Implementation research and practice最新文献

Background: Audience segmentation is an analysis technique that can identify meaningful subgroups within a population to inform the tailoring of dissemination strategies. We have conducted an empirical clustering audience segmentation study of licensed psychologists using survey data about the sources of knowledge they report most often consulting to guide their clinical decision-making. We identify meaningful subgroups within the population and inform the tailoring of dissemination strategies for evidence-based practice (EBP) materials.

Method: Data come from a 2018-2019 web-based survey of licensed psychologists who were members of the American Psychological Association (APA; N = 518, response rate = 29.8%). Ten dichotomous variables assessed sources that psychologists regularly consult to inform clinical decision-making (e.g., colleagues, academic literature, and practice guidelines). We used latent class analysis to identify segments of psychologists who turn to similar sources and named each segment based on the segment's most salient characteristics.

Results: Four audience segments were identified: the No-guidelines (45% of psychologists), Research-driven (16%), Thirsty-for-knowledge (9%), and No-reviews (30%). The four segments differed not only in their preferred sources of knowledge, but also in the types of evidence-based posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) treatments they provide, their awareness and usage intention of the APA PTSD clinical practice guideline, and attitudes toward clinical practice guidelines.

Conclusion: The results demonstrate that licensed psychologists are heterogeneous in terms of their knowledge-seeking behaviors and preferences for knowledge sources. The distinctive characteristics of these segments could guide the tailoring of dissemination materials and strategies to subsequently enhance the implementation of EBP among psychologists.

Background: Cancer patients who receive evidence-based tobacco-dependence treatment are more likely to quit and remain abstinent, but tobacco treatment programs (TTPs) are not consistently offered. In 2017, the U.S. National Cancer Institute, through the Cancer Moonshot, funded the Cancer Center Cessation Initiative (C3I). C3I supports 52 cancer centers to implement and expand evidence-based tobacco treatment in routine oncology care. Integration into routine care involves the use of health information technology (IT), including modifying electronic health records and clinical workflows. Here, we examine C3I cancer centers' IT leadership involvement and experiences in tobacco-dependence treatment implementation.

Method: This qualitative study of C3I-funded cancer centers integrated data from online surveys and in-person, semistructured interviews with IT leaders. We calculated descriptive statistics of survey data and applied content analysis to interview transcripts.

Results: Themes regarding IT personnel included suggestions to involve IT early, communicate regularly, understand the roles and influence of the IT team, and match program design with IT funding and resources. Themes regarding electronic health record (EHR) modifications included beginning modifications early to account for long lead time to make changes, working with IT to identify and adapt existing EHR tools for TTP or designing tools that will support a desired workflow developed with end-users, and working with IT personnel to make sure TTPs comply with system and state policies (e.g., privacy laws).

Conclusions: The experiences of C3I cancer centers regarding the use of health IT to enhance tobacco-dependence treatment program implementation can guide cancer centers and community oncology practices to potentially enhance TTP implementation and patient outcomes.

Background: The field of implementation science acknowledges the importance of diversity within research teams including members from diverse disciplines and with lived expertise in practical implementation (e.g., administrators, front-line workers, patients/clients). Gaps remain in the successful implementation of proven substance use treatment interventions.

Methods: This paper will outline the rationale for the purposeful inclusion of researchers with lived experience (RLE) related to substance use disorder (SUD) within implementation science research studies focused on improving SUD services.

Results: We posit that researchers with such experience can help address research-to-practice gaps by (1) building strong community partnerships, (2) engaging in conversations around effective interventions through knowledge translation, (3) providing community-congruent approaches to evaluation, and (4) aiding in dissemination and sustainability efforts.

Conclusions: We end by offering recommendations for researchers without lived experience as they intentionally collaborate with RLE.

Background: Reporting on strategies to advance implementation outcomes is imperative. The current study reports descriptive information about external implementation support (EIS) provided over 5 years to 13 regions in North Carolina and South Carolina scaling an evidence-based system of parenting and family supports. Regional support teams operating through the Implementation Capacity for Triple P (ICTP) projects employed core practice components (CPCs) for EIS as proposed by Aldridge et al. and further operationalized by members of The Impact Center at FPG Child Development Institute, UNC-Chapel Hill.

