Formative evaluation of the implementation of digital therapeutics for opioids and other substance use disorders in primary care (DIGITS trial).

Implementation research and practice Pub Date : 2024-12-12 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1177/26334895241301670
Lorella Palazzo, Caitlin N Dorsey, Jess Mogk, Tara Beatty, Deborah King, Kelsey Stefanik-Guizlo, Dustin Key, Tessa E Matson, Mary Shea, Ryan M Caldeiro, Angela Garza McWethy, Edwin S Wong, Abisola E Idu, Joseph E Glass
{"title":"Formative evaluation of the implementation of digital therapeutics for opioids and other substance use disorders in primary care (DIGITS trial).","authors":"Lorella Palazzo, Caitlin N Dorsey, Jess Mogk, Tara Beatty, Deborah King, Kelsey Stefanik-Guizlo, Dustin Key, Tessa E Matson, Mary Shea, Ryan M Caldeiro, Angela Garza McWethy, Edwin S Wong, Abisola E Idu, Joseph E Glass","doi":"10.1177/26334895241301670","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Substance use disorders (SUDs) result in individual and societal burden. However, most individuals with SUD receive no treatment. Implementing SUD interventions in primary care could address this population's treatment needs. In the USA, reSET<sup>®</sup> and reSET-O<sup>®</sup> were the first prescription digital therapeutics (PDTs) for SUDs and opioid use disorder (OUD), respectively. The Digital Treatments for Substance Use Disorder (DIGITS) study tested the effectiveness of practice facilitation and health coaching strategies to support reSET and reSET-O implementation into primary care. A formative evaluation was conducted to monitor implementation, inform adaptations, and learn what promotes PDT sustainment.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>The Dynamic Sustainability Framework and the Framework for Reporting Adaptations and Modifications to Evidence-based Implementation Strategies guided the evaluation. Using rapid qualitative methods, we collected and analyzed observational fieldnotes, key informant interviews, and document sources (e.g., meeting minutes) for synthesis and dissemination to clinical partners and the study team via formative reports. We analyzed the reports to generate evaluation results.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twenty-four primary care clinics participated. Evaluation data included 98 observational fieldnotes, 16 interviews, and 253 document sources. We produced nine formative reports. The study encountered barriers and facilitators in each DSF domain (ecological system, practice setting, and intervention). In the ecological system, the PDT vendor enabled the study, but the COVID-19 pandemic, laws, regulations, and contracting delayed implementation. In the practice setting, staff shortages and low clinic capacity were implementation challenges, while electronic health record capabilities were both barriers and facilitators. At the intervention level, non-routine workflows, clinician burden, and low patient engagement were barriers despite clinicians' efforts.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Digital therapeutics are promising SUD and OUD treatments, but integration into primary care requires conducive laws and regulations, organizational capacity, and patient and clinician engagement. Formative evaluation identified important lessons for future PDT implementation.</p>","PeriodicalId":73354,"journal":{"name":"Implementation research and practice","volume":"5 ","pages":"26334895241301670"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11639013/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Implementation research and practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/26334895241301670","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Substance use disorders (SUDs) result in individual and societal burden. However, most individuals with SUD receive no treatment. Implementing SUD interventions in primary care could address this population's treatment needs. In the USA, reSET® and reSET-O® were the first prescription digital therapeutics (PDTs) for SUDs and opioid use disorder (OUD), respectively. The Digital Treatments for Substance Use Disorder (DIGITS) study tested the effectiveness of practice facilitation and health coaching strategies to support reSET and reSET-O implementation into primary care. A formative evaluation was conducted to monitor implementation, inform adaptations, and learn what promotes PDT sustainment.

Method: The Dynamic Sustainability Framework and the Framework for Reporting Adaptations and Modifications to Evidence-based Implementation Strategies guided the evaluation. Using rapid qualitative methods, we collected and analyzed observational fieldnotes, key informant interviews, and document sources (e.g., meeting minutes) for synthesis and dissemination to clinical partners and the study team via formative reports. We analyzed the reports to generate evaluation results.

Results: Twenty-four primary care clinics participated. Evaluation data included 98 observational fieldnotes, 16 interviews, and 253 document sources. We produced nine formative reports. The study encountered barriers and facilitators in each DSF domain (ecological system, practice setting, and intervention). In the ecological system, the PDT vendor enabled the study, but the COVID-19 pandemic, laws, regulations, and contracting delayed implementation. In the practice setting, staff shortages and low clinic capacity were implementation challenges, while electronic health record capabilities were both barriers and facilitators. At the intervention level, non-routine workflows, clinician burden, and low patient engagement were barriers despite clinicians' efforts.

Conclusions: Digital therapeutics are promising SUD and OUD treatments, but integration into primary care requires conducive laws and regulations, organizational capacity, and patient and clinician engagement. Formative evaluation identified important lessons for future PDT implementation.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
背景:药物使用失调症(SUDs)给个人和社会造成了负担。然而,大多数 SUD 患者并未接受治疗。在初级保健中实施 SUD 干预措施可以满足这一人群的治疗需求。在美国,reSET® 和 reSET-O® 分别是首个针对 SUD 和阿片类药物使用障碍 (OUD) 的处方数字疗法 (PDT)。药物使用障碍数字疗法(DIGITS)研究测试了实践促进和健康指导策略在支持将 reSET 和 reSET-O 应用于初级保健方面的有效性。该研究开展了一项形成性评估,以监测实施情况、提供调整信息并了解促进 PDT 持续性的因素:动态可持续性框架和循证实施策略调整和修改报告框架为评估提供了指导。我们采用快速定性方法,收集并分析了现场观察记录、关键信息提供者访谈和文件来源(如会议记录),以便进行综合,并通过形成性报告向临床合作伙伴和研究团队传播。我们对报告进行了分析,以得出评估结果:24 家初级保健诊所参与了评估。评估数据包括 98 份实地观察记录、16 次访谈和 253 份文件来源。我们编写了九份形成性报告。这项研究在 DSF 的每个领域(生态系统、实践环境和干预措施)都遇到了障碍和促进因素。在生态系统中,PDT 供应商为研究提供了便利,但 COVID-19 大流行、法律法规和合同延迟了研究的实施。在实践环境中,人员短缺和诊所能力低下是实施的挑战,而电子健康记录功能既是障碍也是促进因素。在干预层面,尽管临床医生做出了努力,但非例行工作流程、临床医生的负担和患者参与度低仍是障碍:数字疗法是一种很有前景的药物滥用和药物依赖治疗方法,但要将其融入初级医疗保健中,还需要有利的法律法规、组织能力以及患者和临床医生的参与。形成性评估为未来实施 PDT 找出了重要经验。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
18 weeks
期刊最新文献
Formative evaluation of the implementation of digital therapeutics for opioids and other substance use disorders in primary care (DIGITS trial). A conceptual framework for assessing implementation strategy integrity. Scaling up mental health service provision through multisectoral integration: A qualitative analysis of factors shaping delivery and uptake among South Sudanese refugees and healthcare workers in Uganda. Evaluation of a pilot implementation of a digital cognitive behavioral therapy platform for isolated older adults in county mental health services. Calculating power for multilevel implementation trials in mental health: Meaningful effect sizes, intraclass correlation coefficients, and proportions of variance explained by covariates.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1