Using Implementation Mapping to Develop Implementation Strategies for the Delivery of a Cancer Prevention and Control Phone Navigation Program: A Collaboration With 2-1-1

Using implementation mapping to refine strategies to improve implementation of an evidence-based mobile market intervention: a study protocol

Objectives

The Veggie Van model is a mobile market model that is efficacious in increasing fruit and vegetable consumption for lower-income participants. The model is currently being evaluated for its effectiveness in a multi-state trial. Preliminary implementation data, collected through process measures surveys and implementation interviews, indicate that there are several barriers to implementation among partner organizations and implementation fidelity to the Veggie Van model was low. Consideration and planning for implementation ought to occur early and often throughout the research process order to ensure Veggie Van model effectiveness. This paper describes the step-by-step process for creating strategies to enhance implementation of Veggie Van model components.

Methods

Implementation mapping is a systematic process to develop implementation strategies through engagement with key stakeholders. We conducted a series of interviews (n = 31 representatives) with partner organizations (n = 8) to identify facilitators and barriers to Veggie Van model implementation. We then applied interview findings to an Implementation Mapping process to develop theory and practice-driven strategies to be integrated into existing implementation tools and technical assistance.

Results

We identified implementation outcomes (e.g., staff implement the Veggie Van model component of nutrition education with fidelity) and performance objectives (e.g., offer nutrition education, in the form of food lessons and/or food demonstrations, at least bi-weekly) to achieve them. We conducted a secondary qualitative analysis of the findings from implementation interviews with partner organizations to identify behavioral determinants (e.g., attitudinal beliefs, social support) which were combined with the performance objectives to generate change objectives (e.g., view the Veggie Van model as advantageous to an organization and communities served). To achieve the change objectives, we developed implementation strategies that would be integrated into existing Veggie Van training resources including an online toolkit, webinars and trainings, an annual mobile market conference, and technical assistance.

Conclusion

The development of theory and practice-driven implementation strategies will enable us to improve our implementation tools, thereby improving fidelity to the Veggie Van model among organizations and increasing the likelihood of its effectiveness. Detailing the design of a multifaceted implementation strategy using Implementation Mapping also provides a model to design similar strategies for other community-based interventions.

Identification and development of implementation strategies: the important role of codesign

Background

To date, implementation strategies reported in the literature are commonly poorly described and take the implementation context insufficiently into account. To unravel the black box of implementation strategy development, insight is needed into effective theory-based and practical-informed strategies. The current study aims to describe the stepwise development of a practical-informed and theory-based implementation strategy bundle to implement ProMuscle, a nutrition and exercise intervention for community-dwelling older adults, in multiple settings in primary care.

Methods

The first four steps of Implementation Mapping were adopted to develop appropriate implementation strategies. First, previously identified barriers to implementation were categorized into the constructs of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Second, the CFIR-ERIC matching tool linked barriers to existing implementation strategies. Behavioral change strategies were added from the literature where necessary. Third, evidence for implementation strategies was sought. Fourth, in codesign with involved healthcare professionals and implementation experts, implementation strategies were operationalized to practical implementation activities following the guidance provided by Proctor et al. These practical implementation activities were processed into an implementation toolbox, which can be tailored to a specific context and presents prioritized implementation activities in a chronological order.

Results

A previous study identified and categorized a total of 654 barriers for the implementation of a combined lifestyle intervention within the CFIR framework. Subsequently, the barriers were linked to 40 strategies. Due to the fact that many strategies impacted multiple barriers, seven overarching themes emerged based on the strategies: assessing the context, network internally, network externally, costs, knowledge, champions, and patient needs and resources. Codesign sessions with professionals and implementation experts resulted in the development of supported and tangible implementation activities for the final 20 strategies. The implementation activities were processed into a web-based implementation toolbox, which allows healthcare professionals to tailor the implementation activities to their specific context and guides healthcare professionals to prioritize implementation activities chronologically during their implementation.

Conclusion

A theory-based approach in combination with codesign sessions with stakeholders is a usable Implementation Strategy Mapping Method for developing a practical implementation strategy bundle to implement ProMuscle across multiple settings in primary care. The next step involves evaluating the developed implementation strategies, including the implementation toolbox, to assess their impact on the implementation and adoption of ProMuscle.