Method: Practice activities associated with CPCs were developed and iteratively refined across the study period. ICTP regional support teams systematically tracked their use of CPCs and related activities following each substantive support interaction. Tracking included the duration of time a CPC was employed and the use of specific practice activities associated with that CPC. Data were aggregated by month of the relationship to account for differential start dates across regions.

Results: From November 2016 through December 2021, ICTP support teams tracked 749 support interactions with Triple P regions in North Carolina and South Carolina. Monthly support decreased year over year, though dose varied considerably. Patterns of CPC use indicated a high dose of "foundational" and "co-design" CPCs early, followed by a blended and more diverse use thereafter, with some notable trends. Practice activities considered essential to influencing intended practice outcomes were characterized by higher rates of use. Like CPCs, practice activities were used dynamically across the study period.

Conclusions: This descriptive study offers a case study for how EIS might be operationalized, tracked, and employed. Findings suggest several interpretations that might refine our understanding and use of EIS. Although the nature of this practical report precludes generalizability of findings, directions for future research and practice are discussed.

Background: External implementation support (EIS) is a well-recognized feature of implementation science and practice, often under related terms such as technical assistance and implementation facilitation. Existing models of EIS have gaps related to addressing practice outcomes at both individual and organizational levels, connecting practice activities to intended outcomes, or grounding in well-established theories of behavior and organization change. Moreover, there have been calls to clarify the mechanisms of change through which EIS influences related outcomes.

Method: In this article, we theorize about mechanisms of change within EIS. Our theorizing process aligns with the approach advocated by Kislov et al. We aim to consolidate prior EIS literature, combining related constructs from previous empirical and conceptual work while drawing on our extensive EIS experience to develop a higher-order, midrange theory of change.

Results: Our theory of change is empirically and practically informed, conceptually situated within an established grand theory of change, and guided by eight practice principles and social cognitive theory. The theory of change proposes 10 core practice components as mechanisms of change within EIS. When used according to underlying theory and principles, they are believed to contribute to favorable practice outcomes at individual, team, organizational, and system levels. The model offers flexibility by recognizing the need for sequential support processes and the demand to practice in dynamic and responsive ways. Case examples are presented to illustrate major themes and patterns of the model in action.

Conclusions: The proposed model is intended to support prospective EIS studies by conceptualizing discernable practice components with hypothesized relationships to proximal and distal practice outcomes. The model can be behaviorally operationalized to compliment and extend competency-based approaches to implementation support practitioner (ISP) training and coaching. Over time, the model should be refined based on new empirical findings and contributions from ISPs across the field.

Background: Interdisciplinary collaboration and stakeholder engagement are key ingredients in implementation science research. However, effective and efficient collaboration can be limited by the complexity of implementation science terms. In this article, we argue that the development and use of plain language implementation science terms is an essential step to facilitate collaboration and engagement.

Method: We present an example of plain language development to portray the process and the potential benefits plain language can have on implementation science research. Implementation scientists and intervention experts codeveloped plain language implementation terms as a part of an implementation-effectiveness trial in western Kenya and in preparation for a stakeholder collaborative design meeting.

Results: The developed plain language terms facilitated wider stakeholder understanding and integration of implementation science findings that could inform the design of a stakeholder-led implementation coaching program.

Conclusions: We encourage the use of the plain language terms presented in this article, further translation, and additional development of other plain language terms for implementation science constructs.

Background: There is a priority need to make community-based care widely available for people living with schizophrenia (PLwS) in low- and middle-income countries. An innovative approach for increasing access could be to integrate clinical services available in tertiary care hospitals with community-based care through a task-sharing approach. We describe such an integrated intervention that was implemented at Tezpur in northeast India in collaboration with the Lokopriya Gopinath Bordoloi Regional Institute of Mental Health (LGBRIMH).

Method: The objectives of the study were to illustrate the feasibility of integrating and implementing the intervention and to describe its individual, systemic, and public health impacts. Due to the limited resources available, we conducted a pragmatic single-arm longitudinal evaluation of the intervention cohort over 24 months.

