Using the Practical, Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model (PRISM) to qualitatively assess multilevel contextual factors to help plan, implement, evaluate, and disseminate health services programs

There is consensus in dissemination and implementation (D&I) science that addressing contextual factors is critically important for understanding translation of health care delivery interventions but little agreement on which contextual factors are key determinants of implementation outcomes. We describe the application of the Practical Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model (PRISM), which expands the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework to identify contextual factors across four diverse programs. Multiple qualitative methods were used to collect multilevel, multistakeholder perspectives from the adopting organizations and staff. We identified measures for evaluating context through the various domains of PRISM to guide health services research across the phases of program implementation. The PRISM domains of Recipients, Implementation and Sustainability Infrastructure, and External Environment identified important multilevel contextual factors, including variability in operational processes and available resources. These domains helped to facilitate planning and implementation phases of the four interventions and guide purposeful adaptations. We found assessments of PRISM domains useful to systematically assess multilevel contextual factors across various content areas as well as phases of program implementation. Additionally, these contextual factors were found to be relevant to RE-AIM outcomes. Lessons learned can be applied to future research as there is a need to investigate the measurement properties of PRISM and continue to test which contextual factors are most important to successful implementation and for which outcomes.

Implementing smoking cessation guidelines for hospitalized Veterans: Cessation results from the VA-BEST trial

PURPOSE

To examine the impact of a nurse-initiated tobacco cessation intervention focused on providing guideline-recommended care to hospitalized smokers.

DESIGN

Pre-post quasi-experimental trial.

SETTING

General medical units of four US Department of Veterans Affairs hospitals.

SUBJECTS

898 adult Veteran smokers (503 and 395 were enrolled in the baseline and intervention periods, respectively).

INTERVENTION

The intervention included academic detailing, adaptation of the computerized medical record, patient self-management support, and organizational support and feedback.

MEASURES

The primary outcome was self-reported 7-day point prevalence abstinence at six months.

ANALYSIS

Tobacco use was compared for the pre-intervention and intervention periods with multivariable logistic regression using generalized estimating equations to account for clustering at the nurse level. Predictors of abstinence at six months were investigated with best subsets regression.

RESULTS

Seven-day point prevalence abstinence during the intervention period did not differ significantly from the pre-intervention period at either three (adjusted odds ratio (AOR) and 95% confidence interval (CI₉₅)=0.78 [0.51-1.18]) or six months (AOR=0.92; CI₉₅=0.62-1.37). Predictors of abstinence included baseline self-efficacy for refraining from smoking when experiencing negative affect (p=0.0004) and perceived likelihood of staying off cigarettes following discharge (p<0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Tobacco use interventions in the VA inpatient setting likely require more substantial changes in clinician behavior and enhanced post-discharge follow-up to improve cessation outcomes.

"Let Me Get You a Nicotine Patch": Nurses' Perceptions of Implementing Smoking Cessation Guidelines for Hospitalized Veterans

Many hospitalized smokers do not receive guideline-recommended tobacco treatment, but little is known about the perceptions of inpatient nurses with regard to tobacco treatment. We used a sequential explanatory mixed methods design to help explain the findings of an academic detailing intervention trial on the inpatient medicine units of four Veterans Affairs (VA) hospitals. We surveyed 164 nurses and conducted semistructured interviews in a purposeful sample of 33 nurses with different attitudes toward cessation counseling. Content analysis was used to inductively characterize the issues raised by participants. Emerging themes were categorized using the knowledge-attitudes-behavior framework of guideline adherence. Knowledge-related and attitudinal barriers included perceived lack of skills in cessation counseling and skepticism about the effectiveness of cessation guidelines in hospitalized veterans. Nurses also reported multiple behavioral and organizational barriers to guideline adherence: resistance from patients, insufficient time and resources, the presence of smoking areas on VA premises, and lack of coordination with primary care. VA hospitals should train inpatient staff how to negotiate behavior change, integrate cessation counseling into nurses' workflow, develop alternative referral mechanisms for post-discharge cessation counseling, and adopt hospital policies to promote inpatient abstinence.

Bringing it home: expanding the local reach of dissemination and implementation training via a university-based workshop

BACKGROUND

Currently, national training programs do not have the capacity to meet the growing demand for dissemination and implementation (D&I) workforce education and development. The Colorado Research in Implementation Science Program (CRISP) developed and delivered an introductory D&I workshop adapted from national programs to extend training reach and foster a local learning community for D&I.

METHODS

To gauge interest and assess learning needs, a pre-registration survey was administered. Based on feedback, a 1.5-day workshop was designed. Day 1 introduced D&I frameworks, strategies, and evaluation principles. Local and national D&I experts provided ignite-style talks on key lessons followed by panel discussion. Breakout sessions discussed community engagement and applying for D&I grants. A workbook was developed to enhance the training and provided exercises for application to an individual's projects. Day 2 offered expert-led mentoring sessions with selected participants who desired advanced instruction. Two follow-up surveys (immediate post-workshop, 6 months) assessed knowledge gained from participation and utilization of workshop content.

RESULTS

Ninety-three workshop registrants completed an assessment survey to inform workshop objectives and curriculum design; 43 % were new and 54 % reported a basic understanding of the D&I field. Pre-registrants intended to use the training to "apply for a D&I grant" (73 %); "incorporate D&I into existing projects" (76 %), and for quality improvement (51 %). Sixty-eight individuals attended Day 1; 11 also attended Day 2 mentoring sessions. In the 1-week post-workshop survey (n = 34), 100 % strongly agreed they were satisfied with the training; 97 % strongly agreed the workshop workbook was a valuable resource. All Day 2 participants strongly agreed that working closely with faculty and experts increased their overall confidence. In the 6-month follow-up evaluation (n = 23), evidence of new D&I-related manuscripts and grant proposals was found. Training materials were published online ( www.ucdenver.edu/implementation/workshops ) and disseminated via the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Clinical and Translational Science Awards Consortium. To sustain reach, CRISP adapted the materials into an interactive e-book ( www.CRISPebooks.org ) and launched a new graduate course.

CONCLUSIONS

Local D&I training workshops can extend the reach of national training programs.

Training primary care clinicians in motivational interviewing: a comparison of two models

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate implementing two training models for motivational interviewing (MI) to address tobacco use with primary care clinicians.

METHODS

Clinicians were randomized to moderate or high intensity. Both training modalities included a single ½ day workshop facilitated by MI expert trainers. The high intensity (HI) training provided six booster sessions including telephone interactions with simulated patients and peer coaching by MI champions over 3 months. To assess performance of clinicians to deliver MI, an objective structured clinical evaluation (OSCE) was conducted before and 12 weeks after the workshop training.

RESULTS

Thirty-four clinicians were enrolled; 18 were randomly assigned to HI. Compared to the moderate intensity group, the HI group scored significantly higher during the OSCE for three of six global Motivational Interviewing Treatment Integrity scale scores. There was also significant improvement for three of the four measures of MI counseling knowledge, skills and confidence.

CONCLUSIONS

Using champions and telephone interactions with simulated patients as enhancement strategies for MI training programs is feasible in the primary care setting and results in greater gains in MI proficiency.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Results confirm and expand evidence for use of booster sessions to improve the proficiency of MI training programs for primary care clinicians.