How Practice Facilitation Strategies Differ by Practice Context

Quality Coordinators' Perspectives on Quality Improvement in Primary Healthcare in Kosovo: A Qualitative Study

AIMS

This qualitative descriptive study provides insights into the experiences of quality coordinators (QCs) in primary healthcare to inform policy and practice actions and empower QCs to enhance healthcare quality.

METHODS

We conducted focus group discussions with purposefully selected QCs to understand their motivations, job experiences, factors influencing healthcare quality, and suggestions for quality improvement. Content analysis and deductive coding were used to scrutinize the responses and answer the research questions.

RESULTS

The QCs thought highly about their job performance and were motivated by both extrinsic and intrinsic factors. Clinical audits, collegial reviews, and managerial support positively affected QCs' performance. In contrast, a lack of managerial support, limited working hours, and changes in organizing work caused the opposite. Empowerment and external support positively influenced healthcare quality, whereas lack of resources, managerial support, or training had a negative influence. Suggestions to improve quality include the role of QCs, external supervision, and centralization of the QCs' network.

CONCLUSION

Appointing QCs alone does not guarantee quality improvement. It is essential to ensure that QCs have the appropriate skills, tools, management support, and open communication channels. Further research is required to evaluate the effects of sex and age on QCs' performance.

A Clinical Guide to Support the Implementation of Addiction Consult Services and the Value of Teaching and Technical Assistance

ABSTRACT

People with substance use disorders (SUDs) are increasingly admitted to general hospitals; however, many hospital systems lack both formal structures and skilled staff to provide high-quality care for inpatients with SUDs. Inpatient addiction consult services (ACSs), which are increasingly being implemented around the country, are an evidence-based strategy to add focused care for people with SUDs into the general medical setting. In 2018, New York City Health + Hospitals (H + H) launched an ACS program called Consult for Addiction Care and Treatment in Hospitals in six hospitals, supported by a team of addiction consult experts to deliver teaching and technical assistance (TTA) for the Consult for Addiction Care and Treatment in Hospitals ACSs. This commentary describes the TTA, which included site visits, introductory educational lectures, case conferences, ad hoc support, implementation assistance, and the creation of an addiction care guide. Similar TTA services could be used in the future when hospitals or systems want to launch novel clinical programs.

Characteristics of primary care practices by proportion of patients unvaccinated against SARS-CoV-2: a cross-sectional cohort study

BACKGROUND

Variations in primary care practices may explain some differences in health outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic. We sought to evaluate the characteristics of primary care practices by the proportion of patients unvaccinated against SARS-CoV-2.

METHODS

We conducted a population-based, cross-sectional cohort study using linked administrative data sets in Ontario, Canada. We calculated the percentage of patients unvaccinated against SARS-CoV-2 enrolled with each comprehensive-care family physician, ranked physicians according to the proportion of patients unvaccinated, and identified physicians in the top 10% (v. the other 90%). We compared characteristics of family physicians and their patients in these 2 groups using standardized differences.

RESULTS

We analyzed 9060 family physicians with 10 837 909 enrolled patients. Family physicians with the largest proportion (top 10%) of unvaccinated patients (n = 906) were more likely to be male, to have trained outside of Canada, to be older, and to work in an enhanced fee-for-service model than those in the remaining 90%. Vaccine coverage (≥ 2 doses of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine) was 74% among patients of physicians with the largest proportion of unvaccinated patients, compared with 87% in the remaining patient population. Patients in the top 10% group tended to be younger and live in areas with higher levels of ethnic diversity and immigration and lower incomes.

INTERPRETATION

Primary care practices with the largest proportion of patients unvaccinated against SARS-CoV-2 served marginalized communities and were less likely to use team-based care models. These findings can guide resource planning and help tailor interventions to integrate public health priorities within primary care practices.

