Organizational culture and climate as moderators of enhanced outreach for persons with serious mental illness: results from a cluster-randomized trial of adaptive implementation strategies

How does facilitation in healthcare work? Using mechanism mapping to illuminate the black box of a meta-implementation strategy

BACKGROUND

Healthcare facilitation, an implementation strategy designed to improve the uptake of effective clinical innovations in routine practice, has produced promising yet mixed results in randomized implementation trials and has not been fully researched across different contexts.

OBJECTIVE

Using mechanism mapping, which applies directed acyclic graphs that decompose an effect of interest into hypothesized causal steps and mechanisms, we propose a more concrete description of how healthcare facilitation works to inform its further study as a meta-implementation strategy.

METHODS

Using a modified Delphi consensus process, co-authors developed the mechanistic map based on a three-step process. First, they developed an initial logic model by collectively reviewing the literature and identifying the most relevant studies of healthcare facilitation components and mechanisms to date. Second, they applied the logic model to write vignettes describing how facilitation worked (or did not) based on recent empirical trials that were selected via consensus for inclusion and diversity in contextual settings (US, international sites). Finally, the mechanistic map was created based on the collective findings from the vignettes.

FINDINGS

Theory-based healthcare facilitation components informing the mechanistic map included staff engagement, role clarification, coalition-building through peer experiences and identifying champions, capacity-building through problem solving barriers, and organizational ownership of the implementation process. Across the vignettes, engagement of leaders and practitioners led to increased socialization of the facilitator's role in the organization. This in turn led to clarifying of roles and responsibilities among practitioners and identifying peer experiences led to increased coherence and sense-making of the value of adopting effective innovations. Increased trust develops across leadership and practitioners through expanded capacity in adoption of the effective innovation by identifying opportunities that mitigated barriers to practice change. Finally, these mechanisms led to eventual normalization and ownership of the effective innovation and healthcare facilitation process.

IMPACT

Mapping methodology provides a novel perspective of mechanisms of healthcare facilitation, notably how sensemaking, trust, and normalization contribute to quality improvement. This method may also enable more efficient and impactful hypothesis-testing and application of complex implementation strategies, with high relevance for lower-resourced settings, to inform effective innovation uptake.

Association of organizational culture and climate with variation in the clinical outcomes of collaborative care for maternal depression in community health centers

Background

Organizational factors may help explain variation in the effectiveness of evidence-based clinical innovations through implementation and sustainment. This study tested the relationship between organizational culture and climate and variation in clinical outcomes of the Collaborative Care Model (CoCM) for treatment of maternal depression implemented in community health centers.

Method

Organizational cultures and climates of 10 community health centers providing CoCM for depression among low-income women pregnant or parenting were assessed using the organizational social context (OSC) measure. Three-level hierarchical linear models tested whether variation in culture and climate predicted variation in improvement in depression symptoms from baseline to 6.5-month post-baseline for N = 468 women with care ±1 year of OSC assessment. Depression symptomology was measured using the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9).

Results

After controlling for patient characteristics, case mix, center size, and implementation support, patients served by centers with more proficient cultures improved significantly more from baseline to 6.5-month post-baseline than patients in centers with less proficient cultures (mean improvement = 5.08 vs. 0.14, respectively, p = .020), resulting in a large adjusted effect size of dadj = 0.78. A similar effect was observed for patients served by centers with more functional climates (mean improvement = 5.25 vs. 1.12, p < .044, dadj = 0.65). Growth models indicated that patients from all centers recovered on average after 4 months of care. However, those with more proficient cultures remained stabilized whereas patients served by centers with less proficient cultures deteriorated by 6.5-month post-baseline. A similar pattern was observed for functional climate.

Conclusions

Variation in clinical outcomes for women from historically underserved populations receiving Collaborative Care for maternal depression was associated with the organizational cultures and climates of community health centers. Implementation strategies targeting culture and climate may improve the implementation and effectiveness of integrated behavioral health care for depression.

Repeated measures of implementation variables

It is commonly acknowledged that implementation work is long-term and contextual in nature and often takes years to accomplish. Repeated measures are needed to study the trajectory of implementation variables over time. To be useful in typical practice settings, measures that are relevant, sensitive, consequential, and practical are needed to inform planning and action. If implementation independent variables and implementation dependent variables are to contribute to a science of implementation, then measures that meet these criteria must be established. This exploratory review was undertaken to "see what is being done" to evaluate implementation variables and processes repeatedly in situations where achieving outcomes was the goal (i.e., more likely to be consequential). No judgement was made about the adequacy of the measure (e.g., psychometric properties) in the review. The search process resulted in 32 articles that met the criteria for a repeated measure of an implementation variable. 23 different implementation variables were the subject of repeated measures. The broad spectrum of implementation variables identified in the review included innovation fidelity, sustainability, organization change, and scaling along with training, implementation teams, and implementation fidelity. Given the long-term complexities involved in providing implementation supports to achieve the full and effective use of innovations, repeated measurements of relevant variables are needed to promote a more complete understanding of implementation processes and outcomes. Longitudinal studies employing repeated measures that are relevant, sensitive, consequential, and practical should become common if the complexities involved in implementation are to be understood.

