in immersive EBP sessions. The toolkit was then modified, with subsequent content validity and usability evaluations conducted among implementation science experts and health care clinicians. This article presents the newly updated Fuld Institute Evidence-based Implementation and Sustainability Toolkit for health care settings. Nurse leaders seeking to implement EBPs may benefit from an evidence-based toolkit to provide a science-informed approach to implementation and sustainability of practice changes.

Logic model for opioid safety in chronic non-malignant pain management, an in-depth qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Opioids are commonly used for the management of chronic non-malignant pain in Pakistan; but there is a lack of literature around precursors or motivators in the use of opioids.

AIM

The study holistically explored factors contributing towards the unsafe use of opioids and identifies strategies to overcome them.

METHOD

Exploratory qualitative methods using interviews, focus groups and non-participant observational case studies were used. Interviews and focus groups were carried out face-to-face as well as virtually and observations were conducted in community pharmacies in Islamabad and Khyber Pukhtoon Khuwa province, Pakistan. Data were collected from 4 stakeholder groups; pharmacy policy makers (n = 11), people with chronic non-malignant pain (n = 14), doctors (n = 31) and community pharmacists (n = 36) by purposive critical case sampling method. Data were analysed inductively using reflexive thematic analysis and then deductively mapped to a social ecological framework. Non-participant observations were analysed using a cross case synthesis using explanation building technique. Data from all three methods were triangulated to develop a logic model.

RESULTS

Identified factors at macro (regulation), meso (social perceptions of pain and opioids) and micro levels (uncontrolled pain, self-medication, health literacy) and strategies are presented holistically and were used to develop a logic model for the prevention and mitigation of factors currently causing unsafe use of opioids.

CONCLUSION

The study provides an in-depth view of factors contributing towards diversion of pharmaceutical opioids and can help guide national and international policy makers in their future initiatives to promote safe use of opioids in the management of chronic non-malignant pain in Pakistan.

Healthcare professionals feel empowered by implementing a hospital-based multifaceted intervention: a qualitative study using inductive thematic analysis

Background

Most patients are insufficiently physically active during their hospital stay, and this is associated with poor health and delayed recovery. Hospital-based multifaceted interventions aim to encourage patients to engage in physical activity. Ban Bedcentricity is one such intervention. Its value – and that of others similar to it – for healthcare professionals has not been studied yet. Whether an intervention looks and feels right, and whether it does the job well, is important for healthcare professionals and thus its use. Understanding value for healthcare professionals seems crucial for the long-term adoption and implementation of interventions. Therefore, we studied healthcare professionals’ perceptions of value in terms of the implementation of a multifaceted intervention that aimed at improving physically active behaviour in patients during their hospital stay.

Methods

Using Ban Bedcentricity as a case study to focus on healthcare professionals’ perceptions about multifaceted interventions, we conducted a qualitative study between November 2019 and September 2020. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with purposefully selected physicians, physiotherapists, and nurses (assistants) until theoretical data saturation was reached. Inductive thematic analysis was used to identify key themes and develop a conceptual model.

Results

We interviewed 15 healthcare professionals and formulated six key themes from these interviews. The participants said that Ban Bedcentricity empowered them in their beliefs about the importance of physical activity for hospitalized patients (theme 1). They also indicated that it made them more aware of the value of physical activity (theme 2) and skilled to promote physical activity as part of their professional role (theme 3). Similarly, they noted that it enabled them to shift from providing hands-on support to verbal coaching (theme 4). Other aspects that the participants valued were the increased possibilities for teamwork (theme 5) and the routinized physical activity promotion in usual care (theme 6). The challenges discussed by the participants were prioritizing activities that promoted physical activity, especially because of a high workload, and avoiding relapses of new routinized work practices related to physical activity promotion if insufficient long-term support and training were provided.

Conclusions

Our conceptual model shows that the implementation of a hospital-based multifaceted intervention by healthcare professionals empowers their beliefs, and improves their awareness, skills, professional roles, teamwork, and work routinization. These values are typically overlooked, despite potentially being important facilitators for long-term implementation.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-022-08310-w.

Integration of systematic screening for tuberculosis in outpatient departments of urban primary healthcare facilities in Zambia: a case study of Kitwe district

Background

Tuberculosis (TB) is the leading cause of death from a single infectious agent globally, killing about 1.5 million people annually, yet 3 million cases are missed every year. The World Health Organization recommends systematic screening of suspected active TB patients among those visiting the healthcare facilities. While many countries have scaled-up systematic screening of TB, there has been limited assessment of the extent of its integration into the health system. This study sought to explore factors that shape the integration of systematic screening of TB in outpatient departments of primary healthcare facilities in Kitwe district, Zambia.

Methods

This was a qualitative case study with health providers including district managers, TB focal point persons and laboratory personnel working in six purposively selected primary healthcare facilities. Data was collected through key informant (n = 8) and in-depth (n = 15) interviews. Data analysis was conducted using QDA Miner software and guided by Atun’s Integration framework.

Results

The facilitators to integration of systematic screening for TB into out patient departments of primary health facilities included the perceived high burden TB, compatibility of the systematic screening for TB program with healthcare workers training and working schedules, stakeholder knowledge of each others interest and values, regular performance management and integrated outreach of TB screening services. Constraining factors to integration of systematic screening for TB into outpatient departments included complexity of screening for TB in children, unbalanced incentivization mechanisms, ownership and legitimacy of the TB screening program, negative health worker attitudes, social cultural misconceptions of TB and societal stigma as well as the COVID-19 pandemic.

Conclusion

Systematic screening of TB is not fully integrated into the primary healthcare facilities in Zambia to capture all those suspected with active TB that make contact with the health system. Finding the missing TB cases will, therefore, require contextual adaptation of the systematic screening for TB program to local needs and capacities as well as strengthening the health system.

A Modified Implementation Mapping Methodology for Evaluating and Learning From Existing Implementation

When empirically supported interventions are implemented in real-world practice settings, the process of how these interventions are implemented is highly relevant for their potential success. Implementation Mapping is a method that provides step-by-step guidance for systematically designing implementation processes that fit the respective intervention and context. It includes needs assessments among relevant stakeholders, the identification of implementation outcomes and determinants, the selection and design of appropriate implementation strategies, the production of implementation protocols and an implementation outcome evaluation. Implementation Mapping is generally conceptualized as a tool to prospectively guide implementation. However, many implementation efforts build on previous or ongoing implementation efforts, i.e., “existing implementation.” Learnings from existing implementation may offer insights critical to the success of further implementation activities. In this article, we present a modified Implementation Mapping methodology to be applied when evaluating existing implementation. We illustrate the methodology using the example of evaluating ongoing organized colorectal cancer screening programs in Switzerland. Through this example, we describe how we identify relevant stakeholders, implementation determinants and outcomes as well as currently employed implementation strategies. Moreover, we describe how we compare the types of strategies that are part of existing implementation efforts with those that implementation science would suggest as being suited to address identified implementation determinants. The results can be used for assessing the current state of implementation outcomes, refining ongoing implementation strategies, and informing future implementation efforts.