Virtual facilitation best practices and research priorities: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Facilitation is an implementation strategy that supports the uptake of evidence-based practices. Recently, use of virtual facilitation (VF), or the application of facilitation using primarily video-based conferencing technologies, has become more common, especially since the COVID-19 pandemic. Thorough assessment of the literature on VF, however, is lacking. This scoping review aimed to identify and describe conceptual definitions of VF, evaluate the consistency of terminology, and recommend "best" practices for its use as an implementation strategy.

METHODS

We conducted a scoping review to identify literature on VF following the PRISMA-ScR guidance. A search of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and CINAHL databases was conducted in June 2022 for English language articles published from January 2012 through May 2022 and repeated in May 2023 for articles published from January 2012 through April 2023. Identified articles, including studies and conference abstracts describing VF, were uploaded into Covidence and screened independently by two reviewers. Data extraction was done by two reviewers in Microsoft Excel; additionally, studies were evaluated based on the Proctor et al. (2013) reporting guidelines for specifying details of implementation strategies.

RESULTS

The search strategy identified 19 articles. After abstract and full-text screening, eight studies described by 10 articles/abstracts were included in analysis. Best practices summarized across studies included (1) stakeholder engagement, (2) understanding the recipient's organization, (3) facilitator training, (4) piloting, (5) evaluating facilitation, (6) use of group facilitation to encourage learning, and (7) integrating novel tools for virtual interaction. Three papers reported all or nearly all components of the Proctor et al. reporting guidelines; justification for use of VF was the most frequently omitted.

CONCLUSIONS

This scoping review evaluated available literature on use of VF as a primary implementation strategy and identified significant variability on how VF is reported, including inconsistent terminology, lack of details about how and why it was conducted, and limited adherence to published reporting guidelines. These inconsistencies impact generalizability of these methods by preventing replicability and full understanding of this emerging methodology. More work is needed to develop and evaluate best practices for effective VF to promote uptake of evidence-based interventions.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

N/A.

Communities catalyzing change with data to mitigate an invisible menace, traffic-related air pollution

OBJECTIVES

To identify strategies and tactics communities use to translate research into environmental health action.

METHODS

We employed a qualitative case study design to explore public health action conducted by residents, organizers, and public health planners in two Massachusetts communities as part of a community based participatory (CBPR) research study. Data sources included key informant interviews (n = 24), reports and direct observation of research and community meetings (n = 10) and project meeting minutes from 2016-2021. Data were coded deductively drawing on the community organizing and implementation frameworks.

RESULTS

In Boston Chinatown, partners drew broad participation from community-based organizations, residents, and municipal leaders, which resulted in air pollution mitigation efforts being embedded in the master planning process. In Somerville, partners focused on change at multiple levels, developer behavior, and separate from the funded research, local legislative efforts, and litigation.

CONCLUSIONS

CBPR affords communities the ability to environmental health efforts in a way that is locally meaningful, leveraging their respective strengths. External facilitation can support the continuity and sustainment of community led CBPR efforts.

Perspectives of clinical stakeholders and patients from four VA liver clinics to tailor practice facilitation for implementing evidence-based alcohol-related care

BACKGROUND

Unhealthy alcohol use (UAU) is particularly dangerous for people with chronic liver disease. Liver clinics may be an important setting in which to provide effective alcohol-related care by integrating evidence-based strategies, such as brief intervention and medications for alcohol use disorder. We conducted qualitative interviews with clinical stakeholders and patients at liver clinics in four Veterans Health Administration (VA) medical centers to understand barriers and facilitators of integrating alcohol-related care and to support tailoring of a practice facilitation implementation intervention.

METHODS

Data collection and analysis were guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Interviews were transcribed and qualitatively analyzed using a Rapid Assessment Process (RAP) guided by the CFIR.

