1
|
Waaler PM, Bergseth J, Vaskinn L, Espenes K, Holtan T, Kjøbli J, Bjørnebekk G. Identification of treatment elements for adolescents with callous unemotional traits: a systematic narrative review. Child Adolesc Psychiatry Ment Health 2024; 18:110. [PMID: 39227822 DOI: 10.1186/s13034-024-00792-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/09/2024] [Accepted: 07/31/2024] [Indexed: 09/05/2024] Open
Abstract
Adolescents with callous unemotional (CU) traits are at risk for poor quality-of-life outcomes such as incarceration, suicide, and psychopathy. It is currently unknown which treatments are implemented with CU adolescents specifically and which elements make up these interventions. A narrative systematic review was used to identify the treatments and common elements used with CU adolescents (12-18 years). Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials and quasi-experimental studies evaluating psychosocial interventions, delivered within a clinical context, and directed towards the adolescent or their family. Eight studies with 1291 participants were included. Significant decreases in CU traits were demonstrated only in a minority of studies. The most utilized practice elements were set goals for treatment, practice interpersonal/communication skills, prepare for termination, and teach parents skills and strategies; the most utilized process elements were formal therapy, practice exercises, important others, and flexible/adaptive. A majority of the studies did not report an implementation element. While theoretical frameworks for CU children are employed with CU adolescents, there is still uncertainty regarding their suitability for this age group. Given the limited empirical evidence, there is a critical need for further exploration.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Pamela M Waaler
- Department of Special Needs Education, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
| | - Josefine Bergseth
- Center for Child and Adolescent Mental Health, Eastern and Southern Norway, Oslo, Norway
| | - Linda Vaskinn
- Norwegian Directorate for Children, Youth and Family Affairs (Bufdir), Oslo, Norway
| | - Kristin Espenes
- Center for Child and Adolescent Mental Health, Eastern and Southern Norway, Oslo, Norway
- Norwegian Office for Children, Youth and Family Affairs (Bufetat), Oslo, Norway
| | - Thale Holtan
- Center for Child and Adolescent Mental Health, Eastern and Southern Norway, Oslo, Norway
| | - John Kjøbli
- Center for Child and Adolescent Mental Health, Eastern and Southern Norway, Oslo, Norway
- Department of Education, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| | - Gunnar Bjørnebekk
- Department of Special Needs Education, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Rognstad K, Engell T, Fjermestad K, Wentzel-Larsen T, Kjøbli J. Process and Implementation Elements of Measurement Feedback Systems: A Systematic Review. ADMINISTRATION AND POLICY IN MENTAL HEALTH AND MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH 2023:10.1007/s10488-023-01325-3. [PMID: 38153585 DOI: 10.1007/s10488-023-01325-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 11/18/2023] [Indexed: 12/29/2023]
Abstract
Measurement feedback systems (MFS) can help guide treatment and improve clinical outcomes. Studies of MFS are heterogeneous both in execution and results, and the effects of MFS seem restricted by limited attention to process and implementation elements and by limited adoption by health professionals. The current systematic review mapped the use of process and implementation elements in MFS studies. An overview of therapists' use of and attitudes toward MFS is provided. Three-level meta-analyses were used to test theoretically informed process and implementation elements as moderators of the effects of MFS. Hypotheses and general propositions from Clinical Performance Feedback Intervention Theory (CP-FIT) were used to organize the elements of the studies and were used as moderator variables. Previous studies on MFS interventions have had a limited focus on implementation efforts and process elements that may increase the effects of MFS and their use among therapists. Efforts have sparsely been made to reduce barriers to MFS use, and several studies have reported limited engagement with MFS among therapists. Therapists' attitudes toward MFS, feedback, or standardized measures were heterogeneously reported, making data synthesis challenging. Identified process and implementation elements were not significantly associated with effect sizes in the studies and the results did not support the propositions of CP-FIT. The lack of statistically significant associations may be due to limited reporting of details about process and implementation aspects. More research designed to test hypotheses regarding process and implementation elements is needed to improve the use and effects of MFS. Future studies should aspire to report findings in a manner that allows for an understanding of the implementation process and therapists' adoption of these systems.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kristian Rognstad
- Regional Center for Child and Adolescent Mental Health, Eastern and Southern Norway, Oslo, Norway.
