Participatory implementation science to increase the impact of evidence-based cancer prevention and control

Organizing the dissemination and implementation field: who are we, what are we doing, and how should we do it?

Two decades into its tenure as a field, dissemination and implementation (D&I) scientists have begun a process of self-reflection, illuminating a missed opportunity to bridge the gap between research and practice-one of the field's foundational objectives. In this paper, we, the authors, assert the research-to-practice gap has persisted, in part due to an inadequate characterization of roles, functions, and processes within D&I. We aim to address this issue, and the rising tension between D&I researchers and practitioners, by proposing a community-centered path forward that is grounded in equity.We identify key players within the field and characterize their unique roles using the translational science spectrum, a model originally developed in the biomedical sciences to help streamline the research-to-practice process, as a guide. We argue that the full translational science spectrum, from basic science research, or "T0," to translation to community, or "T4," readily applies within D&I and that in using this framework to clarify roles, functions, and processes within the field, we can facilitate greater collaboration and respect across the entire D&I research-to-practice continuum. We also highlight distinct opportunities (e.g., changes to D&I scientific conference structures) to increase regular communication and engagement between individuals whose work sits at different points along the D&I translational science spectrum that can accelerate our efforts to close the research-to-practice gap and achieve the field's foundational objectives.

Family cascade screening for equitable identification of familial hypercholesterolemia: study protocol for a hybrid effectiveness-implementation type III randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) is a heritable disorder affecting 1.3 million individuals in the USA. Eighty percent of people with FH are undiagnosed, particularly minoritized populations including Black or African American people, Asian or Asian American people, and women across racial groups. Family cascade screening is an evidence-based practice that can increase diagnosis and improve health outcomes but is rarely implemented in routine practice, representing an important care gap. In pilot work, we leveraged best practices from behavioral economics and implementation science-including mixed-methods contextual inquiry with clinicians, patients, and health system constituents-to co-design two patient-facing implementation strategies to address this care gap: (a) an automated health system-mediated strategy and (b) a nonprofit foundation-mediated strategy with contact from a foundation-employed care navigator. This trial will test the comparative effectiveness of these strategies on completion of cascade screening for relatives of individuals with FH, centering equitable reach.

METHODS

We will conduct a hybrid effectiveness-implementation type III randomized controlled trial testing the comparative effectiveness of two strategies for implementing cascade screening with 220 individuals with FH (i.e., probands) per arm identified from a large northeastern health system. The primary implementation outcome is reach, or the proportion of probands with at least one first-degree biological relative (parent, sibling, child) in the USA who is screened for FH through the study. Our secondary implementation outcomes include the number of relatives screened and the number of relatives meeting the American Heart Association criteria for FH. Our secondary clinical effectiveness outcome is post-trial proband cholesterol level. We will also use mixed methods to identify implementation strategy mechanisms for implementation strategy effectiveness while centering equity.

DISCUSSION

We will test two patient-facing implementation strategies harnessing insights from behavioral economics that were developed collaboratively with constituents. This trial will improve our understanding of how to implement evidence-based cascade screening for FH, which implementation strategies work, for whom, and why. Learnings from this trial can be used to equitably scale cascade screening programs for FH nationally and inform cascade screening implementation efforts for other genetic disorders.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05750667. Registered 15 February 2023-retrospectively registered, https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05750667 .

Implementation of new technologies designed to improve cervical cancer screening and completion of care in low-resource settings: a case study from the Proyecto Precancer

BACKGROUND

This case study details the experience of the Proyecto Precancer in applying the Integrative Systems Praxis for Implementation Research (INSPIRE) methodology to guide the co-development, planning, implementation, adoption, and sustainment of new technologies and screening practices in a cervical cancer screening and management (CCSM) program in the Peruvian Amazon. We briefly describe the theoretical grounding of the INSPIRE framework, the phases of the INSPIRE process, the activities within each phase, and the RE-AIM outcomes used to evaluate program outcomes.

METHODS

Proyecto Precancer iteratively engaged over 90 stakeholders in the Micro Red Iquitos Sur (MRIS) health network in the Amazonian region of Loreto, Perú, through the INSPIRE phases. INSPIRE is an integrative research methodology grounded in systems thinking, participatory action research, and implementation science frameworks such as the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. An interrupted time-series design with a mixed-methods RE-AIM (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance) evaluation framework was used to examine the adoption of human papillomavirus (HPV) testing (including self-sampling), with direct treatment after visual inspection with portable thermal ablation, at the primary level.

RESULTS

This approach, blending participatory action research, implementation science, and systems-thinking, led to rapid adoption and successful implementation of the new cervical cancer screening and management program within 6 months, using an HPV-based screen-and-treat strategy across 17 health facilities in one of the largest public health networks of the Peruvian Amazon. Monitoring and evaluation data revealed that, within 6 months, the MRIS had surpassed their monthly screening goals, tripling their original screening rate, with approximately 70% of HPV-positive women reaching a completion of care endpoint, compared with around 30% prior to the new CCSM strategy.

CONCLUSIONS

Proyecto Precancer facilitated the adoption and sustainment of HPV testing with subsequent treatment of HPV-positive women (after visual inspection) using portable thermal ablation at the primary level. This was accompanied by the de-implementation of existing visual inspection-based screening strategies and colposcopy for routine precancer triage at the hospital level. This case study highlights how implementation science approaches were used to guide the sustained adoption of a new screen-and-treat strategy in the Peruvian Amazon, while facilitating de-implementation of older screening practices.

Motivations for investigating health inequities in observational epidemiology: a content analysis of 320 studies

OBJECTIVES

To enhance equity in clinical and epidemiological research, it is crucial to understand researcher motivations for conducting equity-relevant studies. Therefore, we evaluated author motivations in a randomly selected sample of equity-relevant observational studies published during the COVID-19 pandemic.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

We searched MEDLINE for studies from 2020 to 2022, resulting in 16,828 references. We randomly selected 320 studies purposefully sampled across income setting (high vs low-middle-income), COVID-19 topic (vs non-COVID-19), and focus on populations experiencing inequities. Of those, 206 explicitly mentioned motivations which we analyzed thematically. We used discourse analysis to investigate the reasons behind emerging motivations.

RESULTS

We identified the following motivations: (1) examining health disparities, (2) tackling social determinants to improve access, and (3) addressing knowledge gaps in health equity. Discourse analysis showed motivations stem from commitments to social justice and recognizing the importance of highlighting it in research. Other discourses included aspiring to improve health-care efficiency, wanting to understand cause-effect relationships, and seeking to contribute to an equitable evidence base.

CONCLUSION

Understanding researchers' motivations for assessing health equity can aid in developing guidance that tailors to their needs. We will consider these motivations in developing and sharing equity guidance to better meet researchers' needs.

Implementation science for cancer control: One center's experience addressing context, adaptation, equity, and sustainment

Implementation science (IS) has great potential to enhance the frequency, speed, and quality of the translation of evidence-based programs, policies, products, and guidelines into practice. Progress has been made, but with some notable exceptions, this promise has not been achieved for cancer prevention and control. We discuss five interrelated but conceptually distinct, crosscutting issues important to accelerate IS for cancer prevention and control and how our Colorado Implementation Science Center in Cancer Control (COISC3) addressed these issues. These needs and opportunities include more fully addressing changing, multi-level context; guiding rapid, iterative adaptations; evaluating innovative approaches to engagement and health equity; greater attention to costs and economic issues; and sustainability. We summarize conceptual issues; evaluation needs and capacity building activities and then provide examples of how our IS center addressed these five needs for cancer prevention and control. We discuss changes made to address priorities of (i) guiding adaptations of implementation strategies to address changing context and (ii) working on issues identified and prioritized by our primary care partners rather than the research team. We conclude with discussion of lessons learned, limitations, and directions for future research and practice in IS to enhance cancer prevention and control as well as translational behavioral medicine more generally.

Influencing factors for the implementation of school-based interventions promoting obesity prevention behaviors in children with low socioeconomic status: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Health inequity (HI) remains a major challenge in public health. Improving the health of children with low socioeconomic status (SES) can help to reduce overall HI in children. Childhood obesity is a global problem, entailing several adverse health effects. It is crucial to assess the influencing factors for adoption, implementation, and sustainment of interventions. This review aims to identify articles reporting about influencing factors for the implementation of school-based interventions promoting obesity prevention behaviors in children with low SES. It aims to critically appraise the articles' quality, assess influencing factors, categorize and evaluate them, and to discuss possible implications.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted in 7 databases with the following main inclusion criteria: (1) school-based interventions and (2) target group aged 5-14 years. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, its five domains (intervention characteristics, inner setting, outer setting, characteristics of individuals, process) along with 39 categories within these domains were used as deductive category system for data analysis. We grouped the articles with regard to the characteristics of the interventions in simple and complex interventions. For each domain, and for the groups of simple and complex interventions, the most commonly reported influencing factors are identified.

RESULTS

In total, 8111 articles were screened, and 17 met all eligibility criteria. Included articles applied mixed methods (n=11), qualitative (n=5), and quantitative design (n=1). Of these, six were considered to report simple interventions and eleven were considered to report complex interventions. In total, 301 influencing factors were assessed. Aspects of the inner setting were reported in every study, aspects of the outer setting were the least reported domain. In the inner setting, most reported influencing factors were time (n=8), scheduling (n=6), and communication (n=6).