Advancing healthcare equity through dissemination and implementation science

OBJECTIVE

To provide guiding principles and recommendations for how approaches from the field of dissemination and implementation (D&I) science can advance healthcare equity.

DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SETTING

This article, part of a special issue sponsored by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), is based on an outline drafted to support proceedings of the 2022 AHRQ Health Equity Summit and further revised to reflect input from Summit attendees.

STUDY DESIGN

This is a narrative review of the current and potential applications of D&I approaches for understanding and advancing healthcare equity, followed by discussion and feedback with Summit attendees.

DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS

We identified major themes in narrative and systematic reviews related to D&I science, healthcare equity, and their intersections. Based on our expertise, and supported by synthesis of published studies, we propose recommendations for how D&I science is relevant for advancing healthcare equity. We used iterative discussions internally and at the Summit to refine preliminary findings and recommendations.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

We identified four guiding principles and three D&I science domains with strong promise for accelerating progress toward healthcare equity. We present eight recommendations and more than 60 opportunities for action by practitioners, healthcare leaders, policy makers, and researchers.

CONCLUSIONS

Promising areas for D&I science to impact healthcare equity include the following: attention to equity in the development and delivery of evidence-based interventions; the science of adaptation; de-implementation of low-value care; monitoring equity markers; organizational policies for healthcare equity; improving the economic evaluation of implementation; policy and dissemination research; and capacity building.

Systematic development of a set of implementation strategies for transitional care innovations in long-term care

BACKGROUND

Numerous transitional care innovations (TCIs) are being developed and implemented to optimize care continuity for older persons when transferring between multiple care settings, help meet their care needs, and ultimately improve their quality of life. Although the implementation of TCIs is influenced by contextual factors, the use of effective implementation strategies is largely lacking. Thus, to improve the implementation of TCIs targeting older persons receiving long-term care services, we systematically developed a set of viable strategies selected to address the influencing factors.

METHODS

As part of the TRANS-SENIOR research network, a stepwise approach following Implementation Mapping (steps 1 to 3) was applied to select implementation strategies. Building on the findings of previous studies, existing TCIs and factors influencing their implementation were identified. A combination of four taxonomies and overviews of change methods as well as relevant evidence on their effectiveness were used to select the implementation strategies targeting each of the relevant factors. Subsequently, individual consultations with scientific experts were performed for further validation of the process of mapping strategies to implementation factors and for capturing alternative ideas on relevant implementation strategies.

RESULTS

Twenty TCIs were identified and 12 influencing factors (mapped to the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research) were designated as priority factors to be addressed with implementation strategies. A total of 40 strategies were selected. The majority of these target factors at the organizational level, e.g., by using structural redesign, public commitment, changing staffing models, conducting local consensus discussions, and organizational diagnosis and feedback. Strategies at the level of individuals included active learning, belief selection, and guided practice. Each strategy was operationalized into practical applications.

CONCLUSIONS

This project developed a set of theory and evidence-based implementation strategies to address the influencing factors, along further tailoring for each context, and enhance the implementation of TCIs in daily practice settings. Such work is critical to advance the use of implementation science methods to implement innovations in long-term care successfully.

Rapid implementation mapping to identify implementation determinants and strategies for cervical cancer control in Nigeria

Background

Cervical cancer constitutes a huge burden among women in Nigeria, particularly HIV-infected women. However, the provision and uptake of cervical cancer screening and treatment is limited in Nigeria. Understanding implementation determinants is essential for the effective translation of such evidence-based interventions into practice, particularly in low-resource settings. COVID-19 pandemic necessitated online collaboration making implementation mapping challenging in some ways, while providing streamlining opportunities. In this study, we describe the use of a virtual online approach for implementation mapping (steps 1-3) to identify implementation determinants, mechanisms, and strategies to implement evidence-based cervical cancer screening and treatment in existing HIV infrastructure in Nigeria.