- Department of Psychology, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
| | - Thomas Engell
- Regional Center for Child and Adolescent Mental Health, Eastern and Southern Norway, Oslo, Norway
| | | | - Tore Wentzel-Larsen
- Regional Center for Child and Adolescent Mental Health, Eastern and Southern Norway, Oslo, Norway
- Norwegian Centre for Violence and Traumatic Stress Studies, Oslo, Norway
| | - John Kjøbli
- Regional Center for Child and Adolescent Mental Health, Eastern and Southern Norway, Oslo, Norway
- Department of Education, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Davis M, Siegel J, Becker-Haimes EM, Jager-Hyman S, Beidas RS, Young JF, Wislocki K, Futterer A, Mautone JA, Buttenheim AM, Mandell DS, Marx D. Identifying Common and Unique Barriers and Facilitators to Implementing Evidence-Based Practices for Suicide Prevention across Primary Care and Specialty Mental Health Settings. Arch Suicide Res 2023; 27:192-214. [PMID: 34651544 PMCID: PMC9930207 DOI: 10.1080/13811118.2021.1982094] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 15.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/25/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE We identified common and unique barriers and facilitators of evidence-based suicide prevention practices across primary care practices with integrated behavioral health services and specialty mental health settings to identify generalizable strategies for enhancing future implementation efforts. METHOD Twenty-six clinicians and practice leaders from behavioral health (n = 2 programs) and primary care (n = 4 clinics) settings participated. Participation included a semi-structured qualitative interview on barriers and facilitators to implementing evidence-based suicide prevention practices. Within that interview, clinicians participated in a chart-stimulated recall exercise to gather additional information about decision making regarding suicide screening. Interview guides and qualitative coding were informed by leading frameworks in implementation science and behavioral science, and an integrated approach to interpreting qualitative results was used. RESULTS There were a number of similar themes associated with implementation of suicide prevention practices across settings and clinician types, such as the benefits of inter-professional collaboration and uncertainties about managing suicidality once risk was disclosed. Clinicians also highlighted barriers unique to their settings. For primary care settings, time constraints and competing demands were consistently described as barriers. For specialty mental health settings, difficulties coordinating care with schools and other providers in the community made implementation of suicide prevention practices challenging. CONCLUSION Findings can inform the development and testing of implementation strategies that are generalizable across primary care and specialty mental health settings, as well as those tailored for unique site needs, to enhance use of evidence-based suicide prevention practices in settings where individuals at risk for suicide are especially likely to present.HIGHLIGHTSWe examined barriers and facilitators to suicide prevention across health settings.Common and unique barriers and facilitators across health-care settings emerged.Findings can enhance suicide prevention implementation across health-care settings.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Molly Davis
- Department of Psychiatry, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA
- Penn Implementation Science Center at the Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics (PISCE@LDI), University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA
| | - Jennifer Siegel
- University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA
| | - Emily M. Becker-Haimes
- Department of Psychiatry, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA
- Hall Mercer Community Mental Health, University of Pennsylvania Health System
| | - Shari Jager-Hyman
- Department of Psychiatry, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA
| | - Rinad S. Beidas
- Department of Psychiatry, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA
- Penn Implementation Science Center at the Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics (PISCE@LDI), University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA
- Department of Medical Ethics and Health Policy, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA
- Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA
- Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA
- Center for Health Incentives and Behavioral Economics, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA
- Penn Medicine Nudge Unit, University of Pennsylvania Health System, Philadelphia, PA
| | - Jami F. Young
- Department of Psychiatry, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA
- Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, and PolicyLab, Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA
| | - Katherine Wislocki
- Department of Psychiatry, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA
| | - Anne Futterer
- Department of Psychiatry, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA
| | - Jennifer A. Mautone
- Department of Psychiatry, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA
- Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, and PolicyLab, Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA
| | - Alison M. Buttenheim
- Department of Medical Ethics and Health Policy, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA
- Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA
- Center for Health Incentives and Behavioral Economics, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA
- Department of Family and Community Health, School of Nursing, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA
| | - David S. Mandell
- Department of Psychiatry, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA
- Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA
| | - Darby Marx
- Weill Cornell Medical College of Cornell University, New York, NY
| | - Courtney Benjamin Wolk
- Department of Psychiatry, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA
- Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Engell T, Stadnick NA, Aarons GA, Barnett ML. Common Elements Approaches to Implementation Research and Practice: Methods and Integration with Intervention Science. GLOBAL IMPLEMENTATION RESEARCH AND APPLICATIONS 2023; 3:1-15. [PMID: 37013068 PMCID: PMC10063479 DOI: 10.1007/s43477-023-00077-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/24/2022] [Accepted: 03/05/2023] [Indexed: 04/03/2023]
Abstract
We propose that common elements approaches can advance implementation research and practice and facilitate pragmatic use of intervention and implementation evidence. Common elements are practices or processes frequently shared by interventions or implementations. Traditional common elements methodologies use synthesis, distillation, and statistics to describe and evaluate the merit of common ingredients in effective interventions. Recent developments include identifying and testing common configurations of elements, processes, and context variables across the literature of effective interventions and implementations. While common elements thinking has grown popular in intervention science, it has rarely been utilized in implementation science, and specifically, combined with the intervention literature. The goals of this conceptual methodology paper are to (1) provide an overview of the common elements concept and how it may advance implementation research and usability for practice, (2) give a step-by-step guide to systematic common elements reviews that synthesizes and distills the intervention and implementation literature together, and (3) offer recommendations for advancing element-level evidence in implementation science. A narrative review of the common elements literature was conducted with attention to applications to implementation research. A six-step guide to using an advanced common elements methodology was provided. Examples of potential results are presented, along with a review of the implications for implementation research and practice. Finally, we reviewed methodological limitations in current common elements approaches, and identified steps towards realizing their potential. Common elements methodologies can (a) synthesize and distill the implementation science literature into practical applications, (b) generate evidence-informed hypotheses about key elements and determinants in implementation and intervention processes and mechanisms, and (c) promote evidence-informed precision tailoring of intervention and implementation to context. To realize this potential, common elements approaches need improved reporting of details from both successful and unsuccessful intervention and implementation research, more data availability, and more testing and investigation of causal processes and mechanisms of change from diverse theories. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s43477-023-00077-4.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Thomas Engell
- Centre for Child and Adolescent Mental Health, Eastern and Southern Norway, Gullhaugveien 1-3, 0484 Oslo, Norway
| | - Nicole A. Stadnick
- Department of Psychiatry, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA 92093 USA
- Child and Adolescent Services Research Center, San Diego, CA 92123 USA
- University of California San Diego Altman Clinical and Translational Research Institute Dissemination and Implementation Science Center, La Jolla, CA 92093 USA
| | - Gregory A. Aarons
- Department of Psychiatry, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA 92093 USA
- Child and Adolescent Services Research Center, San Diego, CA 92123 USA