CONCLUSION

This review found a wide range of influencing factors for implementation and contributes to existing literature regarding health equity as well as implementation science. Including all stakeholders involved in the implementation process and assessing the most important influencing factors in the specific setting, could enhance implementation and intervention effectiveness. More empirical research and practical guidance are needed to promote obesity prevention behaviors among children with low SES.

REGISTRATION

CRD42021281209 (PROSPERO).

Challenges and promising solutions to engaging patients in healthcare implementation in the United States: an environmental scan

BACKGROUND

One practice in healthcare implementation is patient engagement in quality improvement and systems redesign. Implementers in healthcare systems include clinical leadership, middle managers, quality improvement personnel, and others facilitating changes or adoption of new interventions. Patients provide input into different aspects of health research. However, there is little attention to involve patients in implementing interventions, especially in the United States (U.S.), and this might be essential to reduce inequities. Implementers need clear strategies to overcome challenges, and might be able to learn from countries outside the U.S.

METHODS

We wanted to understand existing work about how patients are being included in implementation activities in real world U.S. healthcare settings. We conducted an environmental scan of three data sources: webinars, published articles, and interviews with implementers who engaged patients in implementation activities in U.S. healthcare settings. We extracted, categorized, and triangulated from data sources the key activities, recurring challenges, and promising solutions using a coding template.

RESULTS

We found 27 examples of patient engagement in U.S. healthcare implementation across four webinars, 11 published articles, and seven interviews, mostly arranging patient engagement through groups and arranging processes for patients that changed how engaged they were able to be. Participants rarely specified if they were engaging a population experiencing healthcare inequities. Participants described eight recurring challenges; the two most frequently identified were: (1) recruiting patients representative of those served in the healthcare system; and (2) ensuring processes for equitable communication among all. We matched recurring challenges to promising solutions, such as logistic solutions on how to arrange meetings to enhance engagement or training in inclusivity and power-sharing.

CONCLUSION

We clarified how some U.S. implementers are engaging patients in healthcare implementation activities using less and more intensive engagement. It was unclear whether reducing inequities was a goal. Patient engagement in redesigning U.S. healthcare service delivery appears similar to or less intense than in countries with more robust infrastructure for this, such as Canada and the United Kingdom. Challenges were common across jurisdictions, including retaining patients in the design/delivery of implementation activities. Implementers in any region can learn from those in other places.

Engaging with Rural Communities for Colorectal Cancer Screening Outreach Using Modified Boot Camp Translation

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and mortality are disproportionately high among rural residents and Medicaid enrollees.

OBJECTIVES

To address disparities, we used a modified community engagement approach, Boot Camp Translation (BCT). Research partners, an advisory board, and the rural community informed messaging about CRC outreach and a mailed fecal immunochemical test program.

METHODS

Eligible rural patients (English-speaking and ages 50-74) and clinic staff involved in patient outreach participated in a BCT conducted virtually over two months. We applied qualitative analysis to BCT transcripts and field notes.

RESULTS

Key themes included: the importance of directly communicating about the seriousness of cancer, leveraging close clinic-patient relationships, and communicating the test safety, ease, and low cost.

CONCLUSIONS

Using a modified version of BCT delivered in a virtual format, we were able to successfully capture community input to adapt a CRC outreach program for use in rural settings. Program materials will be tested during a pragmatic trial to address rural CRC screening disparities.

Symptom Science in Kidney Disease

Physical and emotional symptoms are highly prevalent among patients with kidney disease and are directly linked to impaired health-related quality of life. Symptom science is a field of research aimed at advancing knowledge of the holistic mechanisms driving symptoms, how best to assess symptoms accurately, and developing novel and patient-centered approaches to symptom management. Patients with kidney disease have identified symptom science as a top research priority, and opportunities abound for ongoing patient engagement in symptom-related research efforts and clinical care. This review describes the burden of symptoms experienced by patients with kidney disease, explores the spectrum of patient engagement in symptom care and research, and discusses approaches for symptom assessment and management, taking into consideration the multitude of factors that may contribute to symptoms.

Implementing interventions to start HPV vaccination at age 9: Using the evidence we have

Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination is routinely recommended for adolescents aged 11 or 12 years but can begin at age 9. On-time HPV vaccination by the thirteenth birthday has proven to be effective in preventing HPV cancer and pre-cancer. However, HPV coverage rates continue to lag behind other routinely recommended vaccinations for adolescents. A promising approach to improving coverage is to start HPV vaccination at age 9. This approach has been endorsed by the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Cancer Society. Benefits of this approach include increased time to complete vaccination series by the thirteenth birthday, additional spacing of recommended vaccines, and a more concentrated focus on cancer prevention messaging. While promising, little is known about how and if existing evidence-based interventions and approaches can be used to promote starting HPV vaccination at age 9. Implementation science frameworks offer scientific direction in how to adapt current and develop new interventions to promote starting HPV vaccination at age 9 and accelerate dissemination and prevent HPV cancers.

Community Engagement in Behavioral Medicine: A Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

Behavioral medicine has made key contributions toward improving health outcomes. Engaging community partners in research is critical to addressing persistent health inequities. The aim of this scoping review was to explore how researchers engaged community partners within the field of behavioral medicine research from 2005 to 2023.

METHOD

Publication databases and gray literature were searched for research that engaged community partners to address questions relevant to behavioral medicine. Articles were screened by title and abstract, and then by full text. Articles meeting the inclusion criteria were coded using the framework provided by the Engagement Navigator to identify engagement approaches, methods, and tools and when they were used during the research.

RESULTS

Of 1486 articles initially identified, 58 met the inclusion criteria. Most articles used well-known approaches (e.g., community-based participatory research; 67%), methods (e.g., advisory committees; 59%), and tools (e.g., interviews; 41%), and engaged with healthcare service providers (62%) and/or patients (53%). Community partners were most often included in research planning and design (79%), and less often in dissemination (45%).

CONCLUSION

Community engagement has considerable potential to address health inequities. Our assessment of the approaches, methods, and tools used by behavioral medicine researchers to engage with a diverse range of community partners points toward promising strategies for enhancing the impact of community engagement. Researchers should incorporate explicit descriptions of community engagement strategies in publications, an outcome that could be facilitated by clear publishing guidelines, structured reporting tools, and clear messaging from funders about the value of community engagement in behavioral medicine research.

"Easy women get it": pre-existing stigma associated with HPV and cervical cancer in a low-resource setting prior to implementation of an HPV screen-and-treat program

BACKGROUND

Cervical cancer is preventable with vaccination and early detection and treatment programs. However, for these programs to work as intended, stigma related to HPV and cervical cancer must be understood and addressed. We explored pre-existing stigma associated with HPV and cervical cancer in the public healthcare system and community of a low-resource setting prior to implementation of an HPV screen-and-treat program.

METHODS

This study conducted thematic analysis of data collected during implementation of a novel HPV screen-and-treat system for cervical cancer early detection and treatment in Iquitos, Peru. We included 35 semi-structured interviews (19 health professionals, 16 women with cervical precancer or cancer), eight focus groups (70 community women), one workshop (14 health professionals), 210 counseling observations (with 20 nurse-midwives), and a document review. We used the Socio-Ecological Model to organize the analysis.

RESULTS

We identified three main themes: 1. the implication that women are to blame for their HPV infection through characterizations of being easy or promiscuous, 2. the implication that men are to blame for women's HPV infections through being considered careless or unfaithful, 3. HPV is shameful, embarrassing, and something that should be hidden from others. Consequently, in some cases, women refrained from getting screened for HPV. These themes were seen at the individual level among women, relationship level among women, men, and family members, community level among healthcare staff, and societal level within components of cervical cancer guidelines and male chauvinism.

CONCLUSIONS

Cervical cancer early detection and treatment programs in limited resource settings must address stigma entrenched throughout the entire healthcare system and community in order to sustainably and successfully implement and scale-up new programs. Interventions to tackle this stigma can incorporate messages about HPV infections and latency to lessen the focus on the influence of sexual behavior on HPV acquisition, and instead, promote screening and treatment as paramount preventative measures.

Twenty years of capacity building across the cancer prevention and control research network

PURPOSE

To improve population health, community members need capacity (i.e., knowledge, skills, and tools) to select and implement evidence-based interventions (EBIs) to fit the needs of their local settings. Since 2002, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has funded the national Cancer Prevention and Control Research Network (CPCRN) to accelerate the implementation of cancer prevention and control EBIs in communities. The CPCRN has developed multiple strategies to build community members' capacity to implement EBIs. This paper describes the history of CPCRN's experience developing and lessons learned through the use of five capacity-building strategies: (1) mini-grant programs, (2) training, (3) online tools, (4) evidence academies, and (5) evaluation support for partners' capacity-building initiatives.

METHODS

We conducted a narrative review of peer-reviewed publications and grey literature reports on CPCRN capacity-building activities. Guided by the Interactive Systems Framework, we developed histories, case studies, and lessons learned for each strategy. Lessons were organized into themes.

RESULTS

Three themes emerged: the importance of (1) community-engagement prior to and during implementation of capacity-building strategies, (2) establishing and sustaining partnerships, and (3) co-learning at the levels of centers, networks, and beyond.