Methods

This study used a mixed methods study design with a virtual modified nominal group technique (NGT) process aligning with Implementation Mapping steps 1-3. Eleven stakeholders (six program staff and five healthcare providers and administrators) participated in a virtual NGT process which occurred in two phases. The first phase utilized online surveys, and the second phase utilized an NGT and implementation mapping process. The Exploration, Preparation, Implementation and Sustainment (EPIS) framework was used to elicit discussion around determinants and strategies from the outer context (i.e., country and regions), inner organizational context of existing HIV infrastructure, bridging factors that relate to bi-directional influences, and the health innovation to be implemented (in this case cervical cancer screening and treatment). During the NGT, the group ranked implementation barriers and voted on implementation strategies using Mentimeter.

Results

Eighteen determinants to integrating cervical cancer screening and treatment into existing comprehensive HIV programs were related to human resources capacity, access to cervical cancer services, logistics management, clinic, and client-related factors. The top 3 determinants included gaps in human resources capacity, poor access to cervical cancer services, and lack of demand for services resulting from lack of awareness about the disease and servicesA set of six core implementation strategies and two enhanced implementation strategies were identified.

Conclusions

Rapid Implementation Mapping is a feasible and acceptable approach for identifying and articulating implementation determinants, mechanisms, and strategies for complex healthcare interventions in LMICs.

Implementation strategies for occupational therapists to advance goal setting and goal management

Background

There is a need for an effective evidence-based system to support high-quality goal setting and goal management implementation. We developed a new system for community-based rehabilitation, MyGoals, along with implementation strategies to support occupational therapists (OTs) in its administration. This study evaluates the acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility of the implementation strategies, Clinician Education and Audit & Feedback. It also explores whether OTs achieve the change objectives of the MyGoals implementation strategies and MyGoals intervention fidelity.

Methods

This mixed-methods case series study evaluated the MyGoals implementation strategies developed using Implementation Mapping (IM), specifically IM Task 5 - Implementation Outcome Evaluation. Seven OTs and 13 adults with chronic conditions participated in this study. OTs participated in two Clinician Education sessions, delivered two MyGoals interventions, and participated in two Audit & Feedback sessions. We evaluated the implementation strategies using the Acceptability of Intervention Measure (AIM), Intervention Appropriateness Measure (IAM), Feasibility of Intervention Measure (FIM), and semi-structured interviews and explored the OTs' self-rated MyGoals change objectives achievement and the intervention fidelity using quantitative MyGoals intervention fidelity measures and interviews. Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Qualitative data were analyzed by two independent coders using content analysis.

Results

Seven OTs participated in this study (mean years of professional experience = 9.3, SD = 5.9). Clinician Education and Audit & Feedback had high AIM (M = 17.9, SD = 2.7), IAM (M = 17.3, SD = 3.60), and FIM scores (M = 17.3, SD = 3). The OTs also had high mean scores on self-perceived achievement of change objectives and intervention fidelity. Qualitative interviews suggested that the time commitment for Clinician Education is a key barrier to its acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility. Participants also provided suggestions on how to improve the strategies (e.g., providing recorded Clinician Education, etc.).

Conclusions

The MyGoals implementation strategies are acceptable, appropriate, and feasible to OTs working in community-based rehabilitation. They support OTs in achieving the change objectives necessary to deliver MyGoals completely and competently. Thus, the MyGoals implementation strategies may support clinicians in implementing a theory-based, client-engaged goal setting and goal management for adults with chronic conditions in community-based rehabilitation. This can ultimately help improve the integration of evidence-based interventions into practice.

The Healthy Native Youth Implementation Toolbox: Using Implementation Mapping to adapt an online decision support system to promote culturally-relevant sexual health education for American Indian and Alaska Native youth

Background

American Indian and Alaska Native (AI/AN) youth experience serious disparities in sexual and reproductive health, including the highest teen birth rate among racial/ethnic groups, and disproportionate rates of sexually transmitted infections (STI), including HIV. A growing number of evidence-based programs (EBPs) that integrate the strengths and cultural teachings of Native communities exist. Yet, multiple factors, including lack of trained personnel, limited resources, and geographic isolation, may hinder their adoption and implementation. Innovative implementation strategies that facilitate the adoption and implementation of sexual health EBPs in Native communities may help reduce these disparities.