RESULTS

We interviewed 46 clinical stakeholders and 41 patient participants and analyzed findings based on the CFIR. Clinical stakeholders described barriers and facilitators that ranged from operations/clinic resource-based (e.g., time and capacity, desire for additional provider types, referral processes) to individual perspective and preference-based (e.g., supportiveness of leadership, individual experiences/beliefs). Patient participants shared barriers and facilitators that ranged from relationship-based (e.g., trusting the provider and feeling judged) to resource and education-based (e.g., connection to a range of treatment options, education about impact of alcohol). Many barriers and facilitators to integrating alcohol-related care in liver clinics were similar to those identified in other clinical settings (e.g., time, resources, role clarity, stigmatizing beliefs). However, some barriers (e.g., fellow-led care and lack of integration of liver clinics with addictions specialists) and facilitators (e.g., presence of quality improvement staff in clinics and integrated pharmacists and behavioral health specialists) were more unique to liver clinics.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings support the possibility of integrating alcohol-related care into liver clinics but highlight the importance of tailoring efforts to account for variation in provider beliefs and experiences and clinic resources. The barriers and facilitators identified in these interviews were used to tailor a practice facilitation implementation intervention in each clinic setting.

Facilitation in evidence implementation - experiences, challenges, and determinants of perceived effectiveness: a qualitative systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Facilitation is a key element of evidence implementation. Although quantitative systematic reviews have been undertaken to examine its components and effectiveness, no attempt has been made to synthesize qualitative evidence examining the experiences of facilitators on how facilitation is operationalized, the challenges associated with it, and the factors that can influence its perceived effectiveness.

METHODS

A systematic review of qualitative studies was conducted using the JBI methodology.

RESULTS

A total of 36 qualitative studies was included in the systematic review, with the majority being assessed as high quality following critical appraisal. The findings were extracted and further synthesized, highlighting that facilitation involves providing technical and non-technical support to health professionals, as well as high-intensity collaborations and relationship building. Determinants of perceived effectiveness of facilitation include facilitators' access to resources and learning support; their skills, traits/attitudes, and approach to facilitation; and the context of the organization where the implementation occurs. Work demands, emotional stress, and lack of clarity in roles and career development can pose challenges for facilitators.

CONCLUSION

To maximize the outcomes of facilitation in evidence implementation, the team of facilitators should be carefully selected to ensure they have the right skills, traits/attitudes, and approach to facilitation. They should also be provided with dedicated time to conduct the facilitation and have access to resources, training, and mentoring support. Future research should aim to examine the perspectives of the "implementers" who received support from facilitators to gain a better understanding of which facilitation strategies have an impact on clinical practice behavior.

REVIEW REGISTRATION NUMBER

PROSPERO CRD42023402496.

Practice Facilitation to Support Family Physicians in Encouraging COVID-19 Vaccine Uptake: A Multimethod Process Evaluation

PURPOSE

We offered a practice facilitation intervention to family physicians in Ontario, Canada, known to have large numbers of patients not yet vaccinated against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).

METHODS

We conducted a multimethod process evaluation embedded within a randomized controlled trial (clinical trial #NCT05099497). We collected descriptive statistics regarding engagement and qualitative interview data from family physicians and practice facilitators, as well as data from facilitator field notes. We analyzed and triangulated the data using thematic analysis and mapped barriers to and enablers for implementation to structural, organizational, physician, and patient factors.

RESULTS

Of the 300 approached, 90 family physicians (30%) accepted facilitation. Of these, 57% received technical support to identify unvaccinated patients, 29% used trained medical student volunteers to contact patients on their behalf, and 30% used automated calling to reach patients. Key factors affecting engagement with the intervention were staff shortages owing to COVID-19 (structural), clinic characteristics such as technical issues and gatekeeping by staff, which prevented facilitators from talking with physicians (organizational), burnout (physician), and specialized populations that required targeted resources (patient). The facilitator's ability to address technical issues and connect family physicians with medical students helped with engagement.

CONCLUSIONS

Strategies to help underresourced family physicians serving high-needs populations for issues of public health importance, such as vaccine promotion, must acknowledge the scarcity of physicians' time and provide new resources. To successfully engage family physicians, practice facilitators should seek to build trust and relationships over time, including with front-office staff.