- University of California San Diego Altman Clinical and Translational Research Institute Dissemination and Implementation Science Center, La Jolla, CA 92093 USA
| | - Miya L. Barnett
- Department of Counseling, Clinical, & School Psychology, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA 93106-9490 USA
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Czosnek L, Zopf EM, Cormie P, Rosenbaum S, Richards J, Rankin NM. Developing an implementation research logic model: using a multiple case study design to establish a worked exemplar. Implement Sci Commun 2022; 3:90. [PMID: 35974402 PMCID: PMC9382723 DOI: 10.1186/s43058-022-00337-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/19/2022] [Accepted: 08/01/2022] [Indexed: 12/02/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Implementation science frameworks explore, interpret, and evaluate different components of the implementation process. By using a program logic approach, implementation frameworks with different purposes can be combined to detail complex interactions. The Implementation Research Logic Model (IRLM) facilitates the development of causal pathways and mechanisms that enable implementation. Critical elements of the IRLM vary across different study designs, and its applicability to synthesizing findings across settings is also under-explored. The dual purpose of this study is to develop an IRLM from an implementation research study that used case study methodology and to demonstrate the utility of the IRLM to synthesize findings across case sites. METHOD The method used in the exemplar project and the alignment of the IRLM to case study methodology are described. Cases were purposely selected using replication logic and represent organizations that have embedded exercise in routine care for people with cancer or mental illness. Four data sources were selected: semi-structured interviews with purposely selected staff, organizational document review, observations, and a survey using the Program Sustainability Assessment Tool (PSAT). Framework analysis was used, and an IRLM was produced at each case site. Similar elements within the individual IRLM were identified, extracted, and re-produced to synthesize findings across sites and represent the generalized, cross-case findings. RESULTS The IRLM was embedded within multiple stages of the study, including data collection, analysis, and reporting transparency. Between 33-44 determinants and 36-44 implementation strategies were identified at sites that informed individual IRLMs. An example of generalized findings describing "intervention adaptability" demonstrated similarities in determinant detail and mechanisms of implementation strategies across sites. However, different strategies were applied to address similar determinants. Dependent and bi-directional relationships operated along the causal pathway that influenced implementation outcomes. CONCLUSIONS Case study methods help address implementation research priorities, including developing causal pathways and mechanisms. Embedding the IRLM within the case study approach provided structure and added to the transparency and replicability of the study. Identifying the similar elements across sites helped synthesize findings and give a general explanation of the implementation process. Detailing the methods provides an example for replication that can build generalizable knowledge in implementation research.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Louise Czosnek
- Mary MacKillop Institute for Health Research, Australian Catholic University, Melbourne, Australia.
| | - Eva M Zopf
- Mary MacKillop Institute for Health Research, Australian Catholic University, Melbourne, Australia
- Cabrini Cancer Institute, The Szalmuk Family Department of Medical Oncology, Cabrini Health, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Prue Cormie
- Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia
- Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Simon Rosenbaum
- Discipline of Psychiatry and Mental Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
- School of Health Sciences, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
| | - Justin Richards
- Faculty of Health, Victoria University of Wellington, Wellington, New Zealand
| | - Nicole M Rankin
- Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
- Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Beidas RS, Dorsey S, Lewis CC, Lyon AR, Powell BJ, Purtle J, Saldana L, Shelton RC, Stirman SW, Lane-Fall MB. Promises and pitfalls in implementation science from the perspective of US-based researchers: learning from a pre-mortem. Implement Sci 2022; 17:55. [PMID: 35964095 PMCID: PMC9375077 DOI: 10.1186/s13012-022-01226-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 54] [Impact Index Per Article: 27.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/10/2021] [Accepted: 07/20/2022] [Indexed: 12/26/2022] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