CONCLUSION

CPCRN activities have increased the ability of community organizations to compete for external funds to support implementation, increased the use of evidence in real-world settings, and promoted the broad-scale implementation of cancer control interventions across more than eight states. Lessons from this narrative review highlight the value of long-term thematic networks and provide useful guidance to other research networks and future capacity-building efforts.

Enhancing Impact: A Call to Action for Equitable Implementation Science

Despite investments in evidence-based interventions and Implementation Science, most evidence-based interventions are not widely or routinely adopted, delivered, or sustained in many real-world community and healthcare settings. This gap is even greater in settings and populations experiencing numerous social and structural barriers to health, with important implications for persistent patterns in health inequities. In this Viewpoint, as part of a Special Issue on Advancing the Adaptability of Chronic Disease Prevention and Management through Implementation Science, we outline seven calls to action for the field of Implementation Science, with the goal of encouraging researchers, practitioners, and funders to be more intentional and accountable in applying Implementation Science to have greater impact on promoting health equity. Calls to action include (1) enhance public health, community, and multi-sectoral partnerships to promote health equity and equitable implementation; (2) revisit and build the evidence base needed to promote health equity and impact at multiple levels; (3) prioritize focus on policy development, dissemination, and implementation; (4) be agile and responsive in application of Implementation Science frameworks, processes, and methods; (5) identify and redefine meaningful metrics for equity and impact; (6) disseminate scientific evidence and research to a diverse range of partners and potential beneficiaries; and (7) extend focus on de-implementation, mis-implementation, and sustainability which are central to enhancing health equity. Additionally, we outline why a focus on prevention and public health is essential to making progress towards health equity in Implementation Science, summarize important advancements that the field has made towards making equity more foundational, and pose important research questions to enhance equitable impact of work in this area.

A scoping review of equity-focused implementation theories, models and frameworks in healthcare and their application in addressing ethnicity-related health inequities

BACKGROUND

Inequities in implementation contribute to the unequal benefit of health interventions between groups of people with differing levels of advantage in society. Implementation science theories, models and frameworks (TMFs) provide a theoretical basis for understanding the multi-level factors that influence implementation outcomes and are used to guide implementation processes. This study aimed to identify and analyse TMFs that have an equity focus or have been used to implement interventions in populations who experience ethnicity or 'race'-related health inequities.

METHODS

A scoping review was conducted to identify the relevant literature published from January 2011 to April 2022 by searching electronic databases (MEDLINE and CINAHL), the Dissemination and Implementation model database, hand-searching key journals and searching the reference lists and citations of studies that met the inclusion criteria. Titles, abstracts and full-text articles were screened independently by at least two researchers. Data were extracted from studies meeting the inclusion criteria, including the study characteristics, TMF description and operationalisation. TMFs were categorised as determinant frameworks, classic theories, implementation theories, process models and evaluation frameworks according to their overarching aim and described with respect to how equity and system-level factors influencing implementation were incorporated.

RESULTS

Database searches yielded 610 results, 70 of which were eligible for full-text review, and 18 met the inclusion criteria. A further eight publications were identified from additional sources. In total, 26 papers describing 15 TMFs and their operationalisation were included. Categorisation resulted in four determinant frameworks, one implementation theory, six process models and three evaluation frameworks. One framework included elements of determinant, process and evaluation TMFs and was therefore classified as a 'hybrid' framework. TMFs varied in their equity and systems focus. Twelve TMFs had an equity focus and three were established TMFs applied in an equity context. All TMFs at least partially considered systems-level factors, with five fully considering macro-, meso- and micro-level influences on equity and implementation.

CONCLUSIONS

This scoping review identifies and summarises the implementation science TMFs available to support equity-focused implementation. This review may be used as a resource to guide TMF selection and illustrate how TMFs have been utilised in equity-focused implementation activities.

Making the connection between health equity and sustainability

Sustainability and health inequities are key challenges in public health and healthcare. Research suggests that only about half of evidence-based interventions (EBIs) are sustained over time, and settings and populations experiencing systemic and structural barriers to health (e.g., poverty, racism, stigma, and discrimination) experience even greater challenges to sustainability. In this article, we argue that an enhanced focus on sustainability in the field of implementation science is critical in order to maximize the long-term health benefits and broader societal impacts of EBIs for all populations and settings. From an equity perspective, a focus on sustainability is particularly critical to prioritize among population sub-groups that have not historically received the benefits of health-related EBIs. We discuss how a health equity framing is essential to sustaining EBIs in under-resourced communities, and requires moving away from a deficit mindset that focuses on why EBIs are challenging to sustain, to one that focuses more on identifying and nurturing existing assets within individuals and communities to increase the likelihood that EBIs are sustained. We conclude with a discussion of future directions as well as recommendations and resources (e.g., frameworks, tools) to advance and make progress toward sustainability from a health equity mindset, including: (1) Actively planning early for sustainability alongside key partners; (2) Tracking progress toward enhancing sustainability and being accountable in doing so equitably for all settings and populations; and (3) Focusing on both equity and engagement early and often throughout the research process and all implementation phases.

"Easy women get it": Pre-existing stigma associated with HPV and cervical cancer in a low-resource setting prior to implementation of an HPV screen-and-treat program

Background

Cervical cancer is preventable with vaccination and early detection and treatment programs. However, in order for these programs to work as intended, stigma related to HPV and cervical cancer must be understood and addressed. We explored pre-existing stigma associated with HPV and cervical cancer in the public healthcare system of a low-resource setting prior to implementation of an HPV screen-and-treat program.

Methods

This study conducted thematic analysis of data collected during implementation of a novel HPV screen-and-treat system for cervical cancer early detection and treatment in Iquitos, Peru. We included 35 semi-structured interviews (19 health professionals, 16 women with cervical precancer or cancer), eight focus groups (70 community women), one workshop (14 health professionals), 210 counseling observations (with 20 nurse-midwives), and a document review. We used the Socio-Ecological Model to organize the analysis.

Results

We identified three main themes: 1. the implication that women are to blame for their HPV infection through characterizations of being easy or promiscuous, 2. the implication that men are to blame for women's HPV infections through being considered careless or unfaithful, 3. HPV is shameful, embarrassing, and something that should be hidden from others. Consequently, in some cases, women refrained from getting screened for HPV. These themes were seen at the individual level among women, relationship level among women, men, and family members, community level among healthcare staff, and societal level within components of cervical cancer guidelines and male chauvinism.

Conclusions

Cervical cancer early detection and treatment programs in limited resource settings must address stigma entrenched throughout the entire healthcare system in order to sustainably and successfully implement and scale-up new programs. Interventions to tackle this stigma can incorporate messages about HPV infections and latency to lessen the focus on the influence of sexual behavior on HPV acquisition, and instead, promote screening and treatment as paramount preventative measures.

Parenting and Lead Mitigation at Home: A Multifaceted Community Partnership Model Promoting Parent Engagement in Lead Exposure Prevention

Young children are at high risk of lead poisoning, which can damage early cognitive and behavioral development and have long-lasting impacts. Home environments are persistent sources of exposure for children in urban, low-income settings. Community-academic partnerships are essential for public health intervention strategies addressing residential household lead exposure, yet community organization staff and home visitors often experience strain and burnout. We describe Parenting and Lead Mitigation at Home, a multifaceted partnership project to (a) develop and implement a community-based, peer-delivered education program for parents of young children in neighborhoods at risk for home lead exposure and (b) support the home visitors delivering programming. We developed, delivered, and initially evaluated Lead 101, a lead-exposure prevention curriculum informed by the Community Organizing and Family Issues (COFI) model. The goals were to educate parents around lead exposure risks and empower parents to reduce their child's risk. We developed a novel Reflective Practice pilot curriculum designed to provide emotional support to peer educators and community organization staff who delivered home-based programming. We trained 11 peer educators who delivered Lead 101 to 62 families. We pilot-tested the Reflective Practice curriculum with five community organization staff. The implementation process and pilot evaluation data suggest increased parent knowledge and self-efficacy regarding mitigation of home-based lead hazards, and high satisfaction with reflective practice. Using this model to develop multifaceted partnerships among universities, community-based organizations, and focal communities may facilitate community-engaged program development for families and systematic support for individuals working directly with families, thereby indirectly promoting child health and well-being.

"Just because I have a medical degree does not mean I have the answers": Using CBPR to enhance patient-centered care within a primary care setting

Patient-centered care (PCC) is a health care delivery model that is considered a means to reduce inequities in the healthcare system, specifically through its prioritization of patient voice and preference in treatment planning. Yet, there are documented challenges to its implementation. Community-based participatory research (CBPR) is seemingly well-positioned to address such challenges, but there has been limited discussion of utilizing CBPR in this way. This article begins to address this gap. In it, we present three diverse stakeholders' perspectives on a CBPR project to enhance PCC within a primary care clinic serving low-income patients. These perspectives provide insights into benefits, challenges, and lessons learned in using CBPR to implement PCC. Key benefits of using CBPR to implement PCC include increasing the acceptability and feasibility of data collection tools and process, and the generating of high-quality actionable feedback. Important CBPR facilitators of PCC implementation include intentional power-sharing between patients and providers and having invested stakeholders who "champion" CBPR within an organization with empowering practices.

