Periodic reflections: a method of guided discussions for documenting implementation phenomena

Developing Evidence to Support Policy: Protocol for the StrAtegic PoLicy EvIdence-Based Evaluation CeNTer (SALIENT)

BACKGROUND

All federal agencies are required to support appropriation requests with evidence and evaluation (US Public Law 115-435; the Evidence Act). The StrAtegic PoLicy EvIdence-Based Evaluation CeNTer (SALIENT) is 1 of 6 centers that help the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) meet this requirement.

OBJECTIVE

Working with the existing VA evaluation structure, SALIENT evaluations will contribute to (1) optimize policies and programs for veteran populations; (2) improve outcomes regarding health, equity, cost, and provider well-being; (3) advance the science of dissemination and knowledge translation; and (4) expand the implementation and dissemination science workforce.

METHODS

We leverage the Lean Sprint methodology (iterative, incremental, rule-governed approach to clearly defined, and time-boxed work) and 3 cores to develop our evaluation plans collaboratively with operational partners and key stakeholders including veterans, policy experts, and clinicians. The Operations Core will work with evaluation teams to develop timelines, facilitate work, monitor progress, and guide quality improvement within SALIENT. The Methods Core will work with evaluation teams to identify the most appropriate qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches to address each evaluation, ensure that the analyses are conducted appropriately, and troubleshoot when problems with data acquisition and analysis arise. The Knowledge Translation (KT) Core will target key partners and decision makers using a needs-based market segmentation approach to ensure that needs are incorporated in the dissemination of knowledge. The KT Core will create communications briefs, playbooks, and other materials targeted at these market segments to facilitate implementation of evidence-based practices and maximize the impact of evaluation results.

RESULTS

The SALIENT team has developed a center infrastructure to support high-priority evaluations, often to be responsive to shifting operational needs and priorities. Our team has engaged in our core missions and operations to rapidly evaluate a high-priority areas, develop a comprehensive Lean Sprint systems redesign approach to training, and accelerate rapid knowledge translation.

CONCLUSIONS

With an array of interdisciplinary expertise, operational partnerships, and integrated resources, SALIENT has an established and evolving infrastructure to rapidly develop and implement high-impact evaluations. Projects are developed with sustained efficiency approaches that can pivot to new priorities as needed and effectively translate knowledge for key stakeholders and policy makers, while creating a learning health system infrastructure to foster the next generation of evaluation and implementation scientists.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

PRR1-10.2196/59830.

Evaluating the tailored implementation of a multisite care navigation service for mental health in rural and remote Australia (The Bridging Study): protocol for a community-engaged hybrid effectiveness-implementation study

BACKGROUND

A dramatic decline in mental health of people worldwide in the early COVID-19 pandemic years has not recovered. In rural and remote Australia, access to appropriate and timely mental health services has been identified as a major barrier to people seeking help for mental ill-health. From 2020 to 2021 a care navigation model, Navicare, was co-designed with rural and remote communities in the Greater Whitsunday Region of Central Queensland in Australia. The Exploration, Preparation, Implementation and Sustainment (EPIS) framework was used to design and guide multiple aspects of a multisite study, The Bridging Study, to evaluate the implementation of Navicare in Australia.

METHODS

A community-engaged hybrid effectiveness-implementation study design will focus on the tailored implementation of Navicare at three new sites as well as monitoring implementation at an existing site established since 2021. Study outcomes assessed will include sustained access as the co-primary outcome (measured using access to Navicare mental health referral services) and Proctor's Implementation Outcomes of feasibility, acceptability, appropriateness, adoption, fidelity, implementation cost, and sustainability. Data collection for the implementation evaluation will include service usage data, community consultations, interviews, and workshops; analysed using mixed methods and guided by EPIS and other implementation frameworks. Pre-post effectiveness and cost-consequence study components are embedded in the implementation and sustainment phases, with comparison to pre-implementation data and value assessed for each EPIS phase using hospital, service, and resource allocation data. A scaling up strategy will be co-developed using a national roundtable forum in the final year of the study. Qualitative exploration of other aspects of the study (e.g., mechanisms of action and stakeholder engagement) will be conducted.

DISCUSSION

Our study will use tailoring to local sites and a community-engaged approach to drive implementation of a mental health care navigation service in rural and remote Australia, with expected benefits to mental healthcare access. This approach is consistent with policy recommendations nationally and internationally as building blocks for rural health including the World Health Organization Framework for Action on Strengthening Health Systems to Improve Health Outcomes.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Prospectively registered on April 2, 2024, on the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, no. ACTRN12624000382572. https://anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=386665&isReview=true .

Barriers and facilitators of implementation of evidence-based interventions in children and young people's mental health care - a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Effective evidence-based practices (EBP) for children and young people's (CYP) mental health exist, however, there is low uptake in clinical practice and interventions do not always reach those in need. This review aimed to comprehensively identify and synthesise the barriers and facilitators to implementing EBP in CYP mental health care, mapped according to an implementation framework in order to make pragmatic recommendations for practitioners, commissioners and researchers.

METHODS

Following the PRISMA guidelines, an electronic search of PsycINFO, MEDLINE, CINAHL and Embase in 2021 yielded 1830 results. In total, 107 abstracts were screened, 57 of which were included for full-text review and 26 were included for data extraction and analysis.

RESULTS

We identified a number of organisational and clinician-level barriers which impede the implementation of evidence in 'real world' practice. Barriers included lack of access to funding; poor access to resources; clinician attitudes and flexibility of EBP. Facilitators included targeted funding and access to resources; supportive staff and leadership committed to innovation and skills in the EBP.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the process of translating research into practice is challenging and the solutions are not straightforward, we have identified a set of practical recommendations for ways in which implementation practices can improve. Researchers, commissioners, funders and practitioners can work together to improve the implementation of EBP in CYP mental health settings by ensuring funding is available, prioritise implementation beyond the end of trials, upskill staff on integrating EBP into care, ensure EBPs are flexible and are co-produced with service users.

REGISTRATION

This review was registered on PROSPERO international prospective register of systematic reviews (CRD42021252995).

Strategies for Implementing GlobalConsent to Prevent Sexual Violence in University Men (SCALE): study protocol for a national implementation trial

BACKGROUND

Globally, women 15-24 years are at heightened risk of sexual violence victimization, a risk factor for adverse mental, physical, and behavioral health outcomes. Sexual violence is common at universities and most often perpetrated by men, yet few evidence-based prevention strategies targeting men have been tested in low- and middle-income countries. GlobalConsent is a six-module, web-based educational program adapted from an efficacious U.S.-based program. Nine months post-treatment in a randomized trial in Vietnam, GlobalConsent reduced men's sexually violent behavior (odds ratio [OR] = 0.71, 95%CI 0.50-1.00) and increased prosocial intervening behavior (OR = 1.51, 1.00-2.28) relative to an attention-control. Evidence regarding optimal implementation strategies for scale up is needed.

METHODS

We will randomize six medical universities in North, Central, and South Vietnam to deliver GlobalConsent using two different packages of implementation strategies that vary in intensity. Higher-intensity strategies will include greater (1) pre- and post-implementation engagement with university leaders and faculty and (2) greater pre-implementation outreach, follow-up, and incentives for students to promote engagement and completion of GlobalConsent. Higher intensity universities will receive additional training and support for their added activities. We will compare implementation drivers and outcomes, intervention effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness across the two implementation bundles. Our mixed-methods comparative interrupted time series design includes (1) qualitative interviews and quantitative surveys with university leaders and implementation teams to assess implementation barriers and facilitators; (2) repeated surveys with leaders and faculty, implementation teams, and male students to assess multilevel implementation drivers and outcomes; (3) repeated surveys with male students to assess behavioral outcomes (sexual violence and intervening behavior) and mediating variables (knowledge, attitudes, affect, and capacities); and (4) time diaries and cost tracking to assess cost-effectiveness of the two implementation-strategies bundles.

DISCUSSION

This project is the first to assess packages of implementation strategies to deliver an efficacious web-based sexual violence prevention program for undergraduate men across all regions of Vietnam and synergizes with a violence-prevention training initiative (D43TW012188). This approach will produce rigorous evidence about how to disseminate GlobalConsent nationally, which holds promise to reduce gender-based health inequities linked to sexual violence as GlobalConsent is brought to scale.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT06443541. Retrospectively registered with ClinicalTrials.gov. Registered on June 05, 2024.

Implementation and Impact of Intimate Partner Violence Screening Expansion in the Veterans Health Administration: Protocol for a Mixed Methods Evaluation

BACKGROUND

Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a significant public health problem with far-reaching consequences. The health care system plays an integral role in the detection of and response to IPV. Historically, the majority of IPV screening initiatives have targeted women of reproductive age, with little known about men's IPV screening experiences or the impact of screening on men's health care. The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) has called for an expansion of IPV screening, providing a unique opportunity for a large-scale evaluation of IPV screening and response across all patient populations.

OBJECTIVE

In this protocol paper, we describe the recently funded Partnered Evaluation of Relationship Health Innovations and Services through Mixed Methods (PRISM) initiative, aiming to evaluate the implementation and impact of the VHA's IPV screening and response expansion, with a particular focus on identifying potential gender differences.

METHODS

The PRISM Initiative is guided by the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance (RE-AIM) and Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR 2.0) frameworks. We will use mixed methods data from 139 VHA facilities to evaluate the IPV screening expansion, including electronic health record data and qualitative interviews with patients, clinicians, and national IPV program leadership. Quantitative data will be analyzed using a longitudinal observational design with repeated measurement periods at baseline (T0), year 1 (T1), and year 2 (T2). Qualitative interviews will focus on identifying multilevel factors, including potential implementation barriers and facilitators critical to IPV screening and response expansion, and examining the impact of screening on patients and clinicians.

RESULTS

The PRISM initiative was funded in October 2023. We have developed the qualitative interview guides, obtained institutional review board approval, extracted quantitative data for baseline analyses, and began recruitment for qualitative interviews. Reports of progress and results will be made available to evaluation partners and funders through quarterly and end-of-year reports. All data collection and analyses across time points are expected to be completed in June 2026.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings from this mixed methods evaluation will provide a comprehensive understanding of IPV screening expansion at the VHA, including the implementation and impact of screening and the scope of IPV detected in the VHA patient population. Moreover, data generated by this initiative have critical policy and clinical practice implications in a national health care system.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

PRR1-10.2196/59918.

Adaptations to a patient navigation program for follow-up colonoscopy in rural primary care practices

PURPOSE

Patient navigation is a recommended practice to improve cancer screenings among underserved populations including those residing in rural areas with care access barriers. We report on patient navigation programme adaptations to increase follow-up colonoscopy rates after abnormal fecal testing in rural primary care practices.