|
7
|
Drozd F, Leksbø TS, Størksen HT, Wilhelmsen CEW, Slinning K. An overview of reviews for preventing and treating sleep problems in infants. Acta Paediatr 2022; 111:2071-2076. [PMID: 35778903 DOI: 10.1111/apa.16475] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/20/2022] [Revised: 06/29/2022] [Accepted: 06/30/2022] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
Abstract
AIM Parents and professionals receive conflicting recommendations about management of infant sleep problems. The aim of this umbrella review was to provide an overview of summarised research on the prevention and treatment of sleep problems in infants (0-1 year), content of the interventions, and the conditions under which they are delivered. METHODS The umbrella review included five systematic reviews of 24 individual studies, mainly randomised controlled trials. Searches were conducted in PsycINFO, Cochrane, Campbell, Epistemonikos, PDQ-Evidence, IN SUM, and the Norwegian Institute of Public Health, for reviews published during 2010-2021. RESULTS The systematic reviews showed that behavioural interventions increased sleep in infants and parents. Interventions entailed reducing parental disturbances during sleep onset and enabling the infant to fall asleep and maintain sleep on their own. Knowledge about infant sleep and the establishment of positive bedtime routines seemed crucial for preventing and treating sleep difficulties. The interventions can be delivered in a few sessions, typically one-on-one during the postnatal period. CONCLUSION Behavioural interventions can be recommended and adapted to the individual family. Positive outcomes for the infant and the family depends on a close and coordinated collaboration between child health clinics, community psychologists, general physicians, and other services.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Filip Drozd
- Centre for Child and Adolescent Mental Health, Eastern and Southern Norway, Oslo, Norway
| | - Turid Skjerve Leksbø
- Centre for Child and Adolescent Mental Health, Eastern and Southern Norway, Oslo, Norway
| | | | | | - Kari Slinning
- Centre for Child and Adolescent Mental Health, Eastern and Southern Norway, Oslo, Norway
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Helland SS, Mellblom AV, Kjøbli J, Wentzel-Larsen T, Espenes K, Engell T, Kirkøen B. Elements in Mental Health Interventions Associated with Effects on Emotion Regulation in Adolescents: A Meta-Analysis. ADMINISTRATION AND POLICY IN MENTAL HEALTH AND MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH 2022; 49:1004-1018. [PMID: 35987830 PMCID: PMC9392499 DOI: 10.1007/s10488-022-01213-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/17/2022] [Accepted: 07/23/2022] [Indexed: 01/25/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE Adolescence is a sensitive period for developing mental health problems. Interventions targeting emotion regulation have shown promising transdiagnostic effects for this group, but optimization efforts are called for. In the current study, we used an element-based approach to identify potentially active ingredients in interventions measuring emotion regulation, to guide further optimization. METHODS We coded practice elements in 30 studies based on a systematic review of mental health interventions measuring emotion regulation in adolescents (N = 2,389 participants, mean age 13-17 years). Using a three-level modeling approach, we then investigated the difference in effect on emotion regulation between studies of interventions with and without these practice elements. RESULTS We identified 75 practice elements and 15 element categories used in the included interventions. Results showed significantly stronger effects on emotion regulation when interventions included the practice elements Setting goals for treatment (difference in d = 0.40, 95% CI [0.09, 0.70], p = .012) and Psychoeducation about acceptance (difference in d = 0.58, 95% CI [0.09, 1.07], p = .021). Furthermore, a total of 11 elements and four overall categories were identified as potentially active ingredients, based on an effect size difference of > 0.20 between interventions with and without the elements. CONCLUSION The results can direct experimental research into the selection of practices that are most likely key to mechanisms of change in interventions addressing emotion regulation for adolescents. The challenge of measuring emotion regulation is discussed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Siri Saugestad Helland
- Regional Center for Child and Adolescent Mental Health (RBUP), Southern and Eastern Norway, Gullhaugveien 1-3, 0484 Oslo, Norway
| | - A. V. Mellblom
- Regional Center for Child and Adolescent Mental Health (RBUP), Southern and Eastern Norway, Gullhaugveien 1-3, 0484 Oslo, Norway
| | - J. Kjøbli