Methods

We applied Implementation Mapping, a systematic planning framework that utilizes theory, empirical evidence, and community input, to adapt a theory-based, online decision support system, iCHAMPSS (CHoosing And Maintaining Effective Programs for Sex Education in Schools), to support underlying dissemination and implementation processes unique to Native communities. We used an iterative design process, incorporating input from Native practitioners and academicians, to ensure that the adapted decision support system reflects cultural identification, community values, and experiences.

Results

Grounded in diffusion of innovations, organizational stage theory, and social cognitive theory, the Healthy Native Youth Implementation Toolbox supports Native practitioners through five phases (Gather, Choose, Prepare, Implement, and Grow) to adopt, implement, and maintain a culturally-relevant, age-appropriate sexual health EBP. The Toolbox provides tools, ready-to-use templates, and guidance to plan, implement, and grow a culturally-relevant adolescent health program with their Tribe or community. Hosted within the Healthy Native Youth website (www.healthynativeyouth.org), the Toolbox comprises: (1) a curriculum portal with access to 15 culturally-relevant, age-appropriate evidence-based health promotion programs for AI/AN youth; (2) a "resource library" comprising 20+ support tools, templates, and links to external resources, and (3) "stories from the field" comprising testimonials from experienced Native educators, who have implemented sexual health programs.

Conclusion

There is a continued need to design, test, and evaluate D&I strategies that are relevant to Native communities. The Healthy Native Youth Implementation Toolbox contributes to the dissemination and implementation of evidence-based, culturally-relevant sexual health education programs in diverse Native communities. Implementation Mapping provided a systematic approach to guide the adaptation process and integrate community voice with the ultimate goal of enhancing sexual health equity among AI/AN youth.

Understanding implementation research collaborations from a co-creation lens: Recommendations for a path forward

Increasing calls within the field of implementation science (IS) research seek to promote active engagement of diverse and often disenfranchised stakeholder voices to increase buy-in, fidelity, outcome relevance, and sustainment of evidence-based practices (EBPs). Including such voices requires cultural humility and the integration of multiple perspectives and values among organizations, groups, and individuals. However, the IS field lacks guidance for researchers on structuring collaborative approaches to promote a co-created process (i.e., synergistic approach to goal attainment). We contend that improved operationalization of co-created implementation collaborations is critical to sparking synergy and addressing differentials based on power, privilege, knowledge, and access to resources among stakeholders. These differentials can undermine future implementation and sustainment efforts if not addressed early in the research effort. An insufficient understanding of the guiding principles of co-created implementation collaborations may limit the scientific value of evaluation processes, and researchers' ability to replicate outcomes. We propose a perspective foregrounded in the concept of co-creation to guide the structuring of implementation collaboratives through five principles. We offer three case examples informed by the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, Sustainment (EPIS) Framework to illustrate the application of these co-creation principles. Lastly, we offer recommendations for promoting co-creation in IS research moving forward.

Implementation mapping for tobacco cessation in a federally qualified health center

Background

Implementation mapping (IM) is a promising five-step method for guiding planning, execution, and maintenance of an innovation. Case examples are valuable for implementation practitioners to understand considerations for applying IM. This pilot study aimed to determine the feasibility of using IM within a federally qualified health center (FQHC) with limited funds and a 1-year timeline.

Methods

An urban FQHC partnered with an academic team to employ IM for implementing a computerized strategy of tobacco cessation: the 5A's (Ask, Advise, Assess, Assist, Arrange). Each step of IM was supplemented with theory-driven methods and frameworks. Data collection included surveys and interviews with clinic staff, analyzed via rapid data analysis.

Results

Medical assistants and clinicians were identified as primary implementers of the 5A's intervention. Salient determinants of change included the perceived compatibility and relative priority of 5A's. Performance objectives and change objectives were derived to address these determinants, along with a suite of implementation strategies. Despite indicators of adoptability and acceptability of the 5A's, reductions in willingness to adopt the implementation package occurred over time and the intervention was not adopted by the FQHC within the study timeframe. This is likely due to the strain of the COVID-19 pandemic altering health clinic priorities.

Conclusions

Administratively, the five IM steps are feasible to conduct with FQHC staff within 1 year. However, this study did not obtain its intended outcomes. Lessons learned include the importance of re-assessing barriers over time and ensuring a longer timeframe to observe implementation outcomes.