METHODS

Participating clinics delivered a patient navigation programme to eligible patients from 28 affiliated clinics serving rural communities in Oregon clustered within 3 Medicaid health plans. Patient navigation adaptations were tracked using data sources including patient navigation training programme reflections, qualitative interviews, clinic meetings, and periodic reflections with practice facilitators.

FINDINGS

Initial, planned (proactive) adaptations were made to address the rural context; later, unplanned (reactive) adaptations were implemented to address the impact of the COVID-19 global pandemic. Initial planned adaptations to the patient navigation programme were made before the main trial to address the needs of the rural context, including provider shortages and geographic dispersion limiting both patient access to care and training opportunities for providers. Later unplanned adaptations were made primarily in response to COVID-19 care suspension and staff redeployments and shortages that occurred during implementation.

CONCLUSION

While unplanned adaptations were implemented to address the contextual impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on care access patterns and staffing, the changes to training content and context were beneficial to the rural setting overall and should be sustained. Our findings can guide future efforts to optimise the success of such programmes in other rural settings and highlight the important role of adaptations in implementation projects.

The Rapid Implementation Feedback (RIF) report: real-time synthesis of qualitative data for proactive implementation planning and tailoring

BACKGROUND

Qualitative methods are a critical tool for enhancing implementation planning and tailoring, yet rapid turn-around of qualitative insights can be challenging in large implementation trials. The Department of Veterans Affairs-funded EMPOWER 2.0 Quality Enhancement Research Initiative (QUERI) is conducting a hybrid type 3 effectiveness-implementation trial comparing the impact of Replicating Effective Programs (REP) and Evidence-Based Quality Improvement (EBQI) as strategies for implementing three evidence-based practices (EBPs) for women Veterans. We describe the development of the Rapid Implementation Feedback (RIF) report, a pragmatic, team-based approach for the rapid synthesis of qualitative data to aid implementation planning and tailoring, as well as findings from a process evaluation of adopting the RIF report within the EMPOWER 2.0 QUERI.

METHODS

Trained qualitative staff conducted 125 semi-structured pre-implementation interviews with frontline staff, providers, and leadership across 16 VA sites between October 2021 and October 2022. High-priority topic domains informed by the updated Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research were selected in dialogue between EMPOWER 2.0 implementation and evaluation teams, and relevant key points were summarized for each interview to produce a structured RIF report, with emergent findings about each site highlighted in weekly written and verbal communications. Process evaluation was conducted to assess EMPOWER 2.0 team experiences with the RIF report across pre-implementation data collection and synthesis and implementation planning and tailoring.

RESULTS

Weekly RIF updates supported continuous EMPOWER 2.0 team communication around key findings, particularly questions and concerns raised by participating sites related to the three EBPs. Introducing the RIF report into team processes enhanced: team communication; quality and rigor of qualitative data; sensemaking around emergent challenges; understanding of site readiness; and tailoring of REP and EBQI implementation strategies. RIF report findings have facilitated rapid tailoring of implementation planning and rollout, supporting increased responsiveness to sites' needs and concerns.

CONCLUSIONS

The RIF report provides a structured strategy for distillation of time-sensitive findings, continuous team communication amid a complex multi-site implementation effort, and effective tailoring of implementation rollout in real-time. Use of the RIF report may also support trust-building by enhancing responsiveness to sites during pre- and early implementation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Enhancing Mental and Physical Health of Women Veterans (NCT05050266); https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05050266?term=EMPOWER%202.0&rank=1 Date of registration: 09/09/2021.

A streamlined approach to classifying and tailoring implementation strategies: recommendations to speed the translation of research to practice

BACKGROUND

Implementation science emerged from the recognized need to speed the translation of effective interventions into practice. In the US, the science has evolved to place an ever-increasing focus on implementation strategies. The long list of implementation strategies, terminology used to name strategies, and time required to tailor strategies all may contribute to delays in translating evidence-based interventions (EBIs) into practice. To speed EBI translation, we propose a streamlined approach to classifying and tailoring implementation strategies.

MAIN TEXT

A multidisciplinary team of eight scholars conducted an exercise to sort the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) strategies into three classes: implementation processes (n = 25), capacity-building strategies (n = 20), and integration strategies (n = 28). Implementation processes comprise best practices that apply across EBIs and throughout the phases of implementation from exploration through sustainment (e.g., conduct local needs assessment). Capacity-building strategies target either general or EBI-specific knowledge and skills (e.g., conduct educational meetings). Integration strategies include "methods and techniques" that target barriers or facilitators to implementation of a specific EBI beyond those targeted by capacity building. Building on these three classes, the team collaboratively developed recommendations for a pragmatic, five-step approach that begins with the implementation processes and capacity-building strategies practice-settings are already using prior to tailoring integration strategies. A case study is provided to illustrate use of the five-step approach to tailor the strategies needed to implement a transitional care intervention in skilled nursing facilities.

CONCLUSIONS

Our proposed approach streamlines the formative work required prior to implementing an EBI by building on practice partner preferences, expertise, and infrastructure while also making the most of prior research findings.

Enhancing patient-clinician collaboration during treatment decision-making: study protocol for a community-engaged, mixed method hybrid type 1 trial of collaborative decision skills training (CDST) for veterans with psychosis

BACKGROUND

Patient participation in treatment decision making is a pillar of recovery-oriented care and is associated with improvements in empowerment and well-being. Although demand for increased involvement in treatment decision-making is high among veterans with serious mental illness, rates of involvement are low. Collaborative decision skills training (CDST) is a recovery-oriented, skills-based intervention designed to support meaningful patient participation in treatment decision making. An open trial among veterans with psychosis supported CDST's feasibility and demonstrated preliminary indications of effectiveness. A randomized control trial (RCT) is needed to test CDST's effectiveness in comparison with an active control and further evaluate implementation feasibility.

METHODS

The planned RCT is a hybrid type 1 trial, which will use mixed methods to systematically evaluate the effectiveness and implementation feasibility of CDST among veterans participating in a VA Psychosocial Rehabilitation and Recovery Center (PRRC) in Southern California. The first aim is to assess the effectiveness of CDST in comparison with the active control via the primary outcome, collaborative decision-making behavior during usual care appointments between veterans and their VA mental health clinicians, and secondary outcomes (i.e., treatment engagement, satisfaction, and outcome). The second aim is to characterize the implementation feasibility of CDST within the VA PRRC using the Practical Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model framework, including barriers and facilitators within the PRRC context to support future implementation.

DISCUSSION

If CDST is found to be effective and feasible, implementation determinants gathered throughout the study can be used to ensure sustained and successful implementation at this PRRC and other PRRCs and similar settings nationally.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04324944. Registered on March 27, 2020. Trial registration data can be found in Appendix 1.

Using brief reflections to capture and evaluate end-user engagement: a case example using the COMPASS study

BACKGROUND

Use of participatory research methods is increasing in research trials. Once partnerships are established with end-users, there is less guidance about processes research teams can use to successfully incorporate end-user feedback. The current study describes the use of a brief reflections process to systematically examine and evaluate the impact of end-user feedback on study conduct.

METHODS

The Comparative Effectiveness of Trauma-Focused and Non-Trauma- Focused Treatment Strategies for PTSD among those with Co-Occurring SUD (COMPASS) study was a randomized controlled trial to determine the effectiveness of trauma-focused psychotherapy versus non-trauma-focused psychotherapy for Veterans with co-occurring posttraumatic stress disorder and substance use disorder who were entering substance use treatment within the Department of Veterans Affairs. We developed and paired a process of "brief reflections" with our end-user engagement methods as part of a supplemental evaluation of the COMPASS study engagement plan. Brief reflections were 30-minute semi-structured discussions with the COMPASS Team following meetings with three study engagement panels about feedback received regarding study issues. To evaluate the impact of panel feedback, 16 reflections were audio-recorded, transcribed, rapidly analyzed, and integrated with other study data sources.

RESULTS

Brief reflections revealed that the engagement panels made recommended changes in eight areas: enhancing recruitment; study assessment completion; creating uniformity across Study Coordinators; building Study Coordinator connection to Veteran participants; mismatch between study procedures and clinical practice; therapist skill with patients with active substance use; therapist burnout; and dissemination of study findings. Some recommendations positively impact study conduct while others had mixed impact. Reflections were iterative and led to emergent processes that included revisiting previously discussed topics, cross-pollination of ideas across panels, and sparking solutions amongst the Team when the panels did not make any recommendations or recommendations were not feasible.

CONCLUSIONS

When paired with end-user engagement methods, brief reflections can facilitate systematic examination of end-user input, particularly when the engagement strategy is robust. Reflections offer a forum of accountability for researchers to give careful thought to end-user recommendations and make timely improvements to the study conduct. Reflections can also facilitate evaluation of these recommendations and reveal end-user-driven strategies that can effectively improve study conduct.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04581434) on October 9, 2020; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/study/NCT04581434?term=NCT04581434&draw=2&rank=1 .

Identifying Barriers and Facilitators to Veterans Affairs Whole Health Integration Using the Updated Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research

BACKGROUND

Veterans Affairs (VA) implemented the Veteran-centered Whole Health System initiative across VA sites with approaches to implementation varying by site.

PURPOSE

Using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), we aimed to synthesize systemic barriers and facilitators to Veteran use with the initiative. Relevance to healthcare quality, systematic comparison of implementation procedures across a national healthcare system provides a comprehensive portrait of strengths and opportunities for improvement.

METHODS

Advanced fellows from 11 VA Quality Scholars sites performed the initial data collection, and the final report includes CFIR-organized results from six sites.

RESULTS

Key innovation findings included cost, complexity, offerings, and accessibility. Inner setting barriers and facilitators included relational connections and communication, compatibility, structure and resources, learning centeredness, and information and knowledge access. Finally, results regarding individuals included innovation deliverers, implementation leaders and team, and individual capability, opportunity, and motivation to implement and deliver whole health care.

DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS

Examination of barriers and facilitators suggest that Whole Health coaches are key components of implementation and help to facilitate communication, relationship building, and knowledge access for Veterans and VA employees. Continuous evaluation and improvement of implementation procedures at each site is also recommended.

Comparative effectiveness of implementation strategies for Accelerating Cervical Cancer Elimination through the integration of Screen-and-treat Services (ACCESS study): protocol for a cluster randomized hybrid type III trial in Nigeria

BACKGROUND

Despite the increased risk of cervical cancer (CC) among women living with HIV (WLHIV), CC screening and treatment (CCST) rates remain low in Africa. The integration of CCST services into established HIV programs in Africa can improve CC prevention and control. However, the paucity of evidence on effective implementation strategies (IS) has limited the success of integration in many countries. In this study, we seek to identify effective IS to enhance the integration of CCST services into existing HIV programs in Nigeria.