Challenges associated with follow-up care after implementation of an HPV screen-and-treat program with ablative therapy for cervical cancer prevention in Iquitos, Peru: a mixed methods study

Background

Cervical cancer is a preventable cancer; however, decreasing its prevalence requires early detection and treatment strategies that reduce rates of loss to follow-up. This study explores factors associated with loss to follow-up among HPV-positive women after implementation of a screen-and-treat approach with visual triage and ablative therapy for cervical cancer prevention in Iquitos, Peru.

Methods

We conducted semi-structured interviews with nurse-midwives (n = 15) working in cervical cancer prevention and women (n = 24) who were recorded as lost to follow-up after positive HPV results. We used the Health Care Access Barriers Model to guide analysis. We utilize manifest content analysis to describe barriers to follow-up according to the nurse-midwives and thematic analysis to report themes from the women's perspectives. We also report the steps and time taken to contact women and report discrepancies and concordances between nurse-midwives and women regarding reasons for loss to follow-up.

Results

Women in this study expressed a desire to receive treatment. Barriers, including fragmented and incomplete registry systems, made receiving follow-up care more challenging. Nurse-midwives faced structural barriers in attempting to deliver positive results to women who were challenging to contact, and women did not have clear knowledge of how to receive their HPV results. Women faced cognitive barriers including a lack of understanding about HPV results and treatment procedures, fear or anxiety about HPV or treatment, and confusion about the follow-up process. Women also reported having important work matters as a barrier. Reported financial barriers were minimal. There was agreement between women's and nurse-midwives' reported barriers to follow-up in slightly over half of the cases.

Conclusion

This study highlights the barriers to follow-up after implementation of a primary-level HPV-based screen-and-treat approach. While some barriers that have previously been associated with loss to follow-up were not observed in this study (e.g., financial), we emphasize the need for screen-and-treat programs to focus on strategies that can address incomplete registry systems, structural challenges in results delivery, cognitive barriers in understanding results and treatment, and work-related barriers.

Similar skills, different frames: a thematic analysis exploring conceptualizations held by community-based organization practitioners and academics regarding skills to use evidence-based interventions to address cancer inequities

BACKGROUND

Community-based organizations (CBOs) are critical partners in delivering evidence-based interventions (EBIs) to address cancer inequities. However, CBO practitioners do not typically have access to opportunities to build the necessary capacity (skills, knowledge, motivation, and resources) for using EBIs. Although capacity-building interventions can offer a solution, inconsistent definitions and measurements of capacity limit the ability to develop and evaluate such efforts. We explored how and why conceptualizations of core skills for EBI use differ between practitioners and academics addressing cancer and other health inequities. We anchored the inquiry with a commonly used set of target skills for EBI capacity-building efforts.

METHODS

The study was conducted by an interdisciplinary team of academic researchers and CBO practitioners. We gathered data through semi-structured, hour-long interviews with practitioners and academics working to address cancer and other health inequities (n = 19). After hearing a brief vignette about a CBO addressing cervical cancer inequities, participants considered a widely accepted list of skills for EBI use that included assessing needs, engaging stakeholders, and selecting, adapting, implementing, evaluating, and sustaining the EBI. We used a team-based, reflexive thematic analysis approach grounded in critical and constructivist perspectives.

RESULTS

Overall, the original list resonated with practitioners and academics and they added new skills to the list (cultural humility and systems change). Practitioners' responses described skills from the reference point of addressing broader community needs and context and achieving change over the long term, emphasizing aspects of health promotion in their descriptions. Academics offered a mix of perspectives, with some focused on addressing community needs (and related flexibility regarding EBIs) but more emphasized skills needed to deliver a specific EBI to achieve a focused set of health and equity outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a significant opportunity to leverage complementary expertise and perspectives held by practitioners and academics addressing cancer inequities. However, the different frames utilized suggest proactive efforts will be required to find alignment across groups, particularly in valuing diverse contributions and identifying relevant outcomes of interest for each group. Such alignment is critical to designing effective capacity-building interventions and supporting the routine utilization of EBIs to address cancer inequities.

Increasing consumer engagement: tools to engage service users in quality improvement or implementation efforts

Introduction

Engaging service users or consumers in quality improvement or implementing a new service is important across settings and may reduce health inequities. Implementation strategies leveraging consumer engagement are neither commonly used nor robustly operationalized in implementation science. Implementers (e.g., middle managers, facilitators) want to involve consumers in implementation activities, but do not always feel confident in how to proceed. We developed a compendium of tools called Consumer Voice to guide others how to engage consumers in design/delivery of implementation strategies. Although generalizable to other settings, we developed Consumer Voice within the context of implementing suicide prevention treatments in healthcare to reach rural U.S. military veterans, as there are suicide inequities for people in rural areas.

Methods

We developed Consumer Voice using a multistep process and human-centered design methods. In between steps, a design team met to generate insights from data, and decide which prototypes to create/refine. In preliminary work, we conducted a scan of examples in healthcare of patient engagement in implementation activities and interviewed two implementation experts about preferred learning styles. In Step 1, we interviewed 26 participants with experience in community engagement, implementation, or lived experience as a rural U.S. veteran with suicidal thoughts/behavior. In Step 2, 11 implementers beta tested prototypes then share feedback in focus groups. In Step 3, we reconvened participants from prior steps to review tools and, using nominal group technique, prioritized remaining recommendations.

Results

Consumer Voice is online, modular, and nonlinear for self-guided learning tailored to beginner, intermediate, or advanced experience with consumer engagement. Tools consist of slides, audiovisual content with written text, and templates. Findings indicated there is not one "right" way to engage consumers in implementation activities, rather that implementers wanted tools showcasing core principles for consumer engagement and practical ideas.

Discussion

Consumer Voice can be used by implementers to reflect and decide on how to apply consumer engagement implementation strategies to improve equitable dissemination and uptake of evidence-based practices. Most insights generated by user data were explicitly to build trust between consumers and professionals representing institutions, which may be one component to reducing healthcare inequities.

Community and partner engagement in dissemination and implementation research at the National Institutes of Health: an analysis of recently funded studies and opportunities to advance the field

BACKGROUND

As the focus has grown in recent years on both engaged research and dissemination and implementation (D&I) research, so too has federal funding to support these areas. The purpose of this analysis is to provide an overall perspective about the range of practices and approaches being used to engage partners in D&I research, with special attention to disparities-relevant research, and to identify gaps and opportunities in research funded by the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) in this space.

METHODS

This analysis examined a portfolio of active D&I research grants funded in fiscal years 2020 and 2021 across the NIH. Grant applications were deductively coded and summary statistics were calculated. Cross-tabulations were used to identify trends by engagement and disparities foci.

RESULTS

There were 103 grants included in the portfolio, of which 87% contained some form of community or partner engagement, and 50% of engaged grants were relevant to health disparities. Engagement was planned across the research continuum with each study engaging on average 2.5 different partner types. Consultation was the most common level of engagement (56%) while partnership was the least common (3%). On average, each study used 2.2 engagement strategies. Only 16% of grants indicated formally measuring engagement. Compared to non-disparities studies, disparities-relevant studies were about twice as likely to engage partners at the higher levels of partnership or collaboration (19% vs. 11%) and were also more likely to be conducted in community settings (26% vs. 5%).

CONCLUSIONS

Based on this portfolio analysis, D&I research appears to regularly integrate engagement approaches and strategies, though opportunities to deepen engagement and diversify who is engaged remain. This manuscript outlines several gaps in the portfolio and describes opportunities for increasing engagement to improve the quality of D&I research and application to advancing health equity. In addition, opportunities for leveraging the consistent and systematic application of engagement approaches and strategies to advance the science of engagement are discussed.

Priority skills for equity-focused, evidence-based cancer control in community-based organizations: A group concept mapping analysis with academics and practitioners

Introduction

Community-based organizations (CBOs) are important equity-promoting delivery channels for evidence-based interventions (EBIs). However, CBO practitioners often cannot access needed support to build EBI skills. Additionally, the capacity-building literature is hindered by inconsistent definitions, limited use of validated measures, and an emphasis on the perspectives of EBI developers versus implementers. To address these gaps, we explored commonalities and differences between CBO practitioners and academics in conceptualizing and prioritizing core EBI skills.

Methods

We utilized Group Concept Mapping, a mixed-methods approach connecting qualitative data (e.g., regarding the range of critical EBI skills) and quantitative data (e.g., sorting and ranking data regarding unique skills) to create conceptual maps integrating perspectives from diverse participants. A total of 34 practitioners and 30 academics working with cancer inequities participated in the study.

Results

Participants nominated 581 core skills for EBI use, and our team (including practitioners and academics) identified 98 unique skills from this list. Participants sorted them into conceptual groups, yielding five clusters: (1) using data and evaluation, (2) selecting and adapting EBIs, (3) connecting with community members, (4) building diverse and equitable partnerships, and (5) managing EBI implementation. The ordering of importance and presence of skill clusters were similar across groups. Overall, importance was rated higher than presence, suggesting capacity gaps.

Conclusions

There are helpful commonalities between practitioners' and academics' views of core EBI skills in CBOs and apparent capacity gaps. However, underlying patterns suggest that differences between the groups' perceptions warrant further exploration.