Enabling primary healthcare service development with patient participation: a qualitative study of the internal facilitator role in Norway

AIM

To explore how primary healthcare professionals (HCPs) tasked with facilitating primary healthcare service development with patient participation perceived their role.

INTRODUCTION

Patient participation in health service development is a recognized means of ensuring that health services fit the public's needs. However, HCPs are often uncertain about how to involve patient representatives (PRs), and patient participation is poorly implemented. Inspired by the Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services framework, we address the innovation (patient participation), its recipients (PRs, HCPs, supervisors, and senior managers), and its context (primary healthcare at a local and organizational level).

METHODS

We conducted semi-structured individual interviews with six HCPs working as internal facilitators in primary healthcare in four Norwegian municipalities. The data were analyzed by applying Braun and Clarke's reflexive thematic analysis.

FINDINGS

The themes show that to develop primary healthcare services with patient participation, facilitators must establish a network of PRs with relevant skills, promote involvement within their organization, engage HCPs favorable toward patient participation, and demonstrate to supervisors and senior managers its usefulness to win their support. Implementing patient participation must be a shared, collective responsibility of facilitators, supervisors, and senior management. However, supervisors and senior management appear not to fully understand the potential of involvement or how to support the facilitators. The facilitator role requires continuous and systematic work on multiple organizational levels to enable the development of health services with patient participation. It entails maintaining a network of persons with experiential knowledge, engaging HCPs, and having senior management's understanding and support.

Integrating Opioid Use Disorder Treatment Into Primary Care Settings

Importance

Medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) (eg, buprenorphine and naltrexone) can be offered in primary care, but barriers to implementation exist.

Objective

To evaluate an implementation intervention over 2 years to explore experiences and perspectives of multidisciplinary primary care (PC) teams initiating or expanding MOUD.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This survey-based and ethnographic qualitative study was conducted at 12 geographically and structurally diverse primary care clinics that enrolled in a hybrid effectiveness-implementation study from July 2020 to July 2022 and included PC teams (prescribing clinicians, nonprescribing behavioral health care managers, and consulting psychiatrists). Survey data analysis was conducted from February to April 2022.

Exposure

Implementation intervention (external practice facilitation) to integrate OUD treatment alongside existing collaborative care for mental health services.

Measures

Data included (1) quantitative surveys of primary care teams that were analyzed descriptively and triangulated with qualitative results and (2) qualitative field notes from ethnographic observation of clinic implementation meetings analyzed using rapid assessment methods.

Results

Sixty-two primary care team members completed the survey (41 female individuals [66%]; 1 [2%] American Indian or Alaskan Native, 4 [7%] Asian, 5 [8%] Black or African American, 5 [8%] Hispanic or Latino, 1 [2%] Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, and 46 [4%] White individuals), of whom 37 (60%) were between age 25 and 44 years. An analysis of implementation meetings (n = 362) and survey data identified 4 themes describing multilevel factors associated with PC team provision of MOUD during implementation, with variation in their experience across clinics. Themes characterized challenges with clinical administrative logistics that limited the capacity to provide rapid access to care and patient engagement as well as clinician confidence to discuss aspects of MOUD care with patients. These challenges were associated with conflicting attitudes among PC teams toward expanding MOUD care.

Conclusions and Relevance

The results of this survey and qualitative study of PC team perspectives suggest that PC teams need flexibility in appointment scheduling and the capacity to effectively engage patients with OUD as well as ongoing training to maintain clinician confidence in the face of evolving opioid-related clinical issues. Future work should address structural challenges associated with workload burden and limited schedule flexibility that hinder MOUD expansion in PC settings.