METHODS

Our proposed study has formative and experimental activities across the four phases of the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, and Sustainment (EPIS) framework. Through an implementation mapping conducted with stakeholders in the exploration phase, we identified a core package of IS (Core) and an enhanced package of IS (Core+) mostly selected from the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change. In the preparation phase, we refined and tailored the Core and Core+ IS with the implementation resource teams for local appropriateness. In the implementation phase, we will conduct a cluster-randomized hybrid type III trial to assess the comparative effectiveness of Core versus Core+. HIV comprehensive treatment sites (k = 12) will be matched by region and randomized to Core or Core+ in the ratio of 1:1 stratified by region. In the sustainment phase, we will assess the sustainment of CCST at each site. The study outcomes will be assessed using RE-AIM: reach (screening rate), adoption (uptake of IS by study sites), IS fidelity (degree to which the IS occurred according to protocol), clinical intervention fidelity (delivery of CC screening, onsite treatment, and referral according to protocol), clinical effectiveness (posttreatment screen negative), and sustainment (continued integrated CCST service delivery). Additionally, we will descriptively explore potential mechanisms, including organizational readiness, implementation climate, CCST self-efficacy, and implementation intentions.

DISCUSSION

The assessment of IS to increase CCST rates is consistent with the global plan of eliminating CC as a public health threat by 2030. Our study will identify a set of evidence-based IS for low-income settings to integrate evidence-based CCST interventions into routine HIV care in order to improve the health and life expectancy of WLHIV.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Prospectively registered on November 7, 2023, at ClinicalTrials.gov no. NCT06128304. https://classic.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov/ct2/show/study/NCT06128304.

Expanding Access to Comprehensive Geriatric Evaluation via Telehealth: Development of Hybrid-Virtual Home Visits

BACKGROUND

In response to the aging population, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) seeks to expand access to evidence-based practices which support community-dwelling older persons such as the Geriatric Resources for Assessment and Care of Elders (GRACE) program. GRACE is a multidisciplinary care model which provides home-based geriatric evaluation and management for older Veterans residing within a 20-mile drive radius from the hospital. We sought to expand the geographic reach of VA-GRACE by developing a hybrid-virtual home visit (TeleGRACE).

OBJECTIVES

The objectives were to: (1) describe challenges encountered and solutions implemented during the iterative, pre-implementation program development process; and (2) illustrate potential successes of the program with two case examples.

DESIGN

Quality improvement project with longitudinal qualitative data collection.

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The hybrid-virtual home visit involved a telehealth technician travelling to patients' homes and connecting virtually to VA-GRACE team members who participated remotely.

APPROACH & PARTICIPANTS

We collected multiple data streams throughout program development: TeleGRACE staff periodic reflections, fieldnotes, and team meeting notes; and VA-GRACE team member interviews.

KEY RESULTS

The five program domains that required attention and problem-solving were: telehealth connectivity and equipment, virtual physical examination, protocols and procedures, staff training, and team integration. For each domain, we describe several challenges and solutions. An example from the virtual physical examination domain: several iterations were required to identify the combination of telehealth stethoscope with dedicated headphones that allowed remote nurse practitioners to hear heart and lung sounds. The two cases illustrate how this hybrid-virtual home visit model provided care for patients who would not otherwise have received timely healthcare services.

CONCLUSIONS

These results provide a blueprint to translate an in-person home-based geriatrics program into a hybrid-virtual model and support the feasibility of using hybrid-virtual home visits to expand access to comprehensive geriatric evaluation and ongoing care for high-risk, community-dwelling older persons who reside geographically distant from the primary VA facility.

The core functions and forms paradigm throughout EPIS: designing and implementing an evidence-based practice with function fidelity

There are numerous frameworks for implementing evidence-based practices (EBPs) in novel settings to achieve "fidelity." However, identifying appropriate referents for fidelity poses a challenge. The Core Functions and Forms paradigm offers a model that can inform adaptation decisions throughout all phases of the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, Sustainment (EPIS) framework. We applied the Core Functions-Forms paradigm throughout the Exploration and Preparation phases of EPIS in the design of two EBPs targeting family protective factors among Latinos in San Diego, as well as describe plans for its use in Implementation and Sustainment. We employed a distinct approach for each intervention element to contrast adaptation decisions that prioritize adherence to either form or function fidelity. We describe our application of the functions-forms paradigm within the EPIS framework, focusing on the Preparation phase. We also provide functions-forms matrices that map out the relationship between individual intervention components (forms) and the essential processes (functions) by which components are theorized to exert their impact. This case study of how the core functions-forms framework can be mapped onto EPIS can support a conceptual shift from prioritizing form fidelity to also focusing on function fidelity. This might allow interventionists to target appropriate fidelity referents when adapting an EBP, rather than defaulting to maintaining fidelity to forms as described in the protocol. We see great promise for using this framework for guiding actions throughout all EPIS phases and informing future applications of this paradigm to foster more robust fidelity to function.

Implementing integrated hypertension and diabetes management using the World Health Organization's HEARTS model: protocol for a pilot study in the Guatemalan national primary care system

BACKGROUND

The HEARTS technical package was developed by the World Health Organization to address the implementation gap in cardiovascular disease prevention in low- and middle-income countries. Guatemala is a middle-income country that is currently implementing HEARTS. National authorities in Guatemala are interested in exploring how hypertension and diabetes management can be integrated in HEARTS implementation. The objective of this study is to conduct a feasibility and acceptability pilot trial of integrated hypertension and diabetes management based on HEARTS in the publicly funded primary care system in Guatemala.

METHODS

A single-arm pilot trial for 6 months will be carried out in 11 Ministry of Health primary care facilities starting in September 2023. A planned sample of 100 adult patients diagnosed with diabetes (n = 45), hypertension (n = 45), or both (n = 10) will be enrolled. The intervention will consist of HEARTS-aligned components: Training health workers on healthy-lifestyle counseling and evidence-based treatment protocols, strengthening access to medications and diagnostics, training on risk-based cardiovascular disease management, team-based care and task sharing, and systems monitoring and feedback, including implementation of a facility-based electronic monitoring tool at the individual level. Co-primary outcomes of feasibility and acceptability will be assessed using an explanatory sequential mixed-methods design. Secondary outcomes include clinical effectiveness (treatment with medication, glycemic control, and blood pressure control), key implementation outcomes (adoption, fidelity, usability, and sustainability), and patient-reported outcome measures (diabetes distress, disability, and treatment burden). Using an implementation mapping approach, a Technical Advisory Committee will develop implementation strategies for subsequent scale-up planning.

DISCUSSION

This trial will produce evidence on implementing HEARTS-aligned hypertension and diabetes care in the MOH primary care system in Guatemala. Results also will inform future HEARTS projects in Guatemala and other low- and middle-income countries.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov ID NCT06080451. The trial was prospectively registered on October 12, 2023.

Preparation for implementation of evidence-based practices in urban schools: A shared process with implementing partners

Background

Shifting organizational priorities can negatively affect the sustainment of innovations in community settings. Shifting priorities can present barriers to conducting clinical research in schools if a misalignment occurs between school district priorities and the aims of the study. Often this misalignment occurs due to a shift during the period between when the study is submitted for funding and when research activities begin. Participatory research approaches can be employed to restore alignment between study processes and school district priorities. The purpose of the study is to describe data from a shared process with district partners. The shared process resulted in modifications to the main study's implementation processes and strategies in order to restore alignment with evolving school priorities while remaining faithful to the aims of the study.

Method

Data originated from qualitative interviews conducted with 20 school district and school personnel in a large urban school district. Qualitative themes were organized into categories based on a social-ecological school implementation framework. Data from team meetings, meetings with school district administrators, and emails served to supplement and verify findings from interview analyses.

Results

Themes included barriers and facilitators at the macro-, school-, individual-, team-, and implementation quality levels. Adaptations were made to address barriers and facilitators and restore alignment with school district priorities. Most adaptations to study processes and implementation strategies focused on re-training and providing more information to school district coaches and school-based staff. New procedures were created, and resources were re-allocated for the larger study.

Conclusions

Findings were discussed in relation to the implementation literature in schools. Recommendations for sustaining strong collaboration among researchers and school partners are provided.

Outer-context determinants on the implementation of school-based interventions for LGBTQ+ adolescents

Background

Schools are critical venues for supporting LGBTQ+ youth well-being. Implementing LGBTQ-supportive practices can decrease experiences of stigmatization, discrimination, and victimization that lead to adverse mental health outcomes like anxiety, depression, and suicidality. However, schools are also subject to a wide range of outer-context pressures that may influence their priorities and implementation of LGBTQ-supportive practices. We assessed the role of emergent outer-context determinants in the context of a 5-year cluster randomized controlled trial to study the implementation of LGBTQ-supportive evidence-informed practices (EIPs) in New Mexico high schools.

Method

Using an iterative coding approach, we analyzed qualitative data from annual interviews with school professionals involved in EIP implementation efforts.

Results

The analysis yielded three categories of outer-context determinants that created challenges and opportunities for implementation: (a) social barriers related to heterocentrism, cisgenderism, and religious conservatism; (b) local, state, and national policy and political discourse; and (c) crisis events.

Conclusions

By exploring the implications of outer-context determinants for the uptake of LGBTQ-supportive practices, we demonstrate that these elements are dynamic-not simply reducible to barriers or facilitators-and that assessing outer-context determinants shaping implementation environments is crucial for addressing LGBTQ health equity.

The use of telehealth-supported stewardship activities in acute-care and long-term care settings: An implementation effectiveness trial

BACKGROUND

We assessed the implementation of telehealth-supported stewardship activities in acute-care units and long-term care (LTC) units in Veterans' Administration medical centers (VAMCs).

DESIGN

Before-and-after, quasi-experimental implementation effectiveness study with a baseline period (2019-2020) and an intervention period (2021).

SETTING

The study was conducted in 3 VAMCs without onsite infectious disease (ID) support.

PARTICIPANTS

The study included inpatient providers at participating sites who prescribe antibiotics.

INTERVENTION

During 2021, an ID physician met virtually 3 times per week with the stewardship pharmacist at each participating VAMC to review patients on antibiotics in acute-care units and LTC units. Real-time feedback on prescribing antibiotics was given to providers. Additional implementation strategies included stakeholder engagement, education, and quality monitoring.

METHODS

The reach-effectiveness-adoption-implementation-maintenance (RE-AIM) framework was used for program evaluation. The primary outcome of effectiveness was antibiotic days of therapy (DOT) per 1,000 days present aggregated across all 3 sites. An interrupted time-series analysis was performed to compare this rate during the intervention and baseline periods. Electronic surveys, periodic reflections, and semistructured interviews were used to assess other RE-AIM outcomes.