Contextual factors and mechanisms that influence sustainability: a realist evaluation of two scaled, multi-component interventions

Background

In 2012, Alberta Health Services created Strategic Clinical Networks^TM (SCNs) to develop and implement evidence-informed, clinician-led and team-delivered health system improvement in Alberta, Canada. SCNs have had several provincial successes in improving health outcomes. Little research has been done on the sustainability of these evidence-based implementation efforts.

Methods

We conducted a qualitative realist evaluation using a case study approach to identify and explain the contextual factors and mechanisms perceived to influence the sustainability of two provincial SCN evidence-based interventions, a delirium intervention for Critical Care and an Appropriate Use of Antipsychotics (AUA) intervention for Senior’s Health. The context (C) + mechanism (M) = outcome (O) configurations (CMOcs) heuristic guided our research.

Results

We conducted thirty realist interviews in two cases and found four important strategies that facilitated sustainability: Learning collaboratives, audit & feedback, the informal leadership role, and patient stories. These strategies triggered certain mechanisms such as sense-making, understanding value and impact of the intervention, empowerment, and motivation that increased the likelihood of sustainability. For example, informal leaders were often hands-on and influential to front-line staff. Learning collaboratives broke down professional and organizational silos and encouraged collective sharing and learning, motivating participants to continue with the intervention. Continual audit-feedback interventions motivated participants to want to perform and improve on a long-term basis, increasing the likelihood of sustainability of the two multi-component interventions. Patient stories demonstrated the interventions’ impact on patient outcomes, motivating staff to want to continue doing the intervention, and increasing the likelihood of its sustainability.

Conclusions

This research contributes to the field of implementation science, providing evidence on key strategies for sustainability and the underlying causal mechanisms of these strategies that increases the likelihood of sustainability. Identifying causal mechanisms provides evidence on the processes by which implementation strategies operate and lead to sustainability. Future work is needed to evaluate the impact of informal leadership, learning collaboratives, audit-feedback, and patient stories as strategies for sustainability, to generate better guidance on planning sustainable improvements with long term impact.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-021-07214-5.

Effectiveness and Reach of the Primary Palliative Care for Emergency Medicine (PRIM-ER) Pilot Study: a Qualitative Analysis

BACKGROUND

Palliative care interventions in the ED capture high-risk patients at a time of crisis and can dramatically improve patient-centered outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

To understand the facilitators that contributed to the success of the Primary Palliative Care for Emergency Medicine (PRIM-ER) quality improvement pilot intervention.

DESIGN

Effectiveness was evaluated through semi-structured interviews. Reach outcomes were measured by percent of all full-time emergency providers (physicians, physician assistants, nurses) who completed the intervention education components and baseline survey assessing attitudes and knowledge on end-of-life care.

PARTICIPANTS

Emergency medicine providers affiliated with two medical centers (N = 197). Interviews conducted with six key informants at both institutions.

APPROACH

Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using deductive and inductive approaches. Descriptive statistics include reach outcomes and baseline survey results.

KEY RESULTS

Both sites successfully implemented all components of the intervention and achieved a high level (> 75%) of intervention reach. Two themes emerged as facilitators to successful effectiveness facilitators of PRIM-ER: (1) institutional leadership support and (2) leveraging established quality improvement (QI) processes. Institutional support included leveraging leadership with authority to (a) mandate trainings; (b) substitute PRIM-ER education for normally scheduled education; and (c) provide protected time to implement intervention components. Effectiveness was also enhanced by capitalizing on existing QI processes which included (a) leveraging interdisciplinary partnerships and communication plans and (b) monitoring performance improvement data.

CONCLUSIONS

Capitalizing on strong institutional leadership support and established QI processes enhanced the reach and effectiveness of the PRIM-ER pilot. These findings will guide the PRIM-ER researchers in scaling up the intervention in the remaining 33 sites, as well as enhance the planning of other complex quality improvement interventions in clinical settings.

REGISTRATION DETAILS

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03424109; Grant Number: AT009844-01.

Comparative effectiveness of external vs blended facilitation on collaborative care model implementation in slow-implementer community practices

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the comparative effectiveness of external facilitation (EF) vs external + internal facilitation (EF/IF), on uptake of a collaborative chronic care model (CCM) in community practices that were slower to implement under low-level implementation support.

