Leveraging multistakeholder engagement to develop an implementation blueprint for a brief trauma-focused cognitive behavioral therapy in primary care

Engaging suicide prevention and firearm stakeholders in developing a workshop promoting secure firearm storage for suicide prevention

BACKGROUND

In the US, over 50% of suicide deaths are by firearm injury. Studies have found that limiting access to firearms, including storing them temporarily outside of the home or locking and unloading them securely at home, helps prevent suicide. Family members and other loved ones are in a unique position to encourage secure firearm storage. This paper describes the development of a workshop to empower loved ones of individuals at risk for suicide to discuss secure firearm storage in New York State.

METHODS

Using a multistakeholder engagement framework, we partnered with New York State county-level suicide prevention coalitions, local firearms experts, and other stakeholders to develop a 90-min workshop addressing secure firearm storage for suicide prevention. Pilot workshops were co-facilitated by a suicide prevention coalition member and a local firearms expert. Feedback gathered via surveys from workshop attendees and interviews with workshop co-facilitators were used to revise workshop content and inform dissemination. Following pilot workshops, a 1-day training event was held for potential future facilitators, and survey data were collected to assess trainee experiences and interest in facilitating future workshops. Data analysis included rapid qualitative analysis of interviews and statistical analysis of survey responses about acceptability of workshop.

RESULTS

Four pilot workshops included a total of 23 attendees. Pilot workshop attendees endorsed willingness and confidence to discuss secure firearm storage with a family member or loved one. The training event included 42 attendees, of which 26 indicated interest in facilitating a workshop within the next year. Co-facilitators agreed on several key themes, including the importance of having a "trusted messenger" deliver the firearms portion of the workshop, keeping the conversation focused on firearm safety for suicide prevention, and developing interventions that reflect firearm owning community's culture.

CONCLUSIONS

Consistent with a public health approach to suicide prevention, this study leveraged a multistakeholder engagement framework to develop a community-based workshop empowering loved ones of individuals at risk for suicide to discuss secure firearm storage. The workshop will be disseminated across New York State. We noted positive and collaborative relationships across stakeholder groups, and willingness to facilitate the workshop among both suicide prevention and firearm stakeholders.

Characteristics of recently incarcerated primary care patients with and without a positive posttraumatic stress disorder screening upon clinic intake

OBJECTIVE

Posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is prevalent among people who have been incarcerated. Here, we examined whether screening positive for PTSD was associated with other indicators of poor health, acute healthcare utilization, and poverty among primary care patients upon release from incarceration.

METHOD

We conducted a cross-sectional survey in a national network of primary care clinics serving people recently released from incarceration. Participants were 416 patients who completed the Primary Care PTSD screen (PC-PTSD) and other questions about mental and physical health, acute healthcare utilization, and economic status within 6 months of release.

RESULTS

Screening positive for PTSD was associated with worse status across nearly all variables examined, including being more likely to report: poor/fair health (61.6% vs. 41.7%), current depressive symptoms (89.7% vs. 50.8%), lifetime depression diagnosis (63.3% vs. 35.3%), cannabis use since release (20.7% vs. 9.6%), homelessness (31.9% vs. 18.5%), having no cash on hand (56.3% vs. 39.0%) and severe food insecurity (29.3% vs. 18.2%; all ps < .01). Reporting recent suicidality (14.3% vs. 7.0%), alcohol use since release (30.2% vs. 20.0%), and emergency department utilization (20.4% vs. 12.2%) was also more likely (all ps ≤ .03). These trends were largely upheld when controlling for demographic characteristics and chronic physical health conditions using linear probability regression.

CONCLUSIONS

Primary care patients recently released from incarceration have a need for wrap-around services that address health challenges and poverty. Patients with significant PTSD symptoms face even greater challenges. Identification and treatment of PTSD both during and after incarceration is warranted. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Study protocol for a hybrid 1 effectiveness-implementation trial of Brief Skills Training in Affective and Interpersonal Regulation (Brief STAIR) and web-administered STAIR (webSTAIR) for posttraumatic stress disorder in integrated primary care

BACKGROUND

Posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) disproportionally affects low-income, racial and ethnic minoritized communities, where prevalence is high, yet access to evidence-based treatments (EBTs) is low. As such, there is a need to identify effective, feasible, and scalable interventions for PTSD. Stepped care approaches that include brief, low-intensity treatments are one approach to improving access yet have not been developed for adults with PTSD. Our study aims to test the effectiveness of a step one PTSD treatment in primary care while gathering information on implementation to maximize sustainability in the setting.