RESULTS

The telehealth program reviewed 502 unique patients and made 681 recommendations to 24 providers; 77% of recommendations were accepted. After program initiation, antibiotic DOT immediately decreased in the LTC units (-30%; P < .01) without a significant immediate change in the acute-care units (+16%; P = .22); thereafter DOT remained stable in both settings. Providers generally appreciated feedback and collaborative discussions.

CONCLUSIONS

The implementation of our telehealth program was associated with reductions in antibiotic use in the LTC units but not in the smaller acute-care units. Overall, providers perceived the intervention as acceptable. Wider implementation of telehealth-supported stewardship activities may achieve reductions in antibiotic use.

Suicide-related care among patients who have experienced an opioid-involved overdose

OBJECTIVE

Our objective was to describe suicide prevention care for individuals prescribed opioids or with opioid use disorder (OUD) and identify opportunities for improving this care.

METHODS

Adult patients (n = 65) from four health systems with an opioid-involved overdose and clinicians (n = 21) who had contact with similar patients completed 30-60-min semi-structured interviews. A community advisory board contributed to development of all procedures, and interpretation and summary of findings.

RESULTS

Patients were mostly female (59%), White (63%) and non-Hispanic (77%); 52 were prescribed opioids, 49% had diagnosed OUD, and 42% experienced an intentional opioid-involved overdose. Findings included: 1) when prescribed an opioid or treated for OUD, suicide risks were typically not discussed; 2) 35% of those with an intentional opioid-involved overdose and over 80% with an unintentional overdose reported no discussion of suicidal ideation when treated for the overdose; and 3) suicide-related follow-up care was uncommon among those with unintentional overdoses despite suicidal ideation being reported by >20%. Clinicians reported that when prescribing opioids or treating OUD, post-overdose suicide-related screening or counseling was not done routinely.

CONCLUSIONS

There were several opportunities to tailor suicide prevention care for patients who were treated for opioid-involved overdoses within health systems.

Eight characteristics of rigorous multilevel implementation research: a step-by-step guide

BACKGROUND

Although healthcare is delivered in inherently multilevel contexts, implementation science has no widely endorsed methodological standards defining the characteristics of rigorous, multilevel implementation research. We identify and describe eight characteristics of high-quality, multilevel implementation research to encourage discussion, spur debate, and guide decision-making around study design and methodological issues.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Implementation researchers who conduct rigorous multilevel implementation research demonstrate the following eight characteristics. First, they map and operationalize the specific multilevel context for defined populations and settings. Second, they define and state the level of each construct under study. Third, they describe how constructs relate to each other within and across levels. Fourth, they specify the temporal scope of each phenomenon at each relevant level. Fifth, they align measurement choices and construction of analytic variables with the levels of theories selected (and hypotheses generated, if applicable). Sixth, they use a sampling strategy consistent with the selected theories or research objectives and sufficiently large and variable to examine relationships at requisite levels. Seventh, they align analytic approaches with the chosen theories (and hypotheses, if applicable), ensuring that they account for measurement dependencies and nested data structures. Eighth, they ensure inferences are made at the appropriate level. To guide implementation researchers and encourage debate, we present the rationale for each characteristic, actionable recommendations for operationalizing the characteristics in implementation research, a range of examples, and references to make the characteristics more usable. Our recommendations apply to all types of multilevel implementation study designs and approaches, including randomized trials, quantitative and qualitative observational studies, and mixed methods.

CONCLUSION

These eight characteristics provide benchmarks for evaluating the quality and replicability of multilevel implementation research and promote a common language and reference points. This, in turn, facilitates knowledge generation across diverse multilevel settings and ensures that implementation research is consistent with (and appropriately leverages) what has already been learned in allied multilevel sciences. When a shared and integrated description of what constitutes rigor is defined and broadly communicated, implementation science is better positioned to innovate both methodologically and theoretically.

Utilizing PRISM and RE-AIM to implement and evaluate the Rural Telementoring Training Center (RTTC) for health care workforce development in rural communities

Introduction

Amid rural health worker shortages and hospital closures, it is imperative to build and maintain the local workforce. Telementoring (TM) or technology-enabled mentoring, is a tool for improving health care quality and access by increasing workforce capacity and support. The national Rural Telementoring Training Center (RTTC) was developed to compile and disseminate TM best practices by delivering free training, tools, and technical assistance to support the implementation, sustainability, and evaluation of new and current TM programs for rural health workers. This paper details how the Practical, Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model (PRISM) was used to understand the context that shaped implementation as well as how Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance (RE-AIM) was concurrently applied to frame outcomes.

Methods

The RTTC has three implementation strategies: outreach, training and technical assistance (TTA), and a Quality Measure Toolkit. Ongoing periodic reflections with the RTTC team, informed by PRISM, were collected, as were RE-AIM outcomes. Central to this design was the continuous review of incoming data in team meetings to inform programmatic changes by identifying challenges and applying modifications to strategies in real time.

Results

Major implementation changes discussed during reflections included providing timely and relevant messaging through various platforms, streamlining and customizing a TTA approach, and offering different options for accessing the Toolkit. The outreach strategy resulted in high Reach across the US, with over 300 organizations contacted. The effectiveness of the RTTC was demonstrated by counts of people engaging with outreach (ex. over 8,300 impressions on LinkedIn), the website (over 6,400 views), and e-bursts (33% open rate). Moreover, there were 32 TTA requests and 70 people accessing the Toolkit. Adoption was demonstrated by 27 people participating in TTA and 14 individuals utilizing the Toolkit.

Discussion

The integration of PRISM and RE-AIM frameworks promoted a holistic implementation and evaluation plan. Using PRISM, the RTTC team was able to reflect on the implementation strategies through the lens of contextual factors and make rapid programmatic changes within team meetings. That process resulted in outcomes framed by RE-AIM. The integration of two frameworks in tandem provided an adaptive and comprehensive approach to implementing a large-scale, national program.

Integrative medical group visits for patients with chronic pain: results of a pilot single-site hybrid implementation-effectiveness feasibility study

Background

Approximately 20% of adults in the United States experience chronic pain. Integrative Medical Group Visit (IMGV) offers an innovative approach to chronic pain management through training in mindfulness, nutrition, and other mind-body techniques combined with peer support. To date, there are no studies on IMGV implementation, despite its promise as a feasible non-pharmacological intervention for chronic pain management. In this study, we assessed the feasibility of implementing IMGV and assessing its effectiveness for chronic pain.

Methods

Implementation Mapping was used to develop and evaluate implementation strategies for IMGV. Strategies included disseminating educational materials, conducting ongoing training, and conducting educational meetings. IMGV was delivered by three healthcare providers: an allopathic physician, registered yoga teacher, and naturopathic physician. The effectiveness of IMGV on patient health outcomes was assessed through qualitative interviews and a Patient-Reported Outcomes Scale (PROMIS-29). Provider perspectives of acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility were assessed through periodic reflections (group interviews reflecting on the process of implementation) and field notes. Paired t-tests were used to assess changes between scores at baseline and post intervention. Qualitative data were coded by three experienced qualitative researchers using thematic content analysis.

Results

Of the initial 16 patients enrolled in research, 12 completed at least two sessions of the IMGV. Other than fatigue, there was no statistically significant difference between the pre- and post-scores. Patients reported high satisfaction with IMGV, noting the development of new skills for self-care and the supportive community of peers. Themes from patient interviews and periodic reflections included the feasibility of virtual delivery, patient perspectives on acceptability, provider perspectives of feasibility and acceptability, ease of recruitment, complexity of referral and scheduling process, balancing medical check-in with group engagement, and nursing staff availability.

Conclusions

IMGV was feasible, acceptable, and effective from the perspectives of patients and providers. Although statistically significant differences were not observed for most PROMIS measures, qualitative results suggested that participants experienced increased social support and increased pain coping skills. Providers found implementation strategies effective, except for engaging nurses, due to staff being overwhelmed from the pandemic. Lessons learned from this pilot study can inform future research on implementation of IMGV.

Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on nonpharmacological pain management trials in military and veteran healthcare settings: an evaluation informed by implementation science

The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic disrupted healthcare and clinical research, including a suite of 11 pragmatic clinical trials (PCTs), across clinics within the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and the Department of Defense (DOD). These PCTs were designed to evaluate an array of nonpharmacological treatments and models of care for treatment of patients with pain and co-occurring conditions. The aims of the study are to (a) describe modifications to PCTs and interventions to address the evolving pandemic and (b) describe the application of implementation science methods for evaluation of those PCT modifications. The project used a two-phase, sequential, mixed-methods design. In Phase I, we captured PCT disruptions and modifications via a Research Electronic Data Capture questionnaire, using Periodic Reflections methods as a guide. In Phase II, we utilized the Framework for Reporting Adaptations and Modifications-Expanded (FRAME) taxonomy to develop a focus group interview guide and checklist that would provide more in-depth data than Phase I. Data were analyzed using directed content analysis. Phase I revealed that all PCTs made between two and six trial modifications. Phase II, FRAME-guided analyses showed that the key goals for modifying interventions were increasing treatment feasibility and decreasing patient exposure to COVID-19, while preserving intervention core elements. Context (format) modifications led eight PCTs to modify parts of the interventions for virtual delivery. Content modifications added elements to enhance patient safety; tailored interventions for virtual delivery (counseling, exercise, mindfulness); and modified interventions involving manual therapies. Implementation science methods identified near-real-time disruptions and modifications to PCTs focused on pain management in veteran and military healthcare settings.

Recommendations for post-implementation adaptations to optimize family navigation in pediatric primary care: a qualitative study with parents and navigators

BACKGROUND

Family Navigation (FN) is an evidence-based care management intervention designed to reduce disparities in access to care by providing families with individually tailored support and care coordination. Early data suggest FN is effective, but effectiveness is significantly influenced by both contextual (e.g. setting) and individual (e.g., ethnicity) variables. To better understand how FN could be tailored to address this variability in effectiveness, we set forth to explore proposed adaptations to FN by both navigators and families who received FN.

METHODS

This study was a nested qualitative study set within a larger randomized clinical trial of FN to improve access to autism diagnostic services in urban pediatric primary care practices in Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, and Connecticut serving low-income, racial and ethnic minority families. Following FN implementation, key informant interviews were conducted based on the Framework for Reporting Adaptations and Modifications-Expanded (FRAME) with a purposeful sample of parents of children who received FN (n = 21) and navigators (n = 7). Interviews were transcribed verbatim and were coded using framework-guided rapid analysis to categorize proposed adaptations to FN.