Implementing practice facilitation in research: how facilitators spend their time guiding practices to improve blood pressure control

BACKGROUND

Practice facilitators (PFs) coach practices through quality improvement (QI) initiatives aimed at enhancing patient outcomes and operational efficiencies. Practice facilitation is a dynamic intervention that, by design, is tailored to practices' unique needs and contexts. Little research has explored the amount of time PFs spend with practices on QI activities. This short report expands on previously published work that detailed a 12-month practice facilitation intervention as part of the Southeastern Collaboration to Improve Blood Pressure Control (SEC) trial, which focused on improving hypertension control among people living in rural settings in the southeastern USA. This report analyzes data on the time PFs spent to guide 32 primary care practices in implementing QI activities to support enhanced outcomes in patients with high blood pressure.

METHODS

The SEC trial employed four certified PFs across all practice sites, who documented time spent: (1) driving to support practices; (2) working on-site with staff and clinicians; and (3) communicating remotely (phone, email, or video conference) with practice members. We analyzed the data using descriptive statistics to help understand time devoted to individual and aggregated tasks. Additionally, we explored correlations between practice characteristics and time spent with PFs.

RESULTS

In aggregate, the PFs completed 416 visits to practices and spent an average of 130 (SD 65) min per visit driving to and from practices. The average time spent on-site per visit with practices was 87 (SD 37) min, while an average of 17 (SD 12) min was spent on individual remote communications. During the 12-month intervention, 1131 remote communications were conducted with practices. PFs spent most of their time with clinical staff members (n = 886 instances) or with practice managers alone (n = 670 instances) while relatively few on-site visits were conducted with primary care providers alone (n = 15). In 19 practices, no communications were solely with providers. No significant correlations were found between time spent on PF activities and a practices' percent of Medicaid and uninsured patients, staff-provider ratio, or federally qualified health center (FQHC) status.

CONCLUSIONS

PFs working with practices serving rural patients with hypertension devote substantial time to driving, highlighting the importance of optimizing a balance between time spent on-site vs. communicating remotely. Most time spent was with clinical staff, not primary care providers. These findings may be useful to researchers and business leaders who design, test, and implement efficient facilitation services.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NIH ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02866669 . Registered on 15 August 2016. NHLBI AWARD number: PCS-1UH3HL130691.

Building Capacity of Community Nurses to Strengthen the Management of Uncomplicated Hypertension in Persons Living with HIV in Low- and Middle-Income Countries

Objectives

Poor training of non-physician healthcare workers (especially community nurses) could hinder the successful integration of cardiovascular disease (CVD) management into HIV chronic care in primary healthcare facilities in low- and middle-income countries. To address this limitation, we included a holistic training programme with a robust module for both practice facilitators and community nurses as part of the formative stages of the managing hypertension among people living with HIV: an integrated model (MAP-IT), which is a study that is evaluating the effectiveness of practice facilitation on the integration of a task-strengthening strategy for hypertension control (TASSH) into primary healthcare centres in Akwa Ibom State of Nigeria.

Methods

Between June and November 2021, 3 didactic training workshops were conducted using a training module which is based on the simplified Nigerian Hypertension Protocol for primary care and the World Health Organization (WHO) heart package. Knowledge acquired by the participants was assessed using anonymized pre- and post-training assessments in the first two workshops. Participants' view of the training was assessed using a comprehensive course evaluation questionnaire.

Results

A total of 92 community nurses and six practice facilitators were trained in the workshops on managing hypertension in persons living with HIV. Mean pre- and post-test scores improved from 11.9(3.4) to 15.9(2.9); p < 0.001 in the first workshop, and from 15.4(0.9) to 16.4 (1.4); p < 0.001 in the second workshop. The methodology used in the training, understanding of the MAP-IT study programme, and the level of engagement was highly rated by the participants with LIKERT scores of 3.2/4.0, 3.2/4.0, and 3.1/4.0 respectively.

Conclusion

Our training methodology, which involved the train-the-trainer model to deliver simplified HIV and HTN care guidelines, showed improvement in the knowledge of managing hypertension in persons living with HIV and was highly rated by participants.