Data-driven approach to implementation mapping for the selection of implementation strategies: a case example for risk-aligned bladder cancer surveillance

BACKGROUND

Implementation Mapping is an organized method to select implementation strategies. However, there are 73 Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) strategies. Thus, it is difficult for implementation scientists to map all potential strategies to the determinants of their chosen implementation science framework. Prior work using Implementation Mapping employed advisory panels to select implementation strategies. This article presents a data-driven approach to implementation mapping, in which we systematically evaluated all 73 ERIC strategies using the Tailored Implementation for Chronic Diseases (TICD) framework. We illustrate our approach using implementation of risk-aligned bladder cancer surveillance as a case example.

METHODS

We developed objectives based on previously collected qualitative data organized by TICD determinants, i.e., what needs to be changed to achieve more risk-aligned surveillance. Next, we evaluated all 73 ERIC strategies, excluding those that were not applicable to our clinical setting. The remaining strategies were mapped to the objectives using data visualization techniques to make sense of the large matrices. Finally, we selected strategies with high impact, based on (1) broad scope, defined as a strategy addressing more than the median number of objectives, (2) requiring low or moderate time commitment from clinical teams, and (3) evidence of effectiveness from the literature.

RESULTS

We identified 63 unique objectives. Of the 73 ERIC strategies, 45 were excluded because they were not applicable to our clinical setting (e.g., not feasible within the confines of the setting, not appropriate for the context). Thus, 28 ERIC strategies were mapped to the 63 objectives. Strategies addressed 0 to 26 objectives (median 10.5). Of the 28 ERIC strategies, 10 required low and 8 moderate time commitments from clinical teams. We selected 9 strategies based on high impact, each with a clearly documented rationale for selection.

CONCLUSIONS

We enhanced Implementation Mapping via a data-driven approach to the selection of implementation strategies. Our approach provides a practical method for other implementation scientists to use when selecting implementation strategies and has the advantage of favoring data-driven strategy selection over expert opinion.

Use of Implementation Mapping With Community-Based Participatory Research: Development of Implementation Strategies of a New Goal Setting and Goal Management Intervention System

Aims

This study aims to identify implementation determinants, mechanisms of action, implementation strategies, and implementation outcome evaluation plans for a new theory-based rehabilitation goal setting and goal management intervention system, called MyGoals, using Implementation Mapping with community-based participatory research principles.

Methods

We completed Implementation Mapping tasks 1 to 4 as a planning team consisting of MyGoals target implementers (occupational therapists (OTs), MyGoals intervention target clients (adults with chronic conditions), and the research team. We are currently conducting mapping task 5. These processes were guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, social cognitive theory, the taxonomy of behavior change methods, and Proctor's implementation research framework.

Results

We identified intervention-level determinants (MyGoals' evidence strength & quality, relative advantages) and OT-level determinants (knowledge, awareness, skills, self-efficacy, outcome expectancy). We selected the MyGoals implementation outcome (OTs will deliver MyGoals completely and competently), outcome variables (acceptability, appropriateness, feasibility, fidelity), and process outcomes. We also determined three performance objectives (e.g., OTs will deliver all MyGoals intervention components) and 15 change objectives (e.g., OTs will demonstrate skills for delivering all MyGoals intervention components). Based on the identified outcomes, objectives, and determinants, we specified the mechanisms of change (e.g., active learning). To address these determinants and achieve the implementation outcomes, we produced two tailored MyGoals implementation strategies: MyGoals Clinician Education and MyGoals Clinician Audit & Feedback. We developed evaluation plans to explore and evaluate how these two MyGoals implementation strategies perform using a mixed-methods study of OT-client dyads.

Conclusion

We produced tailored implementation strategies for a rehabilitation goal setting and goal management intervention by using Implementation Mapping with community-based participatory research principles. The MyGoals implementation strategies may help OTs implement high-quality goal setting and goal management practice and thus contribute to bridging current research-practice gaps. Our findings can provide insight on how to apply implementation science in rehabilitation to improve the development and translation of evidence-based interventions to enhance health in adults with chronic conditions.