RESULTS

Parents and navigators proposed 38 adaptations in four domains: 1) content of the intervention (n = 18), 2) context of the intervention (n = 10), 3) training and evaluation (n = 6), and 4) implementation and scale-up (n = 4). The most frequently endorsed adaptation recommendations focused on content (e.g., lengthening FN, providing parents with additional education on autism and parenting children with autism) and implementation (e.g., increasing access to navigation). Although probes targeted critical feedback, parents and navigators were overwhelmingly positive about FN.

CONCLUSIONS

This study builds upon prior FN effectiveness and implementation research by providing concrete areas for adaptation and refinement of the intervention. Recommendations by parents and navigators have the potential to inform improvement of existing navigation programs and development of new programs in similarly underserved populations. These findings are critical as adaptation (cultural and otherwise) is an important principle in the field of health equity. Ultimately, adaptations will need to be tested to determine clinical and implementation effectiveness.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, registration number NCT02359084, February 9, 2015.

Peer-to-Patient-Aligned Care Team (Peer-to-PACT; P2P), a Peer-Led Home Visit Intervention Program for Targeting and Improving Long-term Care Services and Support for Veterans With High Needs and High Risk: Protocol for a Mixed Methods Feasibility Study

BACKGROUND

Keeping older veterans with high needs and high risk (HNHR) who are at risk of long-term institutional care safely in their homes for as long as possible is a Department of Veterans Affairs priority. Older veterans with HNHR face disproportionate barriers and disparities to engaging in their care, including accessing care and services. Veterans with HNHR often have poor ability to maintain health owing to complicated unmet health and social needs. The use of peer support specialists (peers) is a promising approach to improving patient engagement and addressing unmet needs. The Peer-to-Patient-Aligned Care Team (Peer-to-PACT; P2P) intervention is a multicomponential home visit intervention designed to support older veterans with HNHR to age in place. Participants receive a peer-led home visit to identify unmet needs and home safety risks aligned with the age-friendly health system model; care coordination, health care system navigation, and linking to needed services and resources in collaboration with their PACT; and patient empowerment and coaching using Department of Veterans Affairs whole health principles.

OBJECTIVE

The primary aim of this study is to evaluate the preliminary effect of the P2P intervention on patient health care engagement. The second aim is to identify the number and types of needs and unmet needs as well as needs addressed using the P2P needs identification tool. The third aim is to evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of the P2P intervention delivered over 6 months.

METHODS

We will use a quantitative-qualitative convergent mixed methods approach to evaluate the P2P intervention outcomes. For our primary outcome, we will conduct an independent, 2-tailed, 2-sample t test to compare the means of the 6-month pre-post differences in the number of outpatient PACT encounters between the intervention and matched comparison groups. Qualitative data analysis will follow a structured rapid approach using deductive coding as well as the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research.

RESULTS

Study enrollment began in July 2020 and was completed in March 2022. Our sample size consists of 114 veterans: 38 (33.3%) P2P intervention participants and 76 (66.7%) matched comparison group participants. Study findings are expected to be published in late 2023.

CONCLUSIONS

Peers may help bridge the gap between PACT providers and veterans with HNHR by evaluating veterans' needs outside of the clinic, summarizing identified unmet needs, and developing team-based solutions in partnership with the PACT. The home visit component of the intervention provides eyes in the home and may be a promising and innovative tool to improve patient engagement.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

DERR1-10.2196/46156.

Team-focused implementation strategies to improve implementation of mental health screening and referral in rural Children's Advocacy Centers: study protocol for a pilot cluster randomized hybrid type 2 trial

BACKGROUND

Children's Advocacy Centers (CACs) use multidisciplinary teams to investigate and respond to maltreatment allegations. CACs play a critical role in connecting children with mental health needs to evidence-based mental health treatment, especially in low-resourced rural areas. Standardized mental health screening and referral protocols can improve CACs' capacity to identify children with mental health needs and encourage treatment engagement. In the team-based context of CACs, teamwork quality is likely to influence implementation processes and outcomes. Implementation strategies that target teams and apply the science of team effectiveness may enhance implementation outcomes in team-based settings.

METHODS

We will use Implementation Mapping to develop team-focused implementation strategies to support the implementation of the Care Process Model for Pediatric Traumatic Stress (CPM-PTS), a standardized screening and referral protocol. Team-focused strategies will integrate activities from effective team development interventions. We will pilot team-focused implementation in a cluster-randomized hybrid type 2 effectiveness-implementation trial. Four rural CACs will implement the CPM-PTS after being randomized to either team-focused implementation (n = 2 CACs) or standard implementation (n = 2 CACs). We will assess the feasibility of team-focused implementation and explore between-group differences in hypothesized team-level mechanisms of change and implementation outcomes (implementation aim). We will use a within-group pre-post design to test the effectiveness of the CPM-PTS in increasing caregivers' understanding of their child's mental health needs and caregivers' intentions to initiate mental health services (effectiveness aim).

CONCLUSIONS

Targeting multidisciplinary teams is an innovative approach to improving implementation outcomes. This study will be one of the first to test team-focused implementation strategies that integrate effective team development interventions. Results will inform efforts to implement evidence-based practices in team-based service settings.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT05679154 . Registered on January 10, 2023.

Common Elements Approaches to Implementation Research and Practice: Methods and Integration with Intervention Science

We propose that common elements approaches can advance implementation research and practice and facilitate pragmatic use of intervention and implementation evidence. Common elements are practices or processes frequently shared by interventions or implementations. Traditional common elements methodologies use synthesis, distillation, and statistics to describe and evaluate the merit of common ingredients in effective interventions. Recent developments include identifying and testing common configurations of elements, processes, and context variables across the literature of effective interventions and implementations. While common elements thinking has grown popular in intervention science, it has rarely been utilized in implementation science, and specifically, combined with the intervention literature. The goals of this conceptual methodology paper are to (1) provide an overview of the common elements concept and how it may advance implementation research and usability for practice, (2) give a step-by-step guide to systematic common elements reviews that synthesizes and distills the intervention and implementation literature together, and (3) offer recommendations for advancing element-level evidence in implementation science. A narrative review of the common elements literature was conducted with attention to applications to implementation research. A six-step guide to using an advanced common elements methodology was provided. Examples of potential results are presented, along with a review of the implications for implementation research and practice. Finally, we reviewed methodological limitations in current common elements approaches, and identified steps towards realizing their potential. Common elements methodologies can (a) synthesize and distill the implementation science literature into practical applications, (b) generate evidence-informed hypotheses about key elements and determinants in implementation and intervention processes and mechanisms, and (c) promote evidence-informed precision tailoring of intervention and implementation to context. To realize this potential, common elements approaches need improved reporting of details from both successful and unsuccessful intervention and implementation research, more data availability, and more testing and investigation of causal processes and mechanisms of change from diverse theories.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s43477-023-00077-4.

Enhancing Mental and Physical Health of Women through Engagement and Retention (EMPOWER) 2.0 QUERI: study protocol for a cluster-randomized hybrid type 3 effectiveness-implementation trial

BACKGROUND

Women Veterans are the fastest-growing segment of Veterans Health Administration (VA) users. The VA has invested heavily in delivering care for women Veterans that is effective, comprehensive, and gender-tailored. However, gender disparities persist in cardiovascular (CV) and diabetes risk factor control, and the rate of perinatal depression among women Veterans is higher than that among civilian women. Challenges such as distance, rurality, negative perception of VA, discrimination (e.g., toward sexual and/or gender minority individuals), and harassment on VA grounds can further impede women's regular use of VA care. Enhancing Mental and Physical Health of Women through Engagement and Retention (EMPOWER) 2.0 builds on work to date by expanding access to evidence-based, telehealth preventive and mental health services for women Veterans with high-priority health conditions in rural and urban-isolation areas.

METHODS

EMPOWER 2.0 will evaluate two implementation strategies, Replicating Effective Practices (REP) and Evidence-Based Quality Improvement (EBQI), in supporting the implementation and sustainment of three evidence-based interventions (Virtual Diabetes Prevention Program; Telephone Lifestyle Coaching Program; and Reach Out, Stay Strong Essentials) focused on preventive and mental health care for women Veterans. We will conduct a mixed-methods implementation evaluation using a cluster-randomized hybrid type 3 effectiveness-implementation trial design to compare the effectiveness of REP and EBQI on improved access to and rates of engagement in telehealth preventive lifestyle and mental health services. Other outcomes of interest include (a) VA performance metrics for telehealth care delivery and related clinical outcomes; (b) progression along the Stages of Implementation Completion; (c) adaptation, sensemaking, and experiences of implementation among multilevel stakeholders; and (d) cost and return on investment. We will also generate implementation playbooks for program partners to support scale-up and spread of these and future evidence-based women's health programs and policies.

DISCUSSION

EMPOWER 2.0 provides a model for mixed-methods hybrid type 3 effectiveness-implementation trial design incorporating evaluation of performance metrics, implementation progress, stakeholder experience, and cost and return on investment, with the ultimate goal of improving access to evidence-based preventive and mental telehealth services for women Veterans with high-priority health conditions.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05050266 . Registered on 20 September 2021.

Using ethnographic approaches to document, evaluate, and facilitate virtual community-engaged implementation research

BACKGROUND

Community Advisory Boards (CABs) have been frequently used to engage diverse partners to inform research projects. Yet, evaluating the quality of engagement has not been routine. We describe a multi-method ethnographic approach documenting and assessing partner engagement in two "virtual" CABs, for which we conducted all meetings remotely.

METHODS

Two research projects for increasing equitable COVID-19 testing, vaccination, and clinical trial participation for underserved communities involved remote CAB meetings. Thirty-three partners representing 17 community groups participated in 15 sessions across the two CABs facilitated by a social change organization. We developed ethnographic documentation forms to assess multiple aspects of CAB member engagement (e.g., time spent speaking, modality used, types of interactions). Documenters were trained to observe CAB sub-groups via virtual sessions. Debriefing with the documentation team after CAB meetings supported quality assurance and process refinement. CAB members completed a brief validated survey after each meeting to assess the quality and frequency of engagement. Content and rapid thematic analysis were used to analyze documentation data. Quantitative data were summarized as frequencies and means. Qualitative and quantitative findings were triangulated.

RESULTS

A total of 4,540 interactions were identified across 15 meetings. The most frequent interaction was providing information (44%), followed by responding (37-38%). The quality and frequency of stakeholder engagement were rated favorably (average 4.7 of 5). Most CAB members (96%) reported good/excellent engagement. Specific comments included appreciation for the diversity of perspectives represented by the CAB members and suggestions for improved live interpretation. Debriefing sessions led to several methodological refinements for the documentation process and forms.