Facilitating implementation of primary care mental health over time and across organizational contexts: a qualitative study of role and process

BACKGROUND

Healthcare organizations have increasingly utilized facilitation to improve implementation of evidence-based practices and programs (e.g., primary care mental health integration). Facilitation is both a role, related to the purpose of facilitation, and a process, i.e., how a facilitator operationalizes the role. Scholars continue to call for a better understanding of this implementation strategy. Although facilitation is described as dynamic, activities are often framed within the context of a staged process. We explored two understudied characteristics of implementation facilitation: 1) how facilitation activities change over time and in response to context, and 2) how facilitators operationalize their role when the purpose of facilitation is both task-focused (i.e., to support implementation) and holistic (i.e., to build capacity for future implementation efforts).

METHODS

We conducted individual monthly debriefings over thirty months with facilitators who were supporting PCMHI implementation in two VA networks. We developed a list of facilitation activities based on a literature review and debriefing notes and conducted a content analysis of debriefing notes by coding what activities occurred and their intensity by quarter. We also coded whether facilitators were "doing" these activities for sites or "enabling" sites to perform them.

RESULTS

Implementation facilitation activities did not occur according to a defined series of ordered steps but in response to specific organizational contexts through a non-linear and incremental process. Amount and types of activities varied between the networks. Concordant with facilitators' planned role, the focus of some facilitation activities was primarily on doing them for the sites and others on enabling sites to do for themselves; a number of activities did not fit into one category and varied across networks.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings indicate that facilitation is a dynamic and fluid process, with facilitation activities, as well as their timing and intensity, occurring in response to specific organizational contexts. Understanding this process can help those planning and applying implementation facilitation to make conscious choices about the facilitation role and the activities that facilitators can use to operationalize this role. Additionally, this work provides the foundation from which future studies can identify potential mechanisms of action through which facilitation activities enhance implementation uptake.

Facilitation of team-based care to improve HTN management and outcomes: a protocol for a randomized stepped wedge trial

BACKGROUND

There are well-established guidelines for treating hypertension (HTN), yet only half of patients with HTN meet the defined target of < 140/90. Team-based care (TBC) is an evidence-based strategy for improving blood pressure (BP) management and control. TBC is defined as the provision of health services by at least two health professionals "who work collaboratively with patients and their caregivers to accomplish shared goals to achieve coordinated, high-quality care". However, primary care practices experience challenges to implementing TBC principles and care processes; these are more pronounced in small independent practice settings (SIPs). Practice facilitation (PF) is an implementation strategy that may overcome barriers to adopting evidence-based TBC to improve HTN management in SIPs.

METHODS

Using a stepped wedge randomized controlled trial design, we will test the effect of PF on the adoption of TBC to improve HTN management in small practices (< 5 FTE clinicians) in New York City, and the impact on BP control compared with usual care. We will enroll 90 SIPs and randomize them into one of three 12-month intervention waves. Practice facilitators will support SIPs to adopt TBC principles to improve implementation of five HTN management strategies (i.e., panel management, population health, measuring BP, supporting medication adherence, self-management). The primary outcome is the adoption of TBC for HTN management measured at baseline and 12 months. Secondary outcomes include the rate of BP control and sustainability of TBC and BP outcomes at 18 months. Aggregated data on BP measures are collected every 6 months in all clusters so that each cluster provides data points in both the control and intervention conditions. Using a mixed methods approach, we will also explore factors that influence the effectiveness of PF at the organization and team level.

DISCUSSION

This study will provide much-needed guidance on how to optimize adoption and sustainability of TBC in independent primary care settings to reduce the burden of disease related to suboptimal BP control and advance understanding of how facilitation works to improve implementation of evidence-based interventions.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov; NCT05413252 .

How does facilitation in healthcare work? Using mechanism mapping to illuminate the black box of a meta-implementation strategy

BACKGROUND

Healthcare facilitation, an implementation strategy designed to improve the uptake of effective clinical innovations in routine practice, has produced promising yet mixed results in randomized implementation trials and has not been fully researched across different contexts.