Using Implementation Mapping to Build Organizational Readiness

Organizational readiness is essential for high-quality implementation of innovations (programs, policies, practices, or processes). The R = MC² heuristic describes three readiness components necessary for implementation—the general functioning of the organization (general capacities), the ability to deliver a particular innovation (innovation-specific capacities), and the motivation to implement the innovation. In this article, we describe how we used the Readiness Building System (RBS) for assessing, prioritizing, and improving readiness and Implementation Mapping (IM), a systematic process for planning implementation strategies, to build organizational readiness for implementation of sexual assault prevention evidence-based interventions (EBIs). While RBS provides an overarching approach for assessing and prioritizing readiness constructs (according to the R = MC² heuristic; Readiness = Motivation x general Capacity × innovation specific Capacity), it does not provide specific guidance on the development and/or selection and tailoring of strategies to improve readiness. We used the five IM tasks to identify and prioritize specific readiness goals and develop readiness-building strategies to improve subcomponents described in the R = MC² heuristic. This article illustrates how IM can be used synergistically with the RBS in applied contexts to plan implementation strategies that will improve organizational readiness and implementation outcomes. Specifically, we provide an example of using these two frameworks as part of the process of building organizational readiness for implementation of sexual assault prevention EBIs.

Applying Implementation Mapping to Expand a Care Coordination Program at a Federally Qualified Health Center

Background

A large and growing percentage of medically underserved groups receive care at federally qualified health centers (FQHCs). Care coordination is an evidence-based approach to address disparities in healthcare services. A partnered FQHC established a care coordination model to improve receipt and quality of healthcare for patients most at risk for poor health outcomes. This care coordination model emphasizes identification and support of behavioral health needs (e.g., depression, anxiety) and two evidence-based behavioral health programs needs were selected for implementation within the context of this care coordination model. Implementation Mapping is a systematic process for specifying the implementation strategies and outcomes. The current case study describes the application of Implementation Mapping to inform the selection and testing of implementation strategies to improve implementation of two behavioral health programs in a Care Coordination Program at a partnered FQHC.

Methods

We applied Implementation Mapping to inform the development, selection and testing of implementation strategies to improve the implementation of two evidence-based behavioral health programs within a care coordination program at a partnered FQHC.

Results

Results are presented by Implementation Mapping task, from Task 1 through Task 5. We also describe the integration of additional implementation frameworks (The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, Health Equity Implementation Framework) within the Implementation Mapping process to inform determinant identification, performance and change objectives development, design and tailoring of implementation strategies and protocols, and resulting evaluation of implementation outcomes.

Conclusions

The current project is an example of real-world application of Implementation Mapping methodology to improve care outcomes for a high priority population that is generalizable to other settings utilizing similar care models and health equity endeavors. Such case studies are critical to advance our understanding and application of innovative implementation science methods such as Implementation Mapping.

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.

A stepped randomized trial to promote colorectal cancer screening in a nationwide sample of U.S. Veterans

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening (CRCS) facilitates early detection and lowers CRC mortality.

OBJECTIVES

To increase CRCS in a randomized trial of stepped interventions. Step 1 compared three modes of delivery of theory-informed minimal cue interventions. Step 2 was designed to more intensively engage those not completing CRCS after Step 1.

METHODS

Recruitment packets (60,332) were mailed to a random sample of individuals with a record of U.S. military service during the Vietnam-era. Respondents not up-to-date with CRCS were randomized to one of four Step 1 groups: automated telephone, telephone, letter, or survey-only control. Those not completing screening after Step 1 were randomized to one of three Step 2 groups: automated motivational interviewing (MI) call, counselor-delivered MI call, or Step 2 control. Intention-to-treat (ITT) analyses assessed CRCS on follow-up surveys mailed after each step.

RESULTS

After Step 1 (n = 1784), CRCS was higher in the letter, telephone, and automated telephone groups (by 1%, 5%, 7%) than in survey-only controls (43%), although differences were not statistically significant. After Step 2 (n = 516), there were nonsignificant increases in CRCS in the two intervention groups compared with the controls. CRCS following any combination of stepped interventions overall was 7% higher (P = 0.024) than in survey-only controls (55.6%).

CONCLUSIONS

In a nationwide study of Veterans, CRCS after each of two stepped interventions of varying modes of delivery did not differ significantly from that in controls. However, combined overall, the sequence of stepped interventions significantly increased CRCS.