CONCLUSION

We highlight key strategies for documenting and assessing community engagement. Our methods allowed for rich ethnographic data collection that refined our work with community partners. We recommend ongoing trainings, including debriefing sessions and routinely reviewed assessment of data to strengthen meaningful community engagement.

The quick pivot: Capturing real world modifications for the re-implementation of an early psychosis program transitioning to virtual delivery

Background

Team-based Early Psychosis Intervention (EPI) services is standard of care for youth with psychosis. The COVID-19 pandemic required most EPI services to mount an unplanned, rapid pivot to virtual delivery, with limited guidance on how to deliver virtual clinical services or whether quality of re-implementation and treatment outcomes would be impacted. We used a structured approach to identify essential modifications for the delivery of core components and explored facilitators and barriers for re-implementation and fidelity of a virtually delivered EPI intervention.

Materials and methods

NAVIGATE is a structured approach to team-based EPI. It provides detailed modules to guide delivery of core components including medication management, psychoeducation and psychotherapies, supported employment/education, and family education. Having initially implemented NAVIGATE at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (CAMH) in 2017, the EPI service transitioned to virtual delivery amid the COVID pandemic. Using a practice profile developed to support implementation, we detailed how core components of NAVIGATE were rapidly modified for virtual delivery as reported in structured group meetings with clinicians. The Framework for Reporting Adaptations and Modifications for Evidence-Based Interventions (FRAME) was used to describe modifications. Fidelity to the EPI standards of care was assessed by the First Episode Psychosis Fidelity Scale (FEPS-FS). Re-implementation barriers and facilitators and subsequent mitigation strategies were explored using structured clinician interviews guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR).

Results

Identified modifications related to the intervention process, context, and training. We identified contextual factors affecting the re-implementation of virtually delivered NAVIGATE and then documented mitigating strategies that addressed these barriers. Findings can inform the implementation of virtual EPI services elsewhere, including guidance on processes, training and technology, and approaches to providing care virtually.

Discussion

This study identified modifications, impacts and mitigations to barriers emerging from rapid, unplanned virtual delivery of EPI services. These findings can support delivery of high-quality virtual services to youth with psychosis when virtual care is indicated.

Optimizing ATTAIN implementation in a federally qualified health center guided by the FRAME-IS

Implementation strategies are methods or techniques used to adopt, implement, and sustain evidence-based practices (EBPs). Implementation strategies are dynamic and may require adaptation to fit implementation contexts, especially in low-resource settings, which are most likely to serve racially and ethnically diverse patients. The framework for reporting adaptations and modifications to evidence-based implementation strategies (FRAME-IS) was used to document adaptations to implementation strategies to inform an optimization pilot of Access to Tailored Autism Integrated Care (ATTAIN; an integrated care model for children with autism and co-occurring mental health needs) in a federally qualified health center (FQHC) near the United States/Mexico border. Quantitative and qualitative data were collected from 36 primary care providers who participated in the initial ATTAIN feasibility pilot to inform adaptations. Adaptations were mapped to the FRAME-IS through an iterative template analysis to inform an optimization pilot at a FQHC 1-year from the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. Four implementation strategies (training and workflow reminders, provider/clinic champions, periodic reflections, and technical assistance) were employed during the feasibility pilot and were adapted for the optimization pilot to fit the needs of the FQHC and service delivery changes prompted by the pandemic. Findings demonstrate the utility of using the FRAME-IS to systematically inform EBP optimization in a FQHC providing care to underserved communities. Findings will inform future research studies implementing integrated mental health models in low-resourced primary care settings. Implementation outcomes and provider perceptions of ATTAIN at the FQHC are also reported. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Perspectives on learning to practice reflexivity while engaging communities in implementation science

Background

As implementation scientists and practitioners engage community members and service users, reflexivity rises as a critical approach for managing power imbalances and effective collaborative work to promote equity. Reflexivity is an approach for acknowledging scientists' own positions, including their understanding and limits of how they view their phenomena of inquiry. We describe our perspective practicing reflexivity as an implementation science team new to community engagement.

Methods

We spent over two years learning principles of Community-Based Participatory Research (CBPR) to inform implementation science and practice, then applied CPBR principles into a new community-academic partnership in August 2020 for and with veterans of the United States Military living in rural Arkansas. We used five methods to practice reflexivity for the first time: identifying positionality, writing fieldnotes, obtaining mentorship on technical aspects, comparing head notes, and consulting reference materials.

Discussion

We found multiple methods for practicing reflexivity to be feasible, although difficult to stay consistent with busy schedules. Fieldnotes especially required commitment and were important not to minimize. Written fieldnotes enabled us to reflect on successes and missteps, funneling into action planning. Head notes allowed emotional catharsis and to generate insights based on each other's perspectives. Referencing books or course modules reminded us of ideal CBPR principles. Discussion with mentors helped us with technical aspects and balancing real-world challenges with ideal CBPR principles. Our methods to practice reflexivity were valuable and directly impacted process and research outcomes. Future training for implementation science and practice might consider reflexivity practice as a core competency.

Getting to implementation: Adaptation of an implementation playbook

Introduction

Implementation strategies supporting the translation of evidence into practice need to be tailored and adapted for maximum effectiveness, yet the field of adapting implementation strategies remains nascent. We aimed to adapt "Getting To Outcomes"® (GTO), a 10-step implementation playbook designed to help community-based organizations plan and evaluate behavioral health programs, into "Getting To Implementation" (GTI) to support the selection, tailoring, and use of implementation strategies in health care settings.

Methods

Our embedded evaluation team partnered with operations, external facilitators, and site implementers to employ participatory methods to co-design and adapt GTO for Veterans Health Administration (VA) outpatient cirrhosis care improvement. The Framework for Reporting Adaptations and Modifications to Evidenced-based Implementation Strategies (FRAME-IS) guided documentation and analysis of changes made pre- and post-implementation of GTI at 12 VA medical centers. Data from multiple sources (interviews, observation, content analysis, and fidelity tracking) were triangulated and analyzed using rapid techniques over a 3-year period.

Results

Adaptations during pre-implementation were planned, proactive, and focused on context and content to improve acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility of the GTI playbook. Modifications during and after implementation were unplanned and reactive, concentrating on adoption, fidelity, and sustainability. All changes were collaboratively developed, fidelity consistent at the level of the facilitator and/or implementer.

Conclusion

GTO was initially adapted to GTI to support health care teams' selection and use of implementation strategies for improving guideline-concordant medical care. GTI required ongoing modification, particularly in steps regarding team building, context assessment, strategy selection, and sustainability due to difficulties with step clarity and progression. This work also highlights the challenges in pragmatic approaches to collecting and synthesizing implementation, fidelity, and adaptation data.

Trial registration

This study was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (Identifier: NCT04178096).

Clinical implementation of suicide risk prediction models in healthcare: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Suicide risk prediction models derived from electronic health records (EHR) are a novel innovation in suicide prevention but there is little evidence to guide their implementation.

METHODS

In this qualitative study, 30 clinicians and 10 health care administrators were interviewed from one health system anticipating implementation of an automated EHR-derived suicide risk prediction model and two health systems piloting different implementation approaches. Site-tailored interview guides focused on respondents' expectations for and experiences with suicide risk prediction models in clinical practice, and suggestions for improving implementation. Interview prompts and content analysis were guided by Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) constructs.

RESULTS

Administrators and clinicians found use of the suicide risk prediction model and the two implementation approaches acceptable. Clinicians desired opportunities for early buy-in, implementation decision-making, and feedback. They wanted to better understand how this manner of risk identification enhanced existing suicide prevention efforts. They also wanted additional training to understand how the model determined risk, particularly after patients they expected to see identified by the model were not flagged at-risk and patients they did not expect to see identified were. Clinicians were concerned about having enough suicide prevention resources for potentially increased demand and about their personal liability; they wanted clear procedures for situations when they could not reach patients or when patients remained at-risk over a sustained period. Suggestions for making risk model workflows more efficient and less burdensome included consolidating suicide risk information in a dedicated module in the EHR and populating risk assessment scores and text in clinical notes.

CONCLUSION

Health systems considering suicide risk model implementation should engage clinicians early in the process to ensure they understand how risk models estimate risk and add value to existing workflows, clarify clinician role expectations, and summarize risk information in a convenient place in the EHR to support high-quality patient care.

Direct Observation Methods: a Practical Guide for Health Researchers

OBJECTIVE

To provide health research teams with a practical, methodologically rigorous guide on how to conduct direct observation.

METHODS

Synthesis of authors' observation-based teaching and research experiences in social sciences and health services research.

RESULTS

This article serves as a guide for making key decisions in studies involving direct observation. Study development begins with determining if observation methods are warranted or feasible. Deciding what and how to observe entails reviewing literature and defining what abstract, theoretically informed concepts look like in practice. Data collection tools help systematically record phenomena of interest. Interdisciplinary teams--that include relevant community members-- increase relevance, rigor and reliability, distribute work, and facilitate scheduling. Piloting systematizes data collection across the team and proactively addresses issues.

CONCLUSION

Observation can elucidate phenomena germane to healthcare research questions by adding unique insights. Careful selection and sampling are critical to rigor. Phenomena like taboo behaviors or rare events are difficult to capture. A thoughtful protocol can preempt Institutional Review Board concerns.

INNOVATION

This novel guide provides a practical adaptation of traditional approaches to observation to meet contemporary healthcare research teams' needs.

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.

Comparing two implementation strategies for implementing and sustaining a case management practice serving homeless-experienced veterans: a protocol for a type 3 hybrid cluster-randomized trial

Background

The Veterans Health Administration (VA) Grant and Per Diem case management “aftercare” program provides 6 months of case management for homeless-experienced veterans (HEVs) undergoing housing transitions. To standardize and improve aftercare services, we will implement critical time intervention (CTI), an evidence-based, structured, and time-limited case management practice. We will use two strategies to support the implementation and sustainment of CTI at 32 aftercare sites, conduct a mixed-methods evaluation of this implementation initiative, and generate a business case analysis and implementation playbook to support the continued spread and sustainment of CTI in aftercare.

Methods

We will use the Replicating Effective Programs (REP) implementation strategy to support CTI implementation at 32 sites selected by our partners. Half (n=16) of these sites will also receive 9 months of external facilitation (EF, enhanced REP). We will conduct a type 3 hybrid cluster-randomized trial to compare the impacts of REP versus enhanced REP. We will cluster potential sites into three implementation cohorts staggered in 9-month intervals. Within each cohort, we will use permuted block randomization to balance key site characteristics among sites receiving REP versus enhanced REP; sites will not be blinded to their assigned strategy. We will use mixed methods to assess the impacts of the implementation strategies. As fidelity to CTI influences its effectiveness, fidelity to CTI is our primary outcome, followed by sustainment, quality metrics, and costs. We hypothesize that enhanced REP will have higher costs than REP alone, but will result in stronger CTI fidelity, sustainment, and quality metrics, leading to a business case for enhanced REP. This work will lead to products that will support our partners in spreading and sustaining CTI in aftercare.