- Regional Center for Child and Adolescent Mental Health (RBUP), Southern and Eastern Norway, Gullhaugveien 1-3, 0484 Oslo, Norway ,Institute of Education, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| | - T. Wentzel-Larsen
- Regional Center for Child and Adolescent Mental Health (RBUP), Southern and Eastern Norway, Gullhaugveien 1-3, 0484 Oslo, Norway ,Norwegian Centre for Violence and Traumatic Stress Studies, Oslo, Norway
| | - K. Espenes
- Regional Center for Child and Adolescent Mental Health (RBUP), Southern and Eastern Norway, Gullhaugveien 1-3, 0484 Oslo, Norway
| | - T. Engell
- Regional Center for Child and Adolescent Mental Health (RBUP), Southern and Eastern Norway, Gullhaugveien 1-3, 0484 Oslo, Norway
| | - B Kirkøen
- Regional Center for Child and Adolescent Mental Health (RBUP), Southern and Eastern Norway, Gullhaugveien 1-3, 0484 Oslo, Norway
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Stadnick NA, Aarons GA, Blake L, Brookman-Frazee LI, Dourgnon P, Engell T, Jusot F, Lau AS, Prieur C, Skar AMS, Barnett ML. Leveraging implementation science to reduce inequities in Children's mental health care: highlights from a multidisciplinary international colloquium. BMC Proc 2020; 14:2. [PMID: 32280371 PMCID: PMC7132860 DOI: 10.1186/s12919-020-00184-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/20/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE Access to evidence-based mental health care for children is an international priority. However, there are significant challenges to advancing this public health priority in an efficient and equitable manner. The purpose of this international colloquium was to convene a multidisciplinary group of health researchers to build an agenda for addressing disparities in mental health care access and treatment for children and families through collaboration among scholars from the United States and Europe engaged in innovative implementation science and mental health services research. KEY HIGHLIGHTS Guided by the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, and Sustainment (EPIS) Framework, presentations related to inner, outer, and bridging context factors that impact the accessibility and quality of mental health evidence-based practices (EBPs) for children and families. Three common topics emerged from the presentations and discussions from colloquium participants, which included: 1) the impact of inner and outer context factors that limit accessibility to EBPs across countries, 2) strategies to adapt EBPs to improve their fit in different settings, 3) the potential for implementation science to address emerging clinical and public health concerns. IMPLICATIONS The common topics discussed underscored that disparities in access to evidence-based mental health care are prevalent across countries. Opportunities for cross-country and cross-discipline learnings and collaborations can help drive solutions to address these inequities, which relate to the availability of a trained and culturally appropriate workforce, insurance reimbursement policies, and designing interventions and implementation strategies to support sustained use of evidence-based practices.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nicole A. Stadnick
- University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA 92093 USA
- Child and Adolescent Services Research Center, San Diego, CA 92123 USA
- University of California San Diego Dissemination and Implementation Science Center, La Jolla, CA 92093 USA
| | - Gregory A. Aarons
- University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA 92093 USA
- Child and Adolescent Services Research Center, San Diego, CA 92123 USA
- University of California San Diego Dissemination and Implementation Science Center, La Jolla, CA 92093 USA
| | - Lucy Blake
- Faculty of Health, Social Care & Medicine, Edge Hill University, Ormskirk, Lancashire UK
| | - Lauren I. Brookman-Frazee
- University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA 92093 USA
- Child and Adolescent Services Research Center, San Diego, CA 92123 USA
- University of California San Diego Dissemination and Implementation Science Center, La Jolla, CA 92093 USA
- Autism Discovery Institute, Rady Children’s Hospital, San Diego, USA
| | - Paul Dourgnon
- Institut de Recherche et Documentation en Economie de la Santé, Paris, France
| | - Thomas Engell
- Regional Centre for Child and Adolescent Mental Health, Eastern and Southern Norway, Oslo, Norway
| | - Florence Jusot
- Institut de Recherche et Documentation en Economie de la Santé, Paris, France
- Université Paris-Dauphine, Paris, France
| | - Anna S. Lau
- Child and Adolescent Services Research Center, San Diego, CA 92123 USA
- University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095 USA
| | | | | | - Miya L. Barnett
- Child and Adolescent Services Research Center, San Diego, CA 92123 USA
- University of California, Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara, CA 93106 USA
| |
Collapse
|