STUDY SETTING

Primary data were collected from 43 community practices in Michigan and Colorado at baseline and for 12 months following randomization.

STUDY DESIGN

Sites that failed to meet a pre-established implementation benchmark after six months of low-level implementation support were randomized to add either EF or EF/IF support for up to 12 months. Key outcomes were change in number of patients receiving the CCM and number of patients receiving a clinically significant dose of the CCM. Moderators' analyses further examined whether comparative effectiveness was dependent on prerandomization adoption, number of providers trained or practice size. Facilitation log data were used for exploratory follow-up analyses.

DATA COLLECTION

Sites reported monthly on number of patients that had received the CCM. Facilitation logs were completed by study EF and site IFs and shared with the study team.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

N = 21 sites were randomized to EF and 22 to EF/IF. Overall, EF/IF practices saw more uptake than EF sites after 12 months (Δ_EF/IF-EF  = 4.4 patients, 95% CI = 1.87-6.87). Moderators' analyses, however, revealed that it was only sites with no prerandomization uptake of the CCM (nonadopter sites) that saw significantly more benefit from EF/IF (Δ_EF/IF-EF  = 9.2 patients, 95% CI: 5.72, 12.63). For sites with prerandomization uptake (adopter sites), EF/IF offered no additional benefit (Δ_EF/IF-EF  = -0.9; 95% CI: -4.40, 2.60). Number of providers trained and practice size were not significant moderators.

CONCLUSIONS

Although stepping up to the more intensive EF/IF did outperform EF overall, its benefit was limited to sites that failed to deliver any CCM under the low-level strategy. Once one or more providers were delivering the CCM, additional on-site personnel did not appear to add value to the implementation effort.

Association of Work Environment With Missed and Rushed Care Tasks Among Care Aides in Nursing Homes

IMPORTANCE

In Canada, approximately 81% of residents of nursing homes live with mild to severe cognitive impairment. Care needs of this population are increasingly complex, but resources, such as staffing, for nursing homes continue to be limited. Staff risk missing or rushing care tasks and interfering with quality of care and life.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the association of work environment with missing and rushing essential care tasks in nursing homes.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This cross-sectional study used survey data collected from a random sample of 93 urban nursing homes in Western Canada, stratified by health region, owner-operator model, and facility size, between May and December 2017. All 5411 eligible care aides were invited to participate, and 4016 care aides agreed and completed structured, computer-assisted interviews in person. Analyses were conducted from July 4, 2018, to February 27, 2019.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Self-reported number of essential care tasks missed (range, 0-8) or rushed (range, 0-7) in the most recent shift. Two-level random intercept hurdle regressions controlled for care aide, care unit, and nursing home characteristics.

RESULTS

Of 4016 care aides, 2757 (68.7%) were 40 years or older, 3574 (89.1%) were women, and 1353 (66.3%) spoke English as an additional language. For their most recent shift, 2306 care aides (57.4%) reported missing at least 1 essential care task and 2628 care aides (65.4%) reported rushing at least 1 essential care task. Care aides on units with more favorable work environments (eg, more effective leadership, better work culture, higher levels of buffering resources) were less likely to miss any care tasks (odds ratio, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.34-1.90; P < .001) and less likely to rush any care task (odds ratio, 1.66; 95% CI, 1.38-1.99; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This study found that rates of missed and rushed essential care in Canadian nursing homes were high and were higher in units with less favorable work environments. This finding suggests that work environment should be added to the list of modifiable factors associated with improving nursing home care, as it may be an important pathway for improving quality of care. Further research is needed to understand associations of missed and rushed care and of improving work environments with outcomes among residents of nursing homes.

RE-AIM Planning and Evaluation Framework: Adapting to New Science and Practice With a 20-Year Review

The RE-AIM planning and evaluation framework was conceptualized two decades ago. As one of the most frequently applied implementation frameworks, RE-AIM has now been cited in over 2,800 publications. This paper describes the application and evolution of RE-AIM as well as lessons learned from its use. RE-AIM has been applied most often in public health and health behavior change research, but increasingly in more diverse content areas and within clinical, community, and corporate settings. We discuss challenges of using RE-AIM while encouraging a more pragmatic use of key dimensions rather than comprehensive applications of all elements. Current foci of RE-AIM include increasing the emphasis on cost and adaptations to programs and expanding the use of qualitative methods to understand "how" and "why" results came about. The framework will continue to evolve to focus on contextual and explanatory factors related to RE-AIM outcomes, package RE-AIM for use by non-researchers, and integrate RE-AIM with other pragmatic and reporting frameworks.