Implementation science communications最新文献

Background: As implementation science (IS) in low and middle-income country settings continues to grow and generate interest, there is continual demand for capacity building in the field. Training programs have proliferated, but evaluations of these efforts are sparse and primarily from high-income countries. There is little knowledge about the impact of IS training on students' careers post-graduation. This evaluation of the first cohort of students who graduated from the 18-month implementation science concentration in HIV/AIDS within the Master of Science program at University of the Witwatersrand in South Africa addresses this gap.

Methods: We conducted two rounds of virtual interviews with the students, who were from eight African countries, immediately after the training program ended (n = 10 participants) and again five years later (n = 9 participants). The first survey captured student perceptions of IS before they entered the program and their opinions just after graduation. The follow-up evaluated their perceptions five years after graduation. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and coded in ATLAS.ti (first round) and MAXQDA (second round), using the framework method and thematic analysis.

Results: Prior to the training, all students, even those with no knowledge of the field, perceived that the IS training program would help them develop skills to address critical public health priorities. These expectations were generally met by the training program, and most students reported satisfaction despite what they felt was a limited timeframe of the program and insufficient mentorship to complete their dissertation projects at their home institutions across the African continent. Five years post-graduation, most of the students did not have jobs in IS but continued applying their training in their roles and had subsequently pursued further education, some in IS-related programs.

Conclusions: IS training in Africa was clearly seen as valuable by trainees but IS job opportunities remain scarce. Training programs need to be more closely tied to local government priorities, and training for in-country policy and decision-makers is needed to increase demand for qualified IS researchers and practitioners.

Background: Delays and missed opportunities for timely treatment contribute significantly to stark inequities in cervical cancer mortality in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) compared to high-income countries. The vast majority (approximately 90%) of new cases and deaths occur in LMICs, particularly those with high rates of HIV such as Botswana. To date, most of the implementation and cancer control research in Botswana and other LMICs has focused on cancer prevention and screening, with limited focus on cancer treatment. As such, there is a critical need to identify effective strategies to ensure timely care, and to understand contextual factors that shape the response to strategies. Without this fundamental knowledge, cervical cancer will remain a public health crisis in Botswana and other LMICs.

Methods: To help fill this known gap, this study tests the effectiveness of adaptive strategies on timely treatment adoption using a hybrid (type III) Sequential Multiple Assignment Randomized Trial (SMART) design and evaluate contextual mechanisms contributing to the success or failure of each adaptive strategy. The adaptive strategies are designed to target contextual determinants identified in our prior work, including delayed communication of results to patients, individual and structural barriers to accessing treatment, and suboptimal care coordination between referring and cancer treatment clinics, and are supported by systematic evidence of the effectiveness of nudge strategies in clinical care. The primary implementation outcome is adoption, defined as the initiation of treatment within 90 days. Secondary outcomes include fidelity, reach, acceptability, implementation costs, and cancer and HIV-related clinical outcomes. The rationale for the study is that enhancing coordination, communication, and navigation through centralized outreach will both increase timely treatment adoption and be scalable and sustainable after the project is completed.

Discussion: This innovative study seeks to decrease cervical cancer mortality in LMICs by developing and implementing effective and sustainable strategies that can be sustained and adapted to other contexts. Additionally, this study seeks to advance the long-term impact of global implementation science through strong and sustained partnerships in Botswana and other LMICs.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05952141. Registered on July 11, 2023. https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05952141 PROTOCOL VERSION AND DATE: Version 1 (September 28, 2024).

Background: Collaboration strategies refer to policies and practices used to align operations and services across organizations or systems. These strategies can influence implementation of cross-system interventions focused on improving integration of care, but remain under-specified and under-examined. This study identifies collaboration strategies and the conditions under which they affected implementation of Sobriety Treatment and Recovery Teams (START), an evidence-based intervention focused on integrating child welfare and behavioral health services for families involved with both systems.

Methods: Our study sample included 17 county child welfare agencies that implemented START. Data on collaboration strategies and organizational context were obtained from key informant interviews, frontline worker surveys, and contracts. Contextual data were drawn from secondary data, and fidelity data were drawn from an administrative database. Qualitative and quantitative data were integrated using coincidence analysis, and used to identify combinations of conditions that uniquely differentiated agencies with higher and lower fidelity to START.

Results: Fidelity was lower for intervention components requiring cross-system collaboration. Although key informants acknowledged the importance of collaboration for START implementation, few agencies used formal collaboration strategies other than staff co-location or reported high communication quality between frontline staff in child welfare and behavioral health. In coincidence analysis, four conditions differentiated agencies with higher and lower fidelity with 100% consistency and 88% coverage. We found that either strong leadership support or, in high need communities, third-party resource support from local behavioral health boards were sufficient for high fidelity. Similarly, in high need communities, absence of third-party resource support was sufficient for low fidelity, while in low need communities, absence of communication quality was sufficient for low fidelity.

