Bugs in the Bed: Addressing the Contradictions of Embedded Science with Agile Implementation Research

Creating demand for unmet needs: Agile Storytelling

Introduction

The translational gap from the discovery of evidence-based solutions to their implementation in healthcare delivery organizations derives from an incorrect assumption that the need for change among executive, administrative, or clinical personnel is the same as the demand for change. For sickle cell disease (SCD), implementation of evidence-based guidelines is often delayed or obstructed due to lack of demand. This challenge allows for the persistence of resource limitations and care delivery models that do not meet the community's unique needs. Agile Storytelling is a process built on the scientific foundations of behavioral economics, complexity science, and network science to create local demand for the implementation of evidence-based solutions.

Methods

Agile Storytelling includes a design phase and a testing phase. The design phase converts the evidence-based solution into a minimally viable story of a hero, a villain, struggle, drama, and a resolution. The testing phase evaluates the effectiveness of the story via a series of storytelling sprints in the target local healthcare delivery organization. The efficacy of Agile Storytelling was tested in an iterative n-of-1 case study design.

Results

Agile Storytelling was used in a large, urban, healthcare system within the United States to facilitate implementation of national SCD best-practice guidelines. After repeated failures attempting to use national and local data regarding the high societal need to hire a SCD-specific social worker, an Agile change conductor using Agile Storytelling was able to create demand for the new position within a week. This decision has ultimately improved patient outcomes and led to the adoption of a specialized collaborative care team for SCD within the health network.

Discussion

Agile Storytelling can lead to structured, effective, and informed storytelling to create local demand within healthcare delivery organizations.

The scope and sustainability of, and data about, utilization of embedded research: qualitative evidence from Latin America and the Caribbean

Objectives

This paper describes and analyzes embedded implementation research and the empirical processes of planning for utilization, strategies to promote utilization and the sustainability of utilization of results from research led by decision-makers in Latin America and the Caribbean.

Methods

This qualitative, descriptive and interpretive study is based on the findings from semistructured interviews with members of teams working under the Embedding Research for the Sustainable Development Goals initiative (2018-2019) as well as their responses to a self-assessment follow-up questionnaire 1 year after the project was completed.

Results

Altogether 13 teams from 11 countries participated in the Initiative. Nine teams had a core team composed of a decision-maker as the principal investigator assisted by a researcher as co-principal investigator. Four teams included more than one co-principal investigator; and in five teams, the originally assigned principal investigator was replaced. There was an interesting relationship between the expected utilization of research results, the utilization strategies, the sustainability of research uptake and the teams' collaboration modalities. When decision-makers and co-principal investigators were active participants, the intention to use the results and strategies for utilization were clearly oriented to improve implementation. In teams with basically a formal collaboration between the two principals, plans for utilization were unclear or focused on producing academic knowledge. The participation of implementers below the rank of principal investigator decision-maker may be relevant.

Conclusions

Embedded implementation research is an innovative tool that may foster the utilization of research and strengthen health programs and services. Considering the internal dynamics of such research teams will enhance planning and strategies for research utilization as well as the sustainability of practical and actionable findings.

Use of implementation science to advance family planning programs in low- and middle-income countries: A systematic review

Objective

As environmental and economic pressures converge with demands to achieve sustainability development goals, low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) increasingly require strategies to strengthen and scale-up evidence-based practices (EBP) related to family planning (FP). Implementation science (IS) can help these efforts. The purpose of this article is to elucidate patterns in the use of IS in FP research and identify ways to maximize the potential of IS to advance FP in LMIC.

Design and methods

We conducted a systematic review that describes how IS concepts and principles have been operationalized in LMIC FP research published from 2007-2021. We searched six databases for implementation studies of LMIC FP interventions. Our review synthesizes the characteristics of implementation strategies and research efforts used to enhance the performance of FP-related EBP in these settings, identifying gaps, strengths and lessons learned.

Results

Four-hundred and seventy-two studies were eligible for full-text review. Ninety-two percent of studies were carried out in one region only, whereas 8 percent were multi-country studies that took place across multiple regions. 37 percent of studies were conducted in East Africa, 21 percent in West and Central Africa, 19 percent in Southern Africa and South Asia, respectively, and fewer than 5 percent in other Asian countries, Latin America and Middle East and North Africa, respectively. Fifty-four percent were on strategies that promoted individuals' uptake of FP. Far fewer were on strategies to enhance the coverage, implementation, spread or sustainability of FP programs. Most studies used quantitative methods only and evaluated user-level outcomes over implementation outcomes. Thirty percent measured processes and outcomes of strategies, 15 percent measured changes in implementation outcomes, and 31 percent report on the effect of contextual factors. Eighteen percent reported that they were situated within decision-making processes to address locally identified implementation issues. Fourteen percent of studies described measures to involve stakeholders in the research process. Only 7 percent of studies reported that implementation was led by LMIC delivery systems or implementation partners.

Conclusions

IS has potential to further advance LMIC FP programs, although its impact will be limited unless its concepts and principles are incorporated more systematically. To support this, stakeholders must focus on strategies that address a wider range of implementation outcomes; adapt research designs and blend methods to evaluate outcomes and processes; and establish collaborative research efforts across implementation, policy, and research domains. Doing so will expand opportunities for learning and applying new knowledge in pragmatic research paradigms where research is embedded in usual implementation conditions and addresses critical issues such as scale up and sustainability of evidence-informed FP interventions.Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier: CRD42020199353.

African Health Initiative Partnership Collaborative for Supportive Supervision and Mentoring. Improving Primary Care Quality Through Supportive Supervision and Mentoring: Lessons From the African Health Initiative in Ethiopia, Ghana, and Mozambique

Systematic approaches to positioning technical support, enhancing systems, and promoting sustainment are crucial to strengthening supportive supervision and mentoring in primary health care systems. The African Health Initiative projects in Ethiopia, Ghana, and Mozambique have lessons to share from such experiences that stakeholders can apply to similar efforts in other countries.

Introduction:

Supportive supervision and mentoring (SSM) is crucial to primary care quality and effectiveness. Yet, there is little clarity on how to design and implement SSM and make it sustainable in primary health care (PHC) systems. The 3 African Health Initiative partnership projects introduced strategies to do this in Ethiopia, Ghana, and Mozambique. We describe: (1) how each partnership adapted SSM implementation strategies, (2) the dynamics of implementation and change that ensued after intervening within PHC systems, and (3) insights on the SSM sustainability as a mainstay of PHC.

Methods:

Researchers from each project collaboratively wrote a cross-country protocol based on those objectives. For this, they adapted implementation science frameworks—the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, and Sustainment model and the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research—through a qualitative theme reduction process. This resulted in harmonized lines of inquiry on the design, implementation, and potential sustainability of each project’s SSM strategy. In-depth interviews and focus group discussions were conducted with stakeholders from PHC systems in each country and thematic analyses ensued.

Results:

Across the projects, SSM strategies acquired multiple components to address individual, systems, and process-related determinants. Benefits arose from efforts that addressed worker-level attitudes and barriers, promoted a wider learning environment, and enhanced collaborative structures and tools for monitoring performance. Peer exchanges and embedded implementation research were critical to the perceived effectiveness of SSM strategies.

Discussion:

Despite differences in their approach to SSM implementation, there are common crucial ingredients across the SSM strategies of the 3 AHI partner projects from which important lessons arise: (1) positioning learning and adaptation opportunities within the routine workings of PHC systems, facilitation, and technical support to reflect and utilize new knowledge; (2) multisectoral collaboration, particularly with academic organizations; and (3) building PHC decision-makers’ and implementation teams’ capacity for evidence-informed change.