Discussion

Implementing CTI within aftercare holds the potential to enhance HEVs’ housing and health outcomes. Understanding effective strategies to support CTI implementation could assist with a larger CTI roll-out within aftercare and support the implementation of other case management practices within and outside VA.

Trial registration

This project was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov as “Implementing and sustaining Critical Time Intervention in case management programs for homeless-experienced Veterans.” Trial registration NCT05312229, registered April 4, 2022.

Implementation outcomes from a pilot of "Access to Tailored Autism Integrated Care" for children with autism and mental health needs

LAY ABSTRACT

Children with autism frequently experience co-occurring mental health needs. The "Access to Tailored Autism Integrated Care (ATTAIN)" model was co-created with caregivers, pediatric providers, and health care leaders to identify mental health needs and link to mental health care for autistic children. This article describes outcomes from a pilot study of Access to Tailored Autism Integrated Care with 36 pediatric primary care providers from seven clinics within three healthcare systems. Providers participated in an initial Access to Tailored Autism Integrated Care training and received ongoing online support over 4 months with autistic patients ages 4-16 years old. Survey and interview assessments measured provider perceptions of feasibility, acceptability, and intentions to continue using Access to Tailored Autism Integrated Care after the pilot. Providers reported that Access to Tailored Autism Integrated Care was feasible, acceptable, that the initial training was helpful in their implementation but that more specific and tailored implementation support was needed. Results show that Access to Tailored Autism Integrated Care is a promising model to support mental health screening and linkage for children with autism in primary care. Findings provide information on specific areas of the Access to Tailored Autism Integrated Care model that could be benefit from additional refinement to support more widespread use in primary care settings.

Promises and pitfalls in implementation science from the perspective of US-based researchers: learning from a pre-mortem

BACKGROUND

Implementation science is at a sufficiently advanced stage that it is appropriate for the field to reflect on progress thus far in achieving its vision, with a goal of charting a path forward. In this debate, we offer such reflections and report on potential threats that might stymie progress, as well as opportunities to enhance the success and impact of the field, from the perspective of a group of US-based researchers.

MAIN BODY

Ten mid-career extramurally funded US-based researchers completed a "pre-mortem" or a group brainstorming exercise that leverages prospective hindsight to imagine that an event has already occurred and to generate an explanation for it - to reduce the likelihood of a poor outcome. We came to consensus on six key themes related to threats and opportunities for the field: (1) insufficient impact, (2) too much emphasis on being a "legitimate science," (3) re-creation of the evidence-to-practice gap, (4) difficulty balancing accessibility and field coherence, (5) inability to align timelines and priorities with partners, and (6) overly complex implementation strategies and approaches.

CONCLUSION

We submit this debate piece to generate further discussion with other implementation partners as our field continues to develop and evolve. We hope the key opportunities identified will enhance the future of implementation research in the USA and spark discussion across international groups. We will continue to learn with humility about how best to implement with the goal of achieving equitable population health impact at scale.

Methods to improve the translation of evidence-based interventions: A primer on dissemination and implementation science for occupational safety and health researchers and practitioners

Objective

A limited focus on dissemination and implementation (D&I) science has hindered the uptake of evidence-based interventions (EBIs) that reduce workplace morbidity and mortality. D&I science methods can be used in the occupational safety and health (OSH) field to advance the adoption, implementation, and sustainment of EBIs for complex workplaces. These approaches should be responsive to contextual factors, including the needs of partners and beneficiaries (such as employers, employees, and intermediaries).

Methods

By synthesizing seminal literature and texts and leveraging our collective knowledge as D&I science and/or OSH researchers, we developed a D&I science primer for OSH. First, we provide an overview of common D&I terminology and concepts. Second, we describe several key and evolving issues in D&I science: balancing adaptation with intervention fidelity and specifying implementation outcomes and strategies. Next, we review D&I theories, models, and frameworks and offer examples for applying these to OSH research. We also discuss widely used D&I research designs, methods, and measures. Finally, we discuss future directions for D&I science application to OSH and provide resources for further exploration.

Results

We compiled a D&I science primer for OSH appropriate for practitioners and evaluators, especially those newer to the field.

Conclusion

This article fills a gap in the OSH research by providing an overview of D&I science to enhance understanding of key concepts, issues, models, designs, methods and measures for the translation into practice of effective OSH interventions to advance the safety, health and well-being of workers.

Patient expectations of and experiences with a suicide risk identification algorithm in clinical practice

BACKGROUND

Suicide risk prediction models derived from electronic health records (EHR) and insurance claims are a novel innovation in suicide prevention but patient perspectives on their use have been understudied.

METHODS

In this qualitative study, between March and November 2020, 62 patients were interviewed from three health systems: one anticipating implementation of an EHR-derived suicide risk prediction model and two others piloting different implementation approaches. Site-tailored interview guides focused on patients' perceptions of this technology, concerns, and preferences for and experiences with suicide risk prediction model implementation in clinical practice. A constant comparative analytic approach was used to derive themes.

RESULTS

Interview participants were generally supportive of suicide risk prediction models derived from EHR data. Concerns included apprehension about inducing anxiety and suicidal thoughts, or triggering coercive treatment, particularly among those who reported prior negative experiences seeking mental health care. Participants who were engaged in mental health care or case management expected to be asked about their suicide risk and largely appreciated suicide risk conversations, particularly by clinicians comfortable discussing suicidality.

CONCLUSION

Most patients approved of suicide risk models that use EHR data to identify patients at-risk for suicide. As health systems proceed to implement such models, patient-centered care would involve dialogue initiated by clinicians experienced with assessing suicide risk during virtual or in person care encounters. Health systems should proactively monitor for negative consequences that result from risk model implementation to protect patient trust.

Partnered implementation of the veteran sponsorship initiative: protocol for a randomized hybrid type 2 effectiveness-implementation trial

BACKGROUND

The USA is undergoing a suicide epidemic for its youngest Veterans (18-to-34-years-old) as their suicide rate has almost doubled since 2001. Veterans are at the highest risk during their first-year post-discharge, thus creating a "deadly gap." In response, the nation has developed strategies that emphasize a preventive, universal, and public health approach and embrace the value of community interventions. The three-step theory of suicide suggests that community interventions that reduce reintegration difficulties and promote connectedness for Veterans as they transition to civilian life have the greatest likelihood of reducing suicide. Recent research shows that the effectiveness of community interventions can be enhanced when augmented by volunteer and certified sponsors (1-on-1) who actively engage with Veterans, as part of the Veteran Sponsorship Initiative (VSI).

METHOD/DESIGN

The purpose of this randomized hybrid type 2 effectiveness-implementation trial is to evaluate the implementation of the VSI in six cities in Texas in collaboration with the US Departments of Defense, Labor and Veterans Affairs, Texas government, and local stakeholders. Texas is an optimal location for this large-scale implementation as it has the second largest population of these young Veterans and is home to the largest US military installation, Fort Hood. The first aim is to determine the effectiveness of the VSI, as evidenced by measures of reintegration difficulties, health/psychological distress, VA healthcare utilization, connectedness, and suicidal risk. The second aim is to determine the feasibility and potential utility of a stakeholder-engaged plan for implementing the VSI in Texas with the intent of future expansion in more states. The evaluators will use a stepped wedge design with a sequential roll-out to participating cities over time. Participants (n=630) will be enrolled on military installations six months prior to discharge. Implementation efforts will draw upon a bundled implementation strategy that includes strategies such as ongoing training, implementation facilitation, and audit and feedback. Formative and summative evaluations will be guided by the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework and will include interviews with participants and periodic reflections with key stakeholders to longitudinally identify barriers and facilitators to implementation.

DISCUSSION

This evaluation will have important implications for the national implementation of community interventions that address the epidemic of Veteran suicide. Aligned with the Evidence Act, it is the first large-scale implementation of an evidence-based practice that conducts a thorough assessment of TSMVs during the "deadly gap."

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov ID number: NCT05224440 . Registered on 04 February 2022.

Improving screening, treatment, and intervention for unhealthy alcohol use in primary care through clinic, practice-based research network, and health plan partnerships: Protocol of the ANTECEDENT study

Background

Unhealthy alcohol use (UAU) is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in the United States, contributing to 95,000 deaths annually. When offered in primary care, screening, brief intervention, referral to treatment (SBIRT), and medication-assisted treatment for alcohol use disorder (MAUD) can effectively address UAU. However, these interventions are not yet routine in primary care clinics. Therefore, our study evaluates tailored implementation support to increase SBIRT and MAUD in primary care.

Methods

ANTECEDENT is a pragmatic implementation study designed to support 150 primary care clinics in Oregon adopting and optimizing SBIRT and MAUD workflows to address UAU. The study is a partnership between the Oregon Health Authority Transformation Center—state leaders in Medicaid health system transformation—SBIRT Oregon and the Oregon Rural Practice-based Research Network. We recruited clinics providing primary care in Oregon and prioritized reaching clinics that were small to medium in size (<10 providers). All participating clinics receive foundational support (i.e., a baseline assessment, exit assessment, and access to the online SBIRT Oregon materials) and may opt to receive tailored implementation support delivered by a practice facilitator over 12 months. Tailored implementation support is designed to address identified needs and may include health information technology support, peer-to-peer learning, workflow mapping, or expert consultation via academic detailing. The study aims are to 1) engage, recruit, and conduct needs assessments with 150 primary care clinics and their regional Medicaid health plans called Coordinated Care Organizations within the state of Oregon, 2) implement and evaluate the impact of foundational and supplemental implementation support on clinic change in SBIRT and MAUD, and 3) describe how practice facilitators tailor implementation support based on context and personal expertise. Our convergent parallel mixed-methods analysis uses RE-AIM (reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation, maintenance). It is informed by a hybrid of the i-PARIHS (integrated Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services) and the Dynamic Sustainability Framework.

Discussion

This study will explore how primary care clinics implement SBIRT and MAUD in routine practice and how practice facilitators vary implementation support across diverse clinic settings. Findings will inform how to effectively align implementation support to context, advance our understanding of practice facilitator skill development over time, and ultimately improve detection and treatment of UAU across diverse primary care clinics.

Extending analytic methods for economic evaluation in implementation science

Background

Economic evaluations of the implementation of health-related evidence-based interventions (EBIs) are conducted infrequently and, when performed, often use a limited set of quantitative methods to estimate the cost and effectiveness of EBIs. These studies often underestimate the resources required to implement and sustain EBIs in diverse populations and settings, in part due to inadequate scoping of EBI boundaries and underutilization of methods designed to understand the local context. We call for increased use of diverse methods, especially the integration of quantitative and qualitative approaches, for conducting and better using economic evaluations and related insights across all phases of implementation.