METHODS

This study will be conducted in integrated primary care in the largest safety net hospital in New England using a hybrid type 1 effectiveness-implementation design. Eligible trial participants are adult primary care patients who meet full or subthreshold criteria for PTSD. Interventions include Brief clinician-administered Skills Training in Affective and Interpersonal Regulation (Brief STAIR) versus web-administered STAIR (webSTAIR) during a 15-week active treatment period. Participants complete assessments at baseline (pre-treatment), 15 weeks (post-treatment), and 9 months (follow-up) post-randomization. We will assess feasibility and acceptability post-trial using surveys and interviews with patients, study therapists, and other key informants, and will assess the preliminary effectiveness of interventions in terms of PTSD symptom change and functioning.

CONCLUSION

This study will provide evidence for the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary effectiveness of brief, low-intensity interventions in safety net integrated primary care, with the aim of including these interventions in a future stepped care approach to PTSD treatment.

CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER

NCT04937504.

Development of an Implementation Blueprint to Scale-Up Contraception Care for Adolescents with Psychiatric Conditions in a Pediatric Hospital

Implementation blueprints are comprehensive plans that describe implementation strategies, goals, timelines, and key personnel necessary for launching new interventions. Although blueprints are a foundational step in driving intervention rollout, little is known about how blueprints are developed, refined, and used in practice. The objective of this study was to describe a systematic, collaborative approach to developing, refining, and utilizing a formal implementation blueprint for scaling up the Contraception Care at Behavioral Health Pavilion (CC@BHP) intervention for adolescents hospitalized in psychiatric units within a pediatric hospital in the United States. In Stage 1 (Planning/Preparation), we assembled a Research Advisory Board (RAB) of 41 multidisciplinary members and conducted a formative evaluation to identify potential barriers to CC@BHP implementation. Barriers were mapped to implementation strategies using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) and Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) tool and used to create an initial blueprint. In Stage 2 (Development/Implementation), RAB members used activity logs to track implementation activities over the 18-month study period, which were then mapped to formal implementation strategies used to further develop the blueprint. About 30% of strategies were situated in the 'Train and Educate Stakeholders' ERIC category, 20% in 'Use Evaluative and Iterative Strategies,' and 16% in 'Develop Stakeholder Interrelationships' category. In Stage 3 (Synthesis/Refinement), the final blueprint was refined, consisting of 16 goals linked to 10 strategies for pre-implementation and 6 strategies for implementation. Feedback on the blueprint emphasized the role of the project champion in translating the blueprint into smaller, actionable steps for implementers.

Formative evaluation prior to implementation of a brief treatment for posttraumatic stress disorder in primary care

BACKGROUND

Successful implementation of evidence-based treatments (EBT) for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in primary care may address treatment access and quality gaps by providing care in novel and less stigmatized settings. Yet, PTSD treatments are largely unavailable in safety net primary care. We aimed to collect clinician stakeholder data on organizational, attitudinal, and contextual factors relevant to EBT implementation.

METHODS

Our developmental formative evaluation was guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), including (a) surveys assessing implementation climate and attitudes towards EBTs and behavioral health integration and (b) semi-structured interviews to identify barriers and facilitators to implementation and need for augmentation. Participants were hospital employees (N = 22), including primary care physicians (n = 6), integrated behavioral health clinicians (n = 8), community wellness advocates (n = 3), and clinic leadership (n = 5). We report frequency and descriptives of survey data and findings from directed content analysis of interviews. We used a concurrent mixed-methods approach, integrating survey and interview data collected simultaneously using a joint display approach. A primary care community advisory board (CAB) helped to refine interview guides and interpret findings.

RESULTS

Stakeholders described implementation determinants of the EBT related to the CFIR domains of intervention characteristics (relative advantage, adaptability), outer setting (patient needs and resources), inner setting (networks and communication, relative priority, leadership engagement, available resources), and individuals involved (knowledge and beliefs, cultural considerations). Stakeholders described strong attitudinal support (relative advantage), yet therapist time and capacity restraints are major PTSD treatment implementation barriers (available resources). Changes in hospital management were perceived as potentially allowing for greater access to behavioral health services, including EBTs. Patient engagement barriers such as stigma, mistrust, and care preferences were also noted (patient needs and resources). Recommendations included tailoring the intervention to meet existing workflows (adaptability), system alignment efforts focused on improving detection, referral, and care coordination processes (networks and communication), protecting clinician time for training and consultation (leadership engagement), and embedding a researcher in the practice (available resources).

CONCLUSIONS

Our evaluation identified key CFIR determinants of implementation of PTSD treatments in safety net integrated primary care settings. Our project also demonstrates that successful implementation necessitates strong stakeholder engagement.