Results: Of the 239 PLwS enrolled in the intervention, 198 (83%) were followed up for 24 months, with nearly three-quarters reporting a >70% reduction in disabilities, most notably between 6 and 18 months. There was a marked reduction in unmet needs across multiple domains, and at 24 months, 62% of the cohort was engaged in individual jobs or other market-linked livelihood opportunities. There was greater uptake and retention with outpatient contacts at the LGBRIMH, and PLwS experienced a marked (82%) reduction in inpatient admissions rates, as compared to before enrolment. Over a period of 24 months, primary caregivers reported that their families experienced significantly fewer social difficulties such as unemployment, interpersonal conflicts, and social isolation. The intervention had a significant public health impact, with an estimated 51.8% effective treatment coverage rate for the integrated intervention.

Conclusion: Our findings provide preliminary evidence of the feasibility of implementing the integrated intervention and its effectiveness. We believe that there is merit in further in-depth refinement and exploration of this implementation-related research and cost analysis while replicating the intervention in other tertiary care institutions.

Background: Barriers and facilitators, collectively called determinants, of evidence-based practice implementation are key to identifying the best strategies for promoting implementation. Assessing determinants before implementation can help tailor strategies to those that would be most effective. Current measures of determinants are not comparable across implementation settings and implementation scientists and practitioners often have to create their own measures. This study was the first step in creating determinants item banks that are usable across settings and focused on intervention characteristics. We aimed to establish the content validity of the item bank.

Method: This study used a concurrent mixed methods approach. Items for assessing intervention characteristic determinants were first identified through systematic reviews. Implementation scientists then completed a survey where they provided both quantitative and qualitative feedback on the items. Finally, three experts with both clinical and implementation experience provided feedback on redundancy and representativeness.

Results: The systematic reviews identified over 1,959 items so subsequent steps were limited to focus on intervention characteristic determinants (271 items) such as adaptability of the practice. Based on feedback from thirty implementation scientists, the items were reduced to 92 but an additional 53 were added, most due to qualitative feedback. Items were also rewritten based on qualitative results. Three experts reviewed the remaining 145 items. Based on their feedback, the number of items was reduced to 109.

Conclusions: Creating a determinants item bank was feasible and the final items had content validity. The next steps include testing reliability and validity in a larger sample of clinicians implementing evidence-based practices.

Background: Communication research demonstrates that messages often have unintended consequences, but this work has received limited attention in implementation science. This dissemination experiment sought to determine whether state-tailored policy briefs about the behavioral health consequences of adverse childhood experiences (ACEs), compared to national policy briefs on the topic, increased state legislators'/staffers' perceptions of the policy brief relevance and parental blame for the consequences of ACEs, and whether effects differed between Democrats and Republicans.

Method: A preregistered, web-based survey experiment with U.S. state legislators/staffers was conducted in 2021 (n  =  133). Respondents were randomized to view a policy brief about the behavioral health consequences of ACEs that included state-tailored data (intervention condition) or national data (control condition) and then answered survey questions. Dependent variables were perceived policy brief relevance and parental blame for the consequences of ACEs.

Results: The mean policy brief relevance score was 4.1% higher in the intervention than in the control condition (p  =  .24), but the mean parental blame score was 16.5% higher (p  =  .02). When outcomes were dichotomized, 61.2% of respondents in the intervention condition rated parents as "very much to blame" for the consequences of ACEs compared to 37.1% in the control condition (p  =  .01). When the sample was stratified by political affiliation, the effect of the state-tailored policy brief on parental blame was larger in magnitude among Democrats and not significant among Republicans. The intervention policy brief increased the mean parental blame score by 22.8% among Democrats relative to the control policy brief (p  =  .007) and doubled the proportion rating parents as "very much to blame" (52.2% vs. 26.1%, p  =  .03).

Conclusions: Despite limited statistical power, state-tailored policy briefs significantly increased state legislators'/staffers' perceptions of parental blame for the behavioral health consequences of ACEs, relative to a policy brief with national data. Unintended messaging effects warrant greater attention in dissemination research and practice.