Main body

We describe methodological opportunities by implementation phase to develop more comprehensive and context-specific estimates of implementation costs and downstream impacts of EBI implementation, using the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, Sustainment (EPIS) framework. We focus specifically on the implementation of complex interventions, which are often multi-level, resource-intensive, multicomponent, heterogeneous across sites and populations, involve many stakeholders and implementation agents, and change over time with respect to costs and outcomes. Using colorectal cancer (CRC) screening EBIs as examples, we outline several approaches to specifying the “boundaries” of EBI implementation and analyzing implementation costs by phase of implementation. We describe how systems mapping and stakeholder engagement methods can be used to clarify EBI implementation costs and guide data collection—particularly important when EBIs are complex. In addition, we discuss the use of simulation modeling with sensitivity/uncertainty analyses within implementation studies for projecting the health and economic impacts of investment in EBIs. Finally, we describe how these results, enhanced by careful data visualization, can inform selection, adoption, adaptation, and sustainment of EBIs.

Conclusion

Health economists and implementation scientists alike should draw from a larger menu of methods for estimating the costs and outcomes associated with complex EBI implementation and employ these methods across the EPIS phases. Our prior experiences using qualitative and systems approaches in addition to traditional quantitative methods provided rich data for informing decision-making about the value of investing in CRC screening EBIs and long-term planning for these health programs. Future work should consider additional opportunities for mixed-method approaches to economic evaluations.

Addressing chronic pain with Focused Acceptance and Commitment Therapy in integrated primary care: findings from a mixed methods pilot randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Over 100 million Americans have chronic pain and most obtain their treatment in primary care clinics. However, evidence-based behavioral treatments targeting pain-related disability are not typically provided in these settings. Therefore, this study sought to: 1) evaluate implementation of a brief evidence-based treatment, Focused Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (FACT-CP), delivered by an integrated behavioral health consultant (BHC) in primary care; and 2) preliminarily explore primary (self-reported physical disability) and secondary treatment outcomes (chronic pain acceptance and engagement in valued activities).

METHODS

This mixed-methods pilot randomized controlled trial included twenty-six participants with non-cancer chronic pain being treated in primary care (54% women; 46% Hispanic/Latino). Active participants completed a 30-min individual FACT-CP visit followed by 3 weekly 60-min group visits and a booster visit 2 months later. An enhanced treatment as usual (ETAU) control group received 4 handouts about pain management based in cognitive-behavioral science. Follow-up research visits occurred during and after treatment, at 12 weeks (booster visit), and at 6 months. Semi-structured interviews were conducted to collect qualitative data after the last research visit. General linear mixed regression models with repeated measures explored primary and secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

The study design and FACT-CP intervention were feasible and acceptable. Quantitative analyses indicate at 6-month follow-up, self-reported physical disability significantly improved pre-post within the FACT-CP arm (d = 0.64); engagement in valued activities significantly improved within both the FACT-CP (d = 0.70) and ETAU arms (d = 0.51); and chronic pain acceptance was the only outcome significantly different between arms (d = 1.04), increased in the FACT-CP arm and decreased in the ETAU arm. Qualitative data analyses reflected that FACT-CP participants reported acquiring skills for learning to live with pain, consistent with increased chronic pain acceptance.

CONCLUSION

Findings support that FACT-CP was acceptable for patients with chronic pain and feasible for delivery in a primary care setting by a BHC. Results provide preliminary evidence for improved physical functioning after FACT-CP treatment. A larger pragmatic trial is warranted, with a design based on data gathered in this pilot.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

clinicaltrials.gov, NCT04978961 (27/07/2021).

Mailed fecal testing and patient navigation versus usual care to improve rates of colorectal cancer screening and follow-up colonoscopy in rural Medicaid enrollees: a cluster-randomized controlled trial

Background

Screening reduces incidence and mortality from colorectal cancer (CRC), yet US screening rates are low, particularly among Medicaid enrollees in rural communities. We describe a two-phase project, SMARTER CRC, designed to achieve the National Cancer Institute Cancer Moonshot^SM objectives by reducing the burden of CRC on the US population. Specifically, SMARTER CRC aims to test the implementation, effectiveness, and maintenance of a mailed fecal test and patient navigation program to improve rates of CRC screening, follow-up colonoscopy, and referral to care in clinics serving rural Medicaid enrollees.

Methods

Phase I activities in SMARTER CRC include a two-arm cluster-randomized controlled trial of a mailed fecal test and patient navigation program involving three Medicaid health plans and 30 rural primary care practices in Oregon and Idaho; the implementation of the program is supported by training and practice facilitation. Participating clinic units were randomized 1:1 into the intervention or usual care. The intervention combines (1) mailed fecal testing outreach supported by clinics, health plans, and vendors and (2) patient navigation for colonoscopy following an abnormal fecal test result. We will evaluate the effectiveness, implementation, and maintenance of the intervention and track adaptations to the intervention and to implementation strategies, using quantitative and qualitative methods. Our primary effectiveness outcome is receipt of any CRC screening within 6 months of enrollee identification. Our primary implementation outcome is health plan- and clinic-level rates of program delivery, by component (mailed FIT and patient navigation). Trial results will inform phase II activities to scale up the program through partnerships with health plans, primary care clinics, and regional and national organizations that serve rural primary care clinics; scale-up will include webinars, train-the-trainer workshops, and collaborative learning activities.

Discussion

This study will test the implementation, effectiveness, and scale-up of a multi-component mailed fecal testing and patient navigation program to improve CRC screening rates in rural Medicaid enrollees. Our findings may inform approaches for adapting and scaling evidence-based approaches to promote CRC screening participation in underserved populations and settings.

Trial registration

Registered at clinicaltrial.gov (NCT04890054) and at the NCI’s Clinical Trials Reporting Program (CTRP #: NCI-2021-01032) on May 11, 2021.

Qualitative Research Methods in Chronic Disease: Introduction and Opportunities to Promote Health Equity

Public health research that addresses chronic disease has historically underutilized and undervalued qualitative methods. This has limited the field's ability to advance (a) a more in-depth understanding of the factors and processes that shape health behaviors, (b) contextualized explanations of interventions' impacts (e.g., why and how something did or did not work for recipients and systems), and (c) opportunities for building and testing theories. We introduce frameworks and methodological approaches common to qualitative research, discuss how and when to apply them in order to advance health equity, and highlight relevant strengths and challenges. We provide an overview of data collection, sampling, and analysis for qualitative research, and we describe research questions that can be addressed by applying qualitative methods across the continuum of chronic disease research. Finally, we offer recommendations to promote the strategic application of rigorous qualitative methods, with an emphasis on priority areas to enhance health equity across the evidence generation continuum.

Community-Engaged Bidirectional Crisis and Emergency Risk Communication With Immigrant and Refugee Populations During the COVID-19 Pandemic

OBJECTIVES

This study was conducted to assess an intervention that was created by a community-academic partnership to address COVID-19 health inequities. We evaluated a community-engaged bidirectional pandemic crisis and emergency risk communication (CERC) framework with immigrant and refugee populations during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

A 17-year community-engaged research partnership adopted a CERC framework in March 2020 to address COVID-19 prevention, testing, and socioeconomic impacts with immigrant and refugee groups in southeast Minnesota. The partnership used bidirectional communication between communication leaders and their social networks to refine messages, leverage resources, and advise policy makers. We conducted a mixed-methods evaluation for intervention acceptability, feasibility, reach, adaptation, and sustainability through multisource data, including email communications, work group notes, semistructured interviews, and focus groups.

RESULTS

The intervention reached at least 39 000 people in 9 months. It was implemented as intended and perceived efficacy was high. Frequent communication between community and academic partners allowed the team to respond rapidly to concerns and facilitated connection of community members to resources. Framework implementation also led to systems and policy changes to meet the needs of immigrant and refugee populations.

CONCLUSIONS

Community-engaged CERC is feasible and sustainable and can reduce COVID-19 disparities through shared creation and dissemination of public health messages, enhanced connection to existing resources, and incorporation of community perspectives in regional pandemic mitigation policies.

Incorporating patient-reported outcomes into shared decision-making in the management of patients with osteoarthritis of the knee: a hybrid effectiveness-implementation study protocol

INTRODUCTION

Osteoarthritis (OA) is a major clinical and public health concern. The primary surgical treatment of knee OA is total knee replacement (TKR), a procedure that aims to alleviate pain and restore physical function. TKR is expensive, however, and based on professional guidelines, inappropriately performed in up to a third of patients. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) help evaluate treatment options by quantifying health outcomes that matter to patients and can thus inform shared decision-making (SDM) between patients and health professionals.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This is a US-based 2-year, two-site hybrid type 1 study to assess clinical effectiveness and implementation of a machine learning-based patient decision aid (PDA) integrating patient-reported outcomes and clinical variables to support SDM for patients with knee OA considering TKR. Substudy 1: At one study site, a randomised controlled trial is evaluating the clinical effectiveness of the PDA and SDM process on decision quality as measured after the baseline consultation and treatment choice measured 3 and 6 months after the baseline visit among 200 patients with knee OA. Substudy 2: At a second study site, a qualitative assessment using principles of behaviour design and intervention mapping is evaluating the feasibility and acceptability of the PROMs, PDA and SDM process by interviewing seven health professionals and 25 patients before and 25 patients after PDA implementation.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethics approval has been obtained from The University of Texas at Austin Institutional Review Board (protocol number: 2018-11-0042). Informed consent will be obtained from all participants. Study results will be disseminated through conference presentations, publications and professional societies.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04805554.

Mental health screening in pediatric primary care for children with autism

LAY ABSTRACT

Children with autism experience high rates of co-occurring mental health conditions like challenging behaviors and anxiety. However, these co-occurring mental health needs are often not identified when they first become problematic. Pediatricians and their care staff are in a good position to identify mental health needs early and support families to connect to needed services. This study describes a project focused on mental health screening for children with autism in pediatric primary care clinics. Over half of eligible patients were screened using the Pediatric Symptom Checklist-17. Many children with autism had clinically elevated scores, suggesting the need for mental health assessment or services. In particular, children with positive screens had clinical elevations on the challenging behavior and attention subscales of the Pediatric Symptom Checklist-17. This finding is consistent with typical trends in co-occurring challenging behavior presentations in children with autism. Mental health screening in primary care is feasible and offers a promising opportunity to identify co-occurring mental health needs for children with autism early. Screening rates varied between clinics, suggesting tailored to improve routine screening in pediatric primary care for children with autism.