Conclusion: Administrators, frontline workers, and interested third parties (i.e., other stakeholders not directly involved in implementation) can use collaboration strategies to facilitate implementation. However, the effectiveness of collaboration strategies depends on local context. In agencies where internal leadership support for implementation is low but need for intervention is high, third-party resource support may still be sufficient for high fidelity. Further research is needed to test effectiveness of collaboration strategies in different conditions and on a broader range of process and implementation outcomes.

Trials registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03931005, Registered 04/29/2019, https://classic.

Clinicaltrials: gov/ct2/show/NCT03931005 .

Background: The efficacy of lung cancer screening (LCS) to reduce lung cancer specific mortality is heavily dependent on adherence to recommended screening guidelines, with real-world adherence rates reported to be drastically lower than rates described in clinical trials. There is a dearth in the literature on reminder processes and clinical workflows used to address adherence and robust data is needed to fully understand which clinical set-ups, processes, and context enhance and increase continued LCS participation. This paper describes a protocol for an environmental scan of adherence and reminder processes that are currently used in LCS programs across the United States.

Methods: This study will triangulate data using a 3-step explanatory sequential mixed methods design to describe mechanisms of current adherence and reminder systems within academic and community LCS programs to pinpoint clinic or system barrier and facilitator combinations that contribute to increased adherence. In step 1, surveys from a nationally representative sample of LCS programs will yield quantitative data about program structure, volume, and tracking/reminder processes and messages. After completion of the survey, interested LCS program personnel will be invited to participate in an in-depth interview (step 2) to explore current processes and interventions used for adherence at the participant and program level. Finally, in step 3, triangulation of quantitative and qualitative data will be completed through qualitative comparative analysis to identify combinations of components that affect higher or lower adherence.

Discussion: This research advances the state of the science by filling a gap in knowledge about LCS program characteristics and processes associated with better adherence which can inform the development and implementation of interventions that are scalable and sustainable across a wide variety of clinical practice settings.

Background: LGBTQ-affirmative cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) is an evidence-based treatment for reducing transdiagnostic mental and behavioral health concerns among LGBTQ individuals. Preserving the effects of this intervention as it is translated into practice can maximize public health benefits. This study systematically identifies and evaluates implementation strategies for LGBTQ-affirmative CBT.

Methods: First, we identified and operationalized implementation strategies used across five trials of LGBTQ-affirmative CBT using the Pragmatic Implementation Reporting Tool. Second, we evaluated the relative importance of these strategies via a quantitative assessment (N = 31 unique trial implementers). Survey responses were analyzed descriptively within each trial. Across all trials, we organized strategies as (1) high priority, (2) moderate priority, and (3) optional (if resources are available) for implementing LGBTQ-affirmative CBT.

Results: Within each trial, we identified 20 or more implementation strategies that were used, many of which overlapped across trials. We identified nine high priority strategies (e.g., working with clients to engage them in LGBTQ-affirmative CBT), nine moderate priority strategies (e.g., conducting ongoing training in LGBTQ-affirmative CBT), and nine optional/resource dependent strategies (e.g., showing visual indicators of LGBTQ affirmation within the physical spaces where LGBTQ-affirmative CBT is delivered).

Conclusions: LGBTQ-affirmative CBT is a complex intervention requiring a package of implementation strategies. Our findings provide guidance for implementers in settings with different levels of resources regarding the highest priority strategies that may be needed to preserve the effectiveness of LGBTQ-affirmative CBT as it is translated into real-world settings.

Background: Implementation strategies are key to enhancing the translation of new innovations but there is a need to systematically design and tailor strategies to match the targeted implementation context and address determinants. There are increasing methods to inform the development and tailoring of implementation strategies to maximize their usability, feasibility, and appropriateness in new settings such as the Cognitive Walkthrough for Implementation Strategies (CWIS) approach. The aim of the current project is to apply the CWIS approach to inform the redesign of a multifaceted selection-quality implementation toolkit entitled Adoption of Curricular supports Toolkit: Systematic Measurement of Appropriateness and Readiness for Translation in Schools (ACT SMARTS) for use in middle and high schools.

Methods: We systematically applied CWIS as the second part of a community-partnered iterative redesign of ACT SMARTS for schools to evaluate the usability and inform further toolkit redesign areas. We conducted three CWIS user testing sessions with key end users of school district administrators (n = 3), school principals (n = 6), and educators (n = 6).

Results: Our CWIS application revealed that end users found ACT SMARTS acceptable and relevant but anticipate usability issues engaging in the ACT SMARTS process. Results informed the identification of eleven usability issues and corresponding redesign solutions to enhance the usability of ACT SMARTS for use in middle and high schools.

Conclusions: Results indicated the utility of CWIS in assessing implementation strategy usability in service of informing strategy modification as part of our broader redesign to improve alignment with end user, end recipient, and setting needs. Recommendations regarding the use of this participatory approach are discussed.

Background: Dissemination and implementation science is an evolving field that focuses on the strategies and mechanisms by which scientific evidence is adopted, used, and sustained in clinical and community practice.

