Influence of organizational role, consensus and innovation status on perceived facilitators and barriers to adoption of innovative and evidence-based practices in state-supported mental health clinics

A typology of power in implementation: Building on the exploration, preparation, implementation, sustainment (EPIS) framework to advance mental health and HIV health equity

Background

Persistent inequities in HIV health are due, in part, to barriers to successful HIV-related mental health intervention implementation with marginalized groups. Implementation Science (IS) has begun to examine how the field can promote health equity. Lacking is a clear method to analyze how power is generated and distributed through practical implementation processes and how this power can dismantle and/or reproduce health inequity through intervention implementation. The aims of this paper are to (1) propose a typology of power generated through implementation processes, (2) apply this power typology to expand on the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, Sustainment (EPIS) framework to advance HIV and mental health equity and (3) articulate questions to guide the explicit examination and distribution of power throughout implementation.

Methods

This paper draws on the work of an Intermediary Purveyor organization implementing trauma-informed care and harm reduction organizational change with HIV service organizations. The expanded framework was developed through analyzing implementation coaching field notes, grant reporting, and evaluation documents, training feedback, partner evaluation interviews, and existing implementation literature.

Results

The authors identify three types of power working through implementation; (1) discursive power is enacted through defining health-related problems to be targeted by intervention implementation, as well as through health narratives that emerge through implementation; (2) epistemic power influences whose knowledge is valued in decision-making and is recreated through knowledge generation; and (3) material power is created through resource distribution and patterns of access to health resources and acquisition of health benefits provided by the intervention. Decisions across all phases and related to all factors of EPIS influence how these forms of power striate through intervention implementation and ultimately affect health equity outcomes.

Conclusions

The authors conclude with a set of concrete questions for researchers and practitioners to interrogate power throughout the implementation process.

Plain language summary

Over the past few years, Implementation Science researchers have committed increased attention to the ways in which the field can more effectively address health inequity. Lacking is a clear method to analyze how implementation processes themselves generate power that has the potential to contribute to health inequity. In this paper, the authors describe and define three types of power that are created and distributed through intervention implementation; discursive power, epistemic power, and material power. The authors then explain how these forms of power shape factors and phases of implementation, using the well-known EPIS (exploration, preparation, implementation, sustainment) framework. The authors draw from their experience working with and Intermediary Purveyor supporting HIV service organizations implementing trauma-informed care and harm reduction organizational change projects. This paper concludes with a set of critical questions that can be used by researchers and practitioners as a concrete tool to analyze the role of power in intervention implementation processes.

The Organizational Financial Context of Publicly-Funded Mental Health Clinics: Development and Preliminary Psychometric Evaluation of the Agency Financial Status Scales

Funding is a major barrier to implementation of evidence-based practices (EBPs) in publicly-funded community mental health clinics (CMHCs). Understanding how best to deploy implementation strategies that address this barrier requires greater clarity on the financial context within agencies. We developed the Agency Financial Status Scales (AFSS) to assess employee perceptions of the level of three hypothesized and theoretical funding related constructs in organizations: (a) perceptions of financial health, (b) financial attitudes toward EBPs, and (c) strategic financial climate. This investigation serves as a preliminary evaluation of this measure. Participants were 239 therapists and 40 supervisors from 25 publicly-funded CMHCs providing outpatient mental health services for young people. Confirmatory factor analysis was used to investigate the latent trait structure of the items. Internal consistency, interrater agreement, concordance between therapists and supervisors, and convergent validity were also examined. A two-factor model measuring perceptions of financial health and strategic financial climate best fit the data. For both of these scales, alpha reliability was acceptable and agreement statistics provided moderate support for aggregation at the organizational level. Analyses supported the convergent validity of the scales. The development and preliminary evaluation of the AFSS is an important first step in understanding the financial context of publicly-funded CMHCs. Though findings from this investigation are promising, additional development and testing are needed to develop a more thorough understanding of the constructs and to improve the validity and reliability of this measure.

Barriers to Implementing a Group Treatment for Maternal Depression in Head Start: Comparing Staff Perspectives

Although providing depression treatment for Head Start mothers may improve child wellbeing, interventions have not been widely used for this purpose. This failure may be due to the characteristics of clients, interventions, or the systems of care in which services are delivered. This study explored barriers to implementing Interpersonal Psychotherapy-Group with ethnic minority Head Start mothers, including differences in the level of staff consensus regarding barriers, which may predict implementation success. Barriers included resource challenges, cultural and linguistic differences, and participant concerns, and staff demonstrated low to moderate consensus. Results emphasize the importance of engaging diverse stakeholders in implementation.

Bridging the Gap Between Research and Practice in Mental Health Service Settings: An Overview of Developments in Implementation Theory and Research

Twenty years after Sobell's (1996) influential call to integrate advances in behavior therapy into clinical settings, significant progress has been made in implementation science. In this narrative review, we provide an overview of implementation research findings and highlight recent findings that can inform efforts to bridge the gap between research and practice in mental health service settings. Key findings are summarized, organized according to levels of influence described in two implementation frameworks: The Exploration, Planning, Implementation, and Sustainment Framework (EPIS; Aarons et al., 2011) and the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR; Damschroder et al., 2009). Important levels of influence to consider when implementing new treatments include the outer context, inner context, characteristics of the individual, and characteristics of the innovation. Research on strategies to prepare clinicians to deliver evidence-based psychosocial treatments (EBPTs) and to address contextual barriers to implementation at each level is described, with discussion of implications for the implementation of EBPTs and next steps for research.