OBJECTIVE

Using mechanism mapping, which applies directed acyclic graphs that decompose an effect of interest into hypothesized causal steps and mechanisms, we propose a more concrete description of how healthcare facilitation works to inform its further study as a meta-implementation strategy.

METHODS

Using a modified Delphi consensus process, co-authors developed the mechanistic map based on a three-step process. First, they developed an initial logic model by collectively reviewing the literature and identifying the most relevant studies of healthcare facilitation components and mechanisms to date. Second, they applied the logic model to write vignettes describing how facilitation worked (or did not) based on recent empirical trials that were selected via consensus for inclusion and diversity in contextual settings (US, international sites). Finally, the mechanistic map was created based on the collective findings from the vignettes.

FINDINGS

Theory-based healthcare facilitation components informing the mechanistic map included staff engagement, role clarification, coalition-building through peer experiences and identifying champions, capacity-building through problem solving barriers, and organizational ownership of the implementation process. Across the vignettes, engagement of leaders and practitioners led to increased socialization of the facilitator's role in the organization. This in turn led to clarifying of roles and responsibilities among practitioners and identifying peer experiences led to increased coherence and sense-making of the value of adopting effective innovations. Increased trust develops across leadership and practitioners through expanded capacity in adoption of the effective innovation by identifying opportunities that mitigated barriers to practice change. Finally, these mechanisms led to eventual normalization and ownership of the effective innovation and healthcare facilitation process.

IMPACT

Mapping methodology provides a novel perspective of mechanisms of healthcare facilitation, notably how sensemaking, trust, and normalization contribute to quality improvement. This method may also enable more efficient and impactful hypothesis-testing and application of complex implementation strategies, with high relevance for lower-resourced settings, to inform effective innovation uptake.

Study design and protocol of a stepped wedge cluster randomized trial using a practical implementation strategy as a model for hypertension-HIV integration - the MAP-IT trial

BACKGROUND

As people living with HIV (PLWH) experience earlier and more pronounced onset of noncommunicable diseases (NCDs), advancing integrated care networks and models in low-resource-high-need settings is critical. Leveraging current health system initiatives and addressing gaps in treatment for PLWH, we report our approach using a late-stage (T4) implementation research study to test the adoption and sustainability of a proven-effective implementation strategy which has been minimally applied in low-resource settings for the integration of hypertension control into HIV treatment. We detail our protocol for the Managing Hypertension Among People Living with HIV: an Integrated Model (MAP-IT) trial, which uses a stepped wedge cluster randomized trial (SW-CRT) design to evaluate the effectiveness of practice facilitation on the adoption of a hypertension treatment program for PLWH receiving care at primary healthcare centers (PHCs) in Akwa Ibom State, Nigeria.

DESIGN

In partnership with the Nigerian Federal Ministry of Health (FMOH) and community organizations, the MAP-IT trial takes place in 30 PHCs. The i-PARiHS framework guided pre-implementation needs assessment. The RE-AIM framework will guide post-implementation activities to evaluate the effect of practice facilitation on the adoption, implementation fidelity, and sustainability of a hypertension program, as well as blood pressure (BP) control. Using a SW-CRT design, PHCs sequentially crossover from the hypertension program only (usual care) to hypertension plus practice facilitation (experimental condition). PHCs will recruit and enroll an average of 28-32 patients to reach a maximum of 960 PLWH participants with uncontrolled hypertension who will be followed longitudinally for BP outcomes.

DISCUSSION

Given the need for integrated NCD-HIV care platforms in low-resource settings, MAP-IT will underscore the challenges and opportunities for integrating hypertension treatment into HIV care, particularly concerning adoption and sustainability. The evaluation of our integration approach will also highlight the potential impact of a health systems strengthening approach on BP control among PLWH.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov ( NCT05031819 ). Registered on 2nd September 2021.

Effective Facilitator Strategies for Supporting