Main body: Implementation scientists are confronted by the challenge to balance rigor and generalizability in their work while also attempting to speed the translation of evidence into clinical and community practice. Hybrid Effectiveness-Implementation studies and the RE-AIM framework were conceptualized to address these challenges. Hybrid Effectiveness-Implementation (HEI) studies provide methods of examining the effectiveness of health promoting interventions while concurrently assessing the utility of dissemination and implementation strategies designed to enhance the application of evidence-based principles in practice. RE-AIM provides a set of planning and evaluation dimensions that can be assessed with a goal to balance internal and external validity. The purpose of this commentary is to provide clarity on definitions of each approach and how to effectively use them together to answer research questions that will advance dissemination and implementation science for health promotion.

Conclusions: We provide examples of concerted use of RE-AIM within HEI studies from the literature and focus on language to provide a clarity and consistency across research questions, designs, and settings. We share how to operationalize RE-AIM dimensions in HEI studies for both dissemination and implementation strategies. Future directions include refining, defining, and evaluating each RE-AIM dimension within hybrid studies.

Background: Adaptation of evidence-based interventions (EBIs) often occurs when implemented in new local contexts and settings. It is unclear, however, during which phase of implementation adaptations are most frequently made and how these changes may impact the fidelity, effectiveness, and sustainability of the EBI. Pediatric Early Warning Systems (PEWS) are EBIs for early identification of deterioration in hospitalized children with cancer. This study evaluates adaptations of PEWS made among resource-variable pediatric oncology hospitals in Latin America implementing and sustaining PEWS.

Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional survey among pediatric oncology centers participating in Proyecto Escala de Valoración de Alerta Temprana (EVAT), a collaborative to implement PEWS. Adaptations to PEWS were assessed via 3 multiple choice and 1 free text question administered as part of a larger study of PEWS sustainability. Descriptive statistics quantitatively described what, when, and why adaptations were made. Qualitative analysis of free text responses applied the Framework for Reporting Adaptations and Modifications Expanded (FRAME) to describe respondent perspectives on PEWS adaptations.

Results: We analyzed 2,094 responses from 58 pediatric oncology centers across 19 countries in Latin America. Participants were predominantly female (82.5%), consisting of nurses (57.4%) and physicians (38.2%) who were PEWS implementation leaders (22.1%) or clinical staff (69.1%). Respondents described multiple PEWS adaptations across all implementation phases, with most occurring during the planning and piloting of EBIs. Adaptations included changes to PEWS content (algorithm, scoring tool, terminology, and use frequency) and context (personnel delivering or population). Respondents felt adaptations streamlined monitoring, enhanced effectiveness, improved workflow, increased comprehension, and addressed local resource limitations. Qualitative analysis indicated that most adaptations were categorized as fidelity consistent and planned; fidelity inconsistent adaptations were unplanned responses to unanticipated challenges.

Conclusion: Adaptations made to PEWS across implementation phases demonstrate how EBIs are adapted to fit dynamic, real-world clinical settings. This research advances implementation science by highlighting EBI adaptation as a potential strategy to promote widespread implementation and sustainability in hospitals of all resource levels.

Background: In clinical oncology practice, patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are essential for assessing the symptom burden, quality of life, and psychological status of patients. However, there remains a gap between the use of PROs in an oncologic setting and its implementation. Furthermore, numerous reviews in PRO implementation are often based on one particular technology, setting, or health condition, making it difficult to obtain a comprehensive and coherent summary of available evidence to help plan and undertake implementation. This systematic review aims to identify and integrate enablers and barriers to PRO implementation through the comprehensive framework for implementation research (CFIR) to provide a reference for implementing patient-reported outcomes management in oncology settings.

Methods: This review strictly observed the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. PubMed, Web of Science, CINAHL, Embase, and PsycINFO databases were systematically searched using a three-step search strategy. The search was limited from the inception of each database to April 2024. Articles describing facilitators and barriers to implementing PROs in clinical oncology practice were included. Two researchers screened the literature independently, and the quality assessment of cross-sectional, qualitative, and mixed studies was completed using the critical appraisal tools recommended by Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) and the mixed methods assessment tool, respectively. Basic information about the included studies and determinants affecting PRO implementation was extracted, and coding categorization of facilitators and barriers was completed based on the 48 constructs provided by the CFIR framework.

Results: We included 30 studies from 5,649 search results, including 25 original and 5 review studies. The quality of the literature for qualitative studies was generally good, and the quality for quantitative and mixed studies was assessed as fair. We identified 52 facilitators and 50 barriers in the included literature, covering the domains used in the CFIR framework and 39 constructs, mainly including "Innovation Evidence-Base", "Innovation Complexity", "Innovation Design", "Structural Characteristics", "Compatibility", "Incentive Systems", "Access to Knowledge & Information", "Innovation Deliverers", "Innovation Recipients", and "Planning".

Conclusions: This systematic review integrated facilitators and barriers affecting PRO implementation in routine oncology clinical practice settings and categorized them through the CFIR framework. These influencing factors should be fully considered in future clinical practice to ensure the successful implementation of PROs.

Trial registration: It has been registered prospectively in PROSPERO under the registration number 42024532983.