Understanding tailoring to support the implementation of evidence-based interventions in healthcare: The CUSTOMISE research programme protocol

Although there are effective evidence-based interventions (EBIs) to prevent, treat and coordinate care for chronic conditions they may not be adopted widely and when adopted, implementation challenges can limit their impact.  Implementation strategies are "methods or techniques used to enhance the adoption, implementation, and sustainment of a clinical program or practice". There is some evidence to suggest that to be more effective,  strategies should be tailored; that is, selected and designed to address specific determinants which may influence implementation in a given context. Despite the growing popularity of tailoring the concept is ill-defined, and the way in which tailoring is applied can vary across studies or lack detail when reported. There has been less focus on the part of tailoring where stakeholders prioritise determinants and select strategies, and the way in which theory, evidence and stakeholders' perspectives should be combined to make decisions during the process. Typically, tailoring is evaluated based on the effectiveness of the tailored strategy, we do not have a clear sense of the mechanisms through which tailoring works, or how to measure the "success" of the tailoring process. We lack an understanding of how stakeholders can be involved effectively in tailoring and the influence of different approaches on the outcome of tailoring. Our research programme, CUSTOMISE (Comparing and Understanding Tailoring Methods for Implementation Strategies in healthcare) will address some of these outstanding questions and generate evidence on  the feasibility, acceptability, and efficiency of different tailoring approaches, and build capacity in implementation science in Ireland, developing and delivering training and supports for, and network of, researchers and implementation practitioners. The evidence generated across the studies conducted as part of CUSTOMISE will bring greater clarity, consistency, coherence, and transparency to tailoring, a key process in implementation science.

Consideration of racism experiences in the implementation of trauma-focused therapy in primary care

OBJECTIVE

To understand providers' perceptions of how a patient's experience of racism may impact the successful implementation of a brief posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) treatment in the safety net integrated primary care setting. To conduct a developmental formative evaluation prior to a hybrid type I effectiveness-implementation trial.

DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SETTING

From October 2020 to January 2021, in-depth qualitative interviews were conducted with integrated primary care stakeholders (N = 27) at the largest safety net hospital in New England, where 82% of patients identify as racial or ethnic minorities.

STUDY DESIGN

Interviews with clinical stakeholders were used to (a) contextualize current patient and provider experiences and responses to racism, (b) consider how racism may impact PTSD treatment implementation, (c) gather recommendations for potential augmentation to the proposed PTSD treatment (e.g., culturally responsive delivery, cultural adaptation), and (d) gather recommendations for how to shift the integrated primary care practice to an antiracist framework.

DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS

Interview data were gathered using remote data collection methods (video conferencing). Participants were hospital employees, including psychologists, social workers, primary care physicians, community health workers, administrators, and operations managers. We used conventional content analysis.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

Clinical stakeholders acknowledged the impact of racism, including racial stress and trauma, on patient engagement and noted the potential need to adapt PTSD treatments to enhance engagement. Clinical stakeholders also characterized the harms of racism on patients and providers and provided recommendations such as changes to staff training and hiring practices, examination of racist policies, and increases in support for providers of color.

CONCLUSIONS

This study contextualizes providers' perceptions of racism in the integrated primary care practice and provides some suggestions for shifting to an antiracist framework. Our findings also highlight how racism in health care may be a PTSD treatment implementation barrier.

Conceptual tensions and practical trade-offs in tailoring implementation interventions

Tailored interventions have been shown to be effective and tailoring is a popular process with intuitive appeal for researchers and practitioners. However, the concept and process are ill-defined in implementation science. Descriptions of how tailoring has been applied in practice are often absent or insufficient in detail. This lack of transparency makes it difficult to synthesize and replicate efforts. It also hides the trade-offs for researchers and practitioners that are inherent in the process. In this article we juxtapose the growing prominence of tailoring with four key questions surrounding the process. Specifically, we ask: (1) what constitutes tailoring and when does it begin and end?; (2) how is it expected to work?; (3) who and what does the tailoring process involve?; and (4) how should tailoring be evaluated? We discuss these questions as a call to action for better reporting and further research to bring clarity, consistency, and coherence to tailoring, a key process in implementation science.

Redesign of a brief PTSD treatment in safety net integrated primary care: Supporting implementation in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic

OBJECTIVE

We conducted a formative evaluation to understand the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the safety net integrated primary care setting and to identify (and respond to) new implementation barriers prior to a hybrid type I effectiveness-implementation trial of a posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) treatment.

METHOD

We used surveys and qualitative interviews with employee stakeholders (N = 27) to (1) understand pandemic-related factors that may influence implementation, including changes in patient needs, provider experiences, and the practice, and (2) assess the need for augmentation to study design, implementation plan, or intervention.

RESULTS

Conventional content analysis and survey findings suggest that patient acuity and volume increased provider burden, leading to high burnout. Although the shift to telehealth improved behavioral health access, issues with technology access and literacy were common. Changes to the study design and implementation plan, based on findings, included the provision of multi-modality treatments (in person, telehealth, web-administered), technology and administrative support, and other strategies for reducing provider burnout.

CONCLUSIONS

This study describes how an ongoing research study adapted to major changes to the implementation setting during the pandemic. Changes to study design and implementation plan were responsive to the shift to telehealth and therapist burden (and burnout) concerns.