Implementation of new technologies designed to improve cervical cancer screening and completion of care in low-resource settings: A case study from the Proyecto Precancer

Background

This case study details the experience of the Proyecto Precancer in applying the Integrative Systems Praxis for Implementation Research (INSPIRE) research methodology to guide the co-development, planning, implementation, adoption, and sustainment of new technologies and screening practices in a cervical cancer screening and management program in the Peruvian Amazon. We briefly describe the theoretical grounding of the INSPIRE framework, the phases of the INSPIRE process, the activities within each phase, and the RE-AIM outcomes used to evaluate program outcomes.

Methods

Proyecto Precancer iteratively engaged over 90 stakeholders in the Micro Red Iquitos Sur (MRIS) health network in the Amazonian region of Loreto, Perú through the INSPIRE phases. INSPIRE is an integrative research methodology grounded in systems thinking, participatory action research, and implementation science frameworks such as the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. An interrupted time-series design with a mixed-methods RE-AIM (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance) evaluation framework was used to examine the adoption of molecular-based primary cervical cancer screening using HPV-testing (including self-sampling), with direct treatment after visual inspection with portable thermal ablation at the primary level.

Results

The participatory and system-thinking-oriented approach led to rapid adoption and successful implementation of the new cervical cancer screening and management program within 6 months, using an HPV-based screen-and-treat strategy across 17 health facilities in one of the largest public health networks of the Peruvian Amazon. Monitoring and evaluation data revealed that, within 6 months, the MRIS had surpassed their monthly screening goals, tripling their original screening rate, with approximately 70% of HPV-positive women reaching a completion of care endpoint, compared with around 30% prior to the new CCSM strategy.

Conclusions

Proyecto Precancer facilitated the adoption and sustainment of molecular-based primary cervical cancer screening using HPV-testing (including self-sampling), with direct treatment after visual inspection with portable thermal ablation at the primary level and the de-implementation of existing visual inspection-based screening strategies and colposcopy for routine precancer triage at the hospital level. This case study shows how PP used implementation science approaches to guide the adoption of a new screen-and-treat strategy in the Peruvian Amazon, while facilitating de-implementation of older screening practices.

Connecting the science and practice of implementation - applying the lens of context to inform study design in implementation research

The saying "horses for courses" refers to the idea that different people and things possess different skills or qualities that are appropriate in different situations. In this paper, we apply the analogy of "horses for courses" to stimulate a debate about how and why we need to get better at selecting appropriate implementation research methods that take account of the context in which implementation occurs. To ensure that implementation research achieves its intended purpose of enhancing the uptake of research-informed evidence in policy and practice, we start from a position that implementation research should be explicitly connected to implementation practice. Building on our collective experience as implementation researchers, implementation practitioners (users of implementation research), implementation facilitators and implementation educators and subsequent deliberations with an international, inter-disciplinary group involved in practising and studying implementation, we present a discussion paper with practical suggestions that aim to inform more practice-relevant implementation research.

Evidence-Based Quality Improvement (EBQI) in the pre-implementation phase: key steps and activities

Background

Evidence-Based Quality Improvement (EBQI) involves researchers and local partners working collaboratively to support the uptake of an evidence-based intervention (EBI). To date, EBQI has not been consistently included in community-engaged dissemination and implementation literature. The purpose of this paper is to illustrate the steps, activities, and outputs of EBQI in the pre-implementation phase.

Methods

The research team applied comparative case study methods to describe key steps, activities, and outputs of EBQI across seven projects. Our approach included: (1) specification of research questions, (2) selection of cases, (3) construction of a case codebook, (4) coding of cases using the codebook, and (5) comparison of cases.

Results

The cases selected included five distinct settings (e.g., correction facilities, community pharmacies), seven EBIs (e.g., nutrition promotion curriculum, cognitive processing therapy) and five unique lead authors. Case examples include both community-embedded and clinically-oriented projects. Key steps in the EBQI process included: (1) forming a local team of partners and experts, (2) prioritizing implementation determinants based on existing literature/data, (3) selecting strategies and/or adaptations in the context of key determinants, (4) specifying selected strategies/adaptations, and (5) refining strategies/adaptations. Examples of activities are included to illustrate how each step was achieved. Outputs included prioritized determinants, EBI adaptations, and implementation strategies.

Conclusions

A primary contribution of our comparative case study is the delineation of various steps and activities of EBQI, which may contribute to the replicability of the EBQI process across other implementation research projects.

"We're always an afterthought"- Designing tobacco control campaigns for dissemination with and to LGBTQ +-serving community organizations: a thematic analysis

PURPOSE

Evidence-based health communication campaigns can support tobacco control and address tobacco-related inequities among lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ +) populations. Community organizations focused on LGBTQ + health (e.g., nonprofits, community centers, and community health centers) can be prime channels for delivering evidence-based health communication campaigns. However, it is unclear how to balance the goals of a) designing campaigns to support broad adoption/uptake and b) adaptation addressing the needs of diverse communities and contexts. As part of an effort to support "designing for dissemination," we explored the key challenges and opportunities staff and leaders of LGBTQ + -serving community organizations encounter when adopting or adapting evidence-based health communication campaigns.

METHODS

A team of researchers and advisory committee members conducted this study, many of whom have lived, research, and/or practice experience with LGBTQ + health. We interviewed 22 staff members and leaders of community organizations serving LGBTQ + populations in the US in early 2021. We used a team-based, reflexive thematic analysis approach.

RESULTS

The findings highlight the challenges of attempting to use health communication campaigns misaligned with the assets and needs of organizations and community members. The three major themes identified were as follows: (1) available evidence-based health communication campaigns typically do not sufficiently center LGBTQ + communities, (2) negotiation regarding campaign utilization places additional burden on practitioners who have to act as "gatekeepers," and (3) processes of using health communication campaigns often conflict with organizational efforts to engage community members in adoption and adaptation activities.

CONCLUSIONS

We offer a set of considerations to support collaborative design and dissemination of health communication campaigns to organizations serving LGBTQ + communities: (1) develop campaigns with and for LGBTQ + populations, (2) attend to the broader structural forces impacting campaign recipients, (3) support in-house testing and adaptations, and (4) increase access to granular data for community organizations.

Understanding Misimplementation in U.S. State Health Departments: An Agent-Based Model

INTRODUCTION

The research goal of this study is to explore why misimplementation occurs in public health agencies and how it can be reduced. Misimplementation is ending effective activities prematurely or continuing ineffective ones, which contributes to wasted resources and suboptimal health outcomes.

METHODS

The study team created an agent-based model that represents how information flow, filtered through organizational structure, capacity, culture, and leadership priorities, shapes continuation decisions. This agent-based model used survey data and interviews with state health department personnel across the U.S. between 2014 and 2020; model design and analyses were conducted with substantial input from stakeholders between 2019 and 2021. The model was used experimentally to identify potential approaches for reducing misimplementation.

RESULTS

Simulations showed that increasing either organizational evidence-based decision-making capacity or information sharing could reduce misimplementation. Shifting leadership priorities to emphasize effectiveness resulted in the largest reduction, whereas organizational restructuring did not reduce misimplementation.

CONCLUSIONS

The model identifies for the first time a specific set of factors and dynamic pathways most likely driving misimplementation and suggests a number of actionable strategies for reducing it. Priorities for training the public health workforce include evidence-based decision making and effective communication. Organizations will also benefit from an intentional shift in leadership decision-making processes. On the basis of this initial, successful application of agent-based model to misimplementation, this work provides a framework for further analyses.

Using Implementation Mapping to increase uptake and use of Salud en Mis Manos: A breast and cervical cancer screening and HPV vaccination intervention for Latinas

Background

Despite CDC recommendations for breast and cervical cancer screening and HPV vaccination, cancer control behaviors are underutilized among low-income Latinas. Salud en Mis Manos (SEMM), adapted from Cultivando La Salud, is a community health worker- (CHW-) delivered evidence-based intervention (EBI), shown to increase breast and cervical cancer screening.

Methods

We used Implementation Mapping to create SEMM-Dissemination and Implementation Assistance (SEMM-DIA), a set of implementation strategies designed to support implementation and maintenance of SEMM in clinic settings. Specifically, we used Implementation Mapping's five iterative tasks to guide the use of theories and frameworks, evidence, new data, and stakeholder input to develop strategies to accelerate and improve implementation fidelity, reach, and maintenance of the SEMM intervention. The resulting implementation mapping logic model also guides the SEMM-DIA evaluation plan to assess reach, effectiveness, implementation, and maintenance.

Discussion

Increased use of implementation planning frameworks is necessary to accelerate the translation of EBIs to public health practice. This work demonstrates the application of Implementation Mapping to develop SEMM-DIA, providing a model for the development of other implementation strategies to support translation of evidence-based health promotion interventions into clinic settings.

What can implementation science offer civil society in their efforts to drive rights-based health reform?

Over the years, civil society organizations (CSOs) have made tremendous efforts to ensure that state policies, programmes, and actions facilitate equitable access to healthcare. While CSOs are key actors in the realization of the right to health, a systematic understanding of how CSOs achieve policy change is lacking. Implementation science, a discipline focused on the methods and strategies facilitating the uptake of evidence-based practice and research can bring relevant, untapped methodologies to understand how CSOs drive health reforms. This article argues for the use of evidence-based strategies to enhance civil society action. We hold that implementation science can offer an actionable frame to aid CSOs in deciphering the mechanisms and conditions in which to pursue rights-based actions most effectively. More empirical studies are needed to generate evidence and CSOs have already indicated the need for more data-driven solutions to empower activists to hold policymakers to account. Although implementation science may not resolve all the challenges CSOs face, its frameworks and approaches can provide an innovative way for organizations to chart out a course for reform.

Implementation of eLearning solutions for patients with chronic pain conditions

Background

Digital and mobile (mHealth) solutions are online or application-based services intended to support individuals with health needs. Despite evidence supporting the use of mHealth for patients with chronic pain, and the increasing desire of these types of solutions by both patients and providers, adoption of mHealth solutions remains limited. Implementation mapping can serve as a practical method to facilitate implementation and adoption of mHealth solutions within healthcare settings.

Methods

Implementation mapping was used to develop implementation strategies based on contextual determinants organized within the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) for mHealth eLearning solutions across an integrated, multi-site healthcare system. We describe our experience identifying stakeholders, delineating implementation facilitators and barriers, defining implementation outcomes using RE-AIM (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, Maintenance) framework, outlining initial implementation strategies, and iterating on implementation strategies.

Results

A total of 30 implementation strategies were identified and implemented. Over the first year, primary and specialty care providers across all the clinical sites (n = 70) placed 2559 orders for the mHealth solution. Most patients reported receiving the mHealth eLearning module (74%), and most patients felt that the tool improved their knowledge regarding their condition (82%) and their ability to provide self-care related to the condition (73%).

Conclusion

Practical applications of implementation science methods can help enable change within healthcare settings. Implementation mapping is an exercise that can engage stakeholders to facilitate the incorporation of new methods of care delivery, including mHealth solutions.

Improving colorectal cancer screening in rural primary care: Preliminary effectiveness and implementation of a collaborative mailed fecal immunochemical test pilot

BACKGROUND

Mailed fecal immunochemical test (FIT) outreach can improve colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates. We piloted a collaborative mailed FIT program with health plans and rural clinics to evaluate preliminary effectiveness and refine implementation strategies.

METHODS

We conducted a single-arm study using a convergent, parallel mixed-methods design to evaluate the implementation of a collaborative mailed FIT program. Enrollees were identified using health plan claims and confirmed via clinic scrub. The intervention included a vendor-delivered automated phone call (auto-call) prompt, FIT mailing, and reminder auto-call; clinics were encouraged to make live reminder calls. Practice facilitation was the primary implementation strategy. At 12 months post mailing, we assessed the rates of: (1) mailed FIT return and (2) completion of any CRC screening. We took fieldnotes and conducted postintervention key informant interviews to assess implementation outcomes (eg, feasibility, acceptability, and adaptations).

RESULTS

One hundred and sixty-nine Medicaid or Medicare enrollees were mailed a FIT. Over the 12-month intervention, 62 participants (37%) completed screening of which 21% completed the mailed FIT (most were returned within 3 months), and 15% screened by other methods (FITs distributed in-clinic, colonoscopy). Enrollee demographics and the reminder call may encourage mailed FIT completion. Program feasibility and acceptability was high and supported by perceived positive benefit, alignment with existing workflows, adequate staffing, and practice facilitation.

CONCLUSION

Collaborative health plan-clinic mailed FIT programs are feasible and acceptable for implementation in rural clinics and support CRC screening completion. Studies that pragmatically test collaborative approaches to mailed FIT and patient navigation follow-up after abnormal FIT and support broad scale-up in rural settings are needed.

Methodological approaches to study context in intervention implementation studies: an evidence gap map

BACKGROUND

Within implementation science studies, contextual analysis is increasingly recognized as foundational to interventions' successful and sustainable implementation. However, inconsistencies between methodological approaches currently limit progress in studying context and guidance to standardize the use of those approaches is scant. Therefore, this study's objective was to systematically review and map current methodological approaches to contextual analysis in intervention implementation studies. The results would help us both to systematize the process of contextual analysis and identify gaps in the current evidence.

METHODS

We conducted an evidence gap map (EGM) based on literature data via a stepwise approach. First, using an empirically developed search string, we randomly sampled 20% of all intervention implementation studies available from PubMed per year (2015-2020). Second, we assessed included studies that conducted a contextual analysis. Data extraction and evaluation followed the Basel Approach for CoNtextual ANAlysis (BANANA), using a color-coded rating scheme. Also based on BANANA and on the Context and Implementation of Complex Interventions (CICI) framework-an implementation framework that pays ample attention to context- we created visual maps of various approaches to contextual analysis.

RESULTS

Of 15, 286 identified intervention implementation studies and study protocols, 3017 were screened for inclusion. Of those, 110 warranted close examination, revealing 22% that reported on contextual analysis. Only one study explicitly applied a framework for contextual analysis. Data were most commonly collected via surveys (n = 15) and individual interviews (n = 13). Ten studies reported mixed-methods analyses. Twenty-two assessed meso-level contextual and setting factors, with socio-cultural aspects most commonly studied. Eighteen described the use of contextual information for subsequent project phases (e.g., intervention development/adaption, selecting implementation strategies). Nine reported contextual factors' influences on implementation and/or effectiveness outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

This study describes current approaches to contextual analysis in implementation science and provides a novel framework for evaluating and mapping it. By synthesizing our findings graphically in figures, we provide an initial evidence base framework that can incorporate new findings as necessary. We strongly recommend further development of methodological approaches both to conduct contextual analysis and to systematize the reporting of it. These actions will increase the quality and consistency of implementation science research.

Developing a co-production strategy to facilitate the adoption and implementation of evidence-based colorectal cancer screening interventions for rural health systems: a pilot study

BACKGROUND

Evidence-based colorectal cancer screening (CRCS) interventions have not been broadly adopted in rural primary care settings. Co-production of implementation strategies through a bundled approach may be promising in closing this gap by helping rural healthcare practitioners select and implement the best fitting CRCS interventions to the local context. This paper describes the process and outcomes of co-development and delivery of the bundled implementation strategy to improve adoption and implementation of CRCS interventions with two rural clinics.

METHODS

We used a bundle of implementation strategies with a core focus on academic-clinical partnership development (strategy 1) and Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles (strategy 2) to identify clinical partner interests/preferences on delivery methods and content needed to facilitate intervention identification and implementation that improves CRCS. We also developed an implementation blueprint for each clinic (strategy 3) through an online blueprinting process based on adapted "Putting Public Health Evidence in Action" (PPHEA) training curriculum. Clinic physicians and staff (n = 7) were asked to evaluate the bundled approach based on overall reactions and perceptions of innovation characteristics using 5-point Likert scale. After completing the bundled approach, we collected implementation outcomes and limited intervention effectiveness of the CRCS evidence-based interventions (EBIs) developed through the process.

RESULTS

Our co-production strategy yielded a prototype online blueprinting process consisting of 8 distance-learning PPHEA modules that guide selection and implementation of EBIs tailored to CRCS. Modules were delivered to clinic participants with minor adaptations, using PDSA cycle to improve quality of module contents and formats. Overall, participants in both clinics reported positive reactions toward the bundled approach. Both clinics reported improvements in how they perceived the characteristics of the innovation (the bundled approach) to tailor selected CRCS EBIs. As a result of the bundled strategies, each clinic selected and adopted specific EBI(s) with the varying degrees of implementation and CRCS outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

The bundle of implementation strategies used were feasible and acceptable in rural primary care practices to facilitate the use of EBIs to improve CRCS.

Implementation beyond the clinic: Community-driven utilization of research evidence from PC CARES, a suicide prevention program

While implementation and dissemination of research is a rapidly growing area, critical questions remain about how, why, and under what conditions everyday people integrate and utilize research evidence. This mixed-methods study investigates how participants of Promoting Community Conversations About Research to End Suicide (PC CARES) make sense of and use research evidence about suicide prevention in their own lives. PC CARES is a health intervention addressing the need for culturally responsive suicide prevention practices in rural Alaska through a series of community Learning Circles. We analyzed PC CARES transcripts and surveys for 376 participants aged 15+ across 10 Northwest Alaska Native villages. Quantitative analysis showed significant correlations between five utilization of research evidence (URE) factors and participants' intent to use research evidence from PC CARES Learning Circles. Key qualitative themes from Learning Circle transcripts expanded upon these URE constructs and included navigating discordant information, centering relationships, and Indigenous worldviews as key to interpreting research evidence. We integrate and organize our findings to inform two domains from the Consolidated Framework for Research Implementation: (1) intervention characteristics and (2) characteristics of individuals, with emphasis on findings most relevant for community settings where self-determined, evidence-informed action is especially important for addressing health inequities.

Metrics to evaluate implementation scientists in the USA: what matters most?

Background

Implementation science has grown rapidly as a discipline over the past two decades. An examination of how publication patterns and other scholarly activities of implementation scientists are weighted in the tenure and promotion process is needed given the unique and applied focus of the field.

Methods

We surveyed implementation scientists (mostly from the USA) to understand their perspectives on the following matters: (1) factors weighted in tenure and promotion for implementation scientists, (2) how important these factors are for success as an implementation scientist, (3) how impact is defined for implementation scientists, (4) top journals in implementation science, and (5) how these journals are perceived with regard to their prestige. We calculated univariate descriptive statistics for all quantitative data, and we used Wilcoxon signed-rank tests to compare the participants’ ratings of various factors. We analyzed open-ended qualitative responses using content analysis.

Results

One hundred thirty-two implementation scientists completed the survey (response rate = 28.9%). Four factors were rated as more important for tenure and promotion decisions: number of publications, quality of publication outlets, success in obtaining external funding, and record of excellence in teaching. Six factors were rated as more important for overall success as an implementation scientist: presentations at professional meetings, involvement in professional service, impact of the implementation scientist’s scholarship on the local community and/or state, impact of the implementation scientist’s scholarship on the research community, the number and quality of the implementation scientist’s community partnerships, and the implementation scientist’s ability to disseminate their work to non-research audiences. Participants most frequently defined and described impact as changing practice and/or policy. This expert cohort identified Implementation Science as the top journal in the field.

Conclusions

Overall, there was a significant mismatch between the factors experts identified as being important to academic success (e.g., tenure and promotion) and the factors needed to be a successful implementation scientist. Findings have important implications for capacity building, although they are largely reflective of the promotion and tenure process in the USA.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s43058-022-00323-0.

Evaluating blinatumomab implementation in low- and middle-income countries: a study protocol

Background

The recent implementation of novel therapies has accelerated progress in pediatric cancer care. Despite the significantly poorer survival of patients in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), administation complexities and other significant resource barriers have limited the translation of these novel therapies in these regions. This study aims to develop a model that can be used to support the implementation of novel therapies, such as blinatumomab (bispecific antibody therapy for B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia [B-ALL]) in LMIC centers, with the long-term goal of developing an implementation framework for similar future efforts.

Methods

In this study, mixed methods will be applied to understand the key contextual considerations that can be accounted for through a training program and prospectively designed implementation activities. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research will guide the activities related to implementation evaluation in parallel with a drug donation program. A multidisciplinary research team comprising high- and low-middle income healthcare professionals, industry, and implementation scientists has been assembled with the common goal of improving safe access to blinatumomab. To assess the factors affecting blinatumomab administration, semi-structured interviews with diverse collaborators and quantitative assessments of organizational characteristics will be conducted, together with quantitative and qualitative assessments of feasibility, acceptability, appropriateness, and cost of blinatumomab implementation. A quantitative assessment of stakeholder perceptions of different implementation strategies used as part of the multifaceted approach will also be performed. Finally, we will examine the key domains and processes used and construct the implementation roadmap for translation of novel therapies.

Discussion

This study will rigorously develop an implementation roadmap for translation of novel therapies in low-resource settings. The knowledge gained in the formative assessment will reveal the priority areas and key implementation strategies. Thereby, the resultant roadmap will facilitate future scale-out strategies for novel therapies in LMICs, thus increasing access, building capacity for management, and ultimately improving the care for children in LMICs.

Building Capacity in Implementation Science for Cancer Prevention and Control Through a Research Network Scholars Program

Building capacity of researchers and practitioners in the dissemination and implementation (D&I) of evidence-based interventions is greatly needed to improve cancer prevention and control. A diverse workforce trained in D&I science is critical for improving cancer outcomes and reducing cancer-related health disparities. The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC) Cancer Prevention and Control Research Network (CPCRN) Scholars Program aimed at training students, researchers, and practitioners in D&I for cancer prevention and control launched in 2021. The purpose of this paper is to describe the creation of the training program, curriculum, and evaluation plans, and to present the baseline results and lessons learned. CPCRN investigator and partner input and formative interviews (n = 16) with assistant professors, postdoctoral fellow, doctoral and undergraduate students, and a program manager guided development of the program. Twenty of 24 applicants were accepted into the inaugural year of the program. The majority of accepted scholars identified as female (80%) and were graduate students (50%). Thirty-five percent were of racially diverse backgrounds. Most self-rated their previous D&I experience and competencies at a beginner level. The multi-step approach used for development of this training program and lessons learned will be helpful for others collaborating on preparing the research and practice workforce in D&I science.

Promote Community Engagement in Participatory Research for Improving Breast Cancer Prevention: The P.I.N.K. Study Framework

Breast cancer (BC) has overtaken lung cancer as the most common cancer in the world and the projected incidence rates show a further increase. Early detection through population screening remains the cornerstone of BC control, but a progressive change from early diagnosis only-based to a personalized preventive and risk-reducing approach is widely debated. Risk-stratification models, which also include personal lifestyle risk factors, are under evaluation, although the documentation burden to gather population-based data is relevant and traditional data collection methods show some limitations. This paper provides the preliminary results from the analysis of clinical data provided by radiologists and lifestyle data collected using self-administered questionnaires from 5601 post-menopausal women. The weight of the combinations of women's personal features and lifestyle habits on the BC risk were estimated by combining a model-driven and a data-driven approach to analysis. The weight of each factor on cancer occurrence was assessed using a logistic model. Additionally, communities of women sharing common features were identified and combined in risk profiles using social network analysis techniques. Our results suggest that preventive programs focused on increasing physical activity should be widely promoted, in particular among the oldest women. Additionally, current findings suggest that pregnancy, breast-feeding, salt limitation, and oral contraception use could have different effects on cancer risk, based on the overall woman's risk profile. To overcome the limitations of our data, this work also introduces a mobile health tool, the Dress-PINK, designed to collect real patients' data in an innovative way for improving women's response rate, data accuracy, and completeness as well as the timeliness of data availability. Finally, the tool provides tailored prevention messages to promote critical consciousness, critical thinking, and increased health literacy among the general population.

Evaluation of the nation-wide implementation of ALS home monitoring & coaching: an e-health innovation for personalized care for patients with motor neuron disease

BACKGROUND

To improve the care for patients with motor neuron disease an e-health innovation for continuous monitoring of disease progression and patients' well-being (ALS H&C) was implemented in 10 multidisciplinary rehabilitation settings. The first aim was to evaluate the implementation of ALS H&C by assessing several implementation outcomes, technology acceptance and usability of the innovation according to the end users. The secondary aim was to explore differences in these outcomes between the teams with sustainable and unsustainable implementation.

METHODS

The chosen implementation strategy was a combination of the implementation process model by Grol & Wensing and a participatory action research approach. In three meetings with multidisciplinary project groups the innovation was introduced, the expected barriers/facilitators identified, and action plans to resolve each barrier developed. After a 3-month pilot phase, patients and their healthcare providers were asked to complete an online evaluation survey to assess implementation outcomes, based on Proctor's evaluation framework (i.e., acceptability, feasibility, fidelity, sustainability). Telemedicine technology acceptance was assessed according the technology acceptance model of Chau, and user experiences with the System Usability Scale (SUS). Implementation outcomes of teams with sustainable implementation (continuation after completion of the pilot phase) and unsustainable implementation (discontinuation after the pilot phase) were compared.

RESULTS

The implementation outcomes from the patients' perspective (N = 71) were positive; they found ALS H&C to be an acceptable and feasible care concept. Patients' technology acceptance was high, with positive attitudes towards ALS H&C, and positive views on perceived technology control, usefulness, and ease of use. Patients rated their satisfaction with the (web) app on a scale from 1 (not satisfied at all) to 10 (very satisfied) with a 7.0 (median; IQR 1.0). Healthcare providers (N = 76) also found ALS H&C acceptable and appropriate as well, but were less positive about the feasibility and usability of ALS H&C (mean SUS 58.8 [SD 11.3]). ALS H&C has largely been implemented as intended and the implementation was sustainable in 7 teams. Teams who discontinued ALS H&C after the pilot phase (N = 2) had more fidelity issues.

CONCLUSIONS

A participatory action research approach supported by theoretical approaches used in implementation science led to a sustainable implementation of ALS H&C in 7 of the participating teams. To improve implementation success, additional implementation strategies to increase feasibility, usability and fidelity are necessary.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Trial NL8542 registered at Netherlands Trial Register (trialregister.nl) on 15th April 2020.

Unraveling implementation context: the Basel Approach for coNtextual ANAlysis (BANANA) in implementation science and its application in the SMILe project

BACKGROUND

Designing intervention and implementation strategies with careful consideration of context is essential for successful implementation science projects. Although the importance of context has been emphasized and methodology for its analysis is emerging, researchers have little guidance on how to plan, perform, and report contextual analysis. Therefore, our aim was to describe the Basel Approach for coNtextual ANAlysis (BANANA) and to demonstrate its application on an ongoing multi-site, multiphase implementation science project to develop/adapt, implement, and evaluate an integrated care model in allogeneic SteM cell transplantatIon facILitated by eHealth (the SMILe project).

METHODS

BANANA builds on guidance for assessing context by Stange and Glasgow (Contextual factors: the importance of considering and reporting on context in research on the patient-centered medical home, 2013). Based on a literature review, BANANA was developed in ten discussion sessions with implementation science experts and a medical anthropologist to guide the SMILe project's contextual analysis. BANANA's theoretical basis is the Context and Implementation of Complex Interventions (CICI) framework. Working from an ecological perspective, CICI acknowledges contextual dynamics and distinguishes between context and setting (the implementation's physical location).

RESULTS

BANANA entails six components: (1) choose a theory, model, or framework (TMF) to guide the contextual analysis; (2) use empirical evidence derived from primary and/or secondary data to identify relevant contextual factors; (3) involve stakeholders throughout contextual analysis; (4) choose a study design to assess context; (5) determine contextual factors' relevance to implementation strategies/outcomes and intervention co-design; and (6) report findings of contextual analysis following appropriate reporting guidelines. Partly run simultaneously, the first three components form a basis both for the identification of relevant contextual factors and for the next components of the BANANA approach.

DISCUSSION

Understanding of context is indispensable for a successful implementation science project. BANANA provides much-needed methodological guidance for contextual analysis. In subsequent phases, it helps researchers apply the results to intervention development/adaption and choices of contextually tailored implementation strategies. For future implementation science projects, BANANA's principles will guide researchers first to gather relevant information on their target context, then to inform all subsequent phases of their implementation science project to strengthen every part of their work and fulfill their implementation goals.

Building Cancer Prevention and Control Research Capacity in Rural Appalachian Kentucky Primary Care Clinics During COVID-19: Development and Adaptation of a Multilevel Colorectal Cancer Screening Project

This study describes the development of a colorectal cancer (CRC) screening multilevel intervention with four primary care clinics in rural Appalachian Kentucky. We also discuss barriers experienced by the clinics during COVID-19 and how clinic limitations and needs informed project modifications. Four primary care clinics were recruited, key informant interviews with clinic providers were conducted, electronic health record (EHR) capacity to collect data related to CRC screening and follow-up was assessed, and a series of meetings were held with clinic champions to discuss implementation of strategies to impact clinic CRC screening rates. Analysis of interviews revealed multilevel barriers to CRC screening. Patient-level barriers included fatalism, competing priorities, and financial and literacy concerns. The main provider- and clinic-level barriers were provider preference for colonoscopy over stool-based testing and EHR tracking concerns. Clinics selected strategies to address barriers, but the onset of COVID-19 necessitated modifications to these strategies. Due to COVID-19, changes in clinic staffing and workflow occurred, including provider furloughs, a state-mandated pause in elective procedures, and an increase in telehealth. Clinics adapted screening strategies to match changing needs, including shifting from paper to digital educational tools and using telehealth to increase annual wellness visits for screening promotion. While significant delays persist for scheduling colonoscopies, clinics were encouraged to promote stool-based tests as a primary screening modality for average-risk patients.

Barriers and facilitators when implementing family involvement for persons with psychotic disorders in community mental health centres - a nested qualitative study

Background

The uptake of family involvement in health care services for patients with psychotic disorders is poor, despite a clear evidence base, socio-economic and moral justifications, policy, and guideline recommendations. To respond to this knowledge-practice gap, we established the cluster randomised controlled trial: Implementation of guidelines on Family Involvement for persons with Psychotic disorders in community mental health centres (IFIP). Nested in the IFIP trial, this sub-study aims to explore what organisational and clinical barriers and facilitators local implementation teams and clinicians experience when implementing family involvement in mental health care for persons with psychotic disorders.

Methods

We performed 21 semi-structured focus groups, including 75 participants in total. Implementation team members were interviewed at the initial and middle phases of the intervention period, while clinicians who were not in the implementation team were interviewed in the late phase. A purposive sampling approach was used to recruit participants with various engagement in the implementation process. Data were analysed using manifest content analysis.

Results

Organisational barriers to involvement included: 1) Lack of shared knowledge, perceptions, and practice 2) Lack of routines 3) Lack of resources and logistics. Clinical barriers included: 4) Patient-related factors 5) Relative-related factors 6) Provider-related factors. Organisational facilitators for involvement included: 1) Whole-ward approach 2) Appointed and dedicated roles 3) Standardisation and routines. Clinical facilitators included: 4) External implementation support 5) Understanding, skills, and self-efficacy among mental health professionals 6) Awareness and attitudes among mental health professionals.

Conclusions

Implementing family involvement in health care services for persons with psychotic disorders is possible through a whole-ward and multi-level approach, ensured by organisational- and leadership commitment. Providing training in family psychoeducation to all staff, establishing routines to offer a basic level of family involvement to all patients, and ensuring that clinicians get experience with family involvement, reduce or dissolve core barriers. Having access to external implementation support appears decisive to initiate, promote and evaluate implementation. Our findings also point to future policy, practice and implementation developments to offer adequate treatment and support to all patients with severe mental illness and their families.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT03869177. Registered 11.03.19.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-022-08489-y.

Cross-sectional survey study of primary care clinics on evidence-based colorectal cancer screening intervention use

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to examine differences between urban and rural primary care clinics in the use of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening methods and evidence-based interventions to promote CRC screening.

METHODS

This was a cross-sectional survey of primary care clinics in Nebraska. Surveys in paper form were sent out and followed up with telephone interviews to nonrespondents. Of the 375 facilities, 263 (70.1%) responded to the survey.

FINDINGS

Over 30% of urban clinics indicated that 80% or more of their patients were meeting the CRC guidelines compared to 18.3% of rural clinics (P = .03). Rural clinics were more likely than urban clinics to prefer the use of colonoscopy alone or in combination with stool tests (P = .02). The most common interventions for CRC screening included one-on-one patient education and use of computer-based pop-ups to remind providers.

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, we found some important differences between rural and urban primary care clinics in the implementation of CRC screening. Given that there is evidence for differences in preference for CRC screening methods (colonoscopy vs stool-based tests) between rural and urban community members, it is important to assess the effectiveness of different types of CRC screening interventions by comparing rural and urban primary care clinic patient populations.

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.

Key Learning Statements for persistent pain education: an iterative analysis of consumer, clinician and researcher perspectives and development of public messaging

Over the last decade, the content, delivery and media of pain education have been adjusted in line with scientific discovery in pain and educational sciences, and in line with consumer perspectives. This paper describes a decade-long process of exploring consumer perspectives on pain science education concepts to inform clinician-derived educational updates (undertaken by the authors). Data were collected as part of a quality audit via a series of online surveys in which consent (non-specific) was obtained from consumers for their data to be used in published research. Consumers who presented for care for a persistent pain condition and were treated with a pain science education informed approach were invited to provide anonymous feedback about their current health status and pain journey experience 6, 12 or 18 months after initial assessment. Two-hundred eighteen consumers reported improvement in health status at follow-up. Results of the surveys from three cohorts of consumers that reported improvement were used to generate iterative versions of 'Key Learning Statements'. Early iteration of these Key Learning Statements was used to inform the development of Target Concepts and associated community-targeted pain education resources for use in public health and health professional workforce capacity building initiatives. Perspective This paper reflects an explicit interest in the insights of people who have been challenged by persistent pain and then recovered, to improve pain care. Identifying pain science concepts that consumers valued learning provided valuable information to inform resources for clinical interactions and community-targeted pain education campaigns.

Context Matters, So How Do We Get Better at Working With Context in Implementation Research and Practice? Comment on "Stakeholder Perspectives of Attributes and Features of Context Relevant to Knowledge Translation in Health Settings: A Multi-country Analysis"

In the field of implementation research, it is widely recognised that 'context matters.' Attempts to implement innovations, research and new knowledge into practice invariably meet contextual challenges at multiple levels during the process of implementation. The paper by Squires and colleagues provides a detailed insight into the many different features and attributes of context. Yet, as this commentary argues, there are significant challenges ahead if we are to apply our growing understanding about context to improve the practice of implementation in everyday healthcare. This will require attention to the practicalities of working with context to achieve successful implementation.

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.

Grounding implementation science in health equity for cancer prevention and control

BACKGROUND

The past decade of research has seen theoretical and methodological advances in both implementation science and health equity research, opening a window of opportunity for facilitating and accelerating cross-disciplinary exchanges across these fields that have largely operated in siloes. In 2019 and 2020, the National Cancer Institute's Consortium for Cancer Implementation Science convened an action group focused on 'health equity and context' to identify opportunities to advance implementation science. In this paper, we present a narrative review and synthesis of the relevant literature at the intersection of health equity and implementation science, highlight identified opportunities (i.e., public goods) by the action group for advancing implementation science in cancer prevention and control, and integrate the two by providing key recommendations for future directions.

DISCUSSION

In the review and synthesis of the literature, we highlight recent advances in implementation science, relevant to promoting health equity (e.g., theories/models/frameworks, adaptations, implementation strategies, study designs, implementation determinants, and outcomes). We acknowledge the contributions from the broader field of health equity research and discuss opportunities for integration and synergy with implementation science, which include (1) articulating an explicit focus on health equity for conducting and reviewing implementation science; (2) promoting an explicit focus on health equity in the theories, models, and frameworks guiding implementation science; and (3) identifying methods for understanding and documenting influences on the context of implementation that incorporate a focus on equity. To advance the science of implementation with a focus on health equity, we reflect on the essential groundwork needed to promote bi-directional learning between the fields of implementation science and health equity research and recommend (1) building capacity among researchers and research institutions for health equity-focused and community-engaged implementation science; (2) incorporating health equity considerations across all key implementation focus areas (e.g., adaptations, implementation strategies, study design, determinants, and outcomes); and (3) continuing a focus on transdisciplinary opportunities in health equity research and implementation science. We believe that these recommendations can help advance implementation science by incorporating an explicit focus on health equity in the context of cancer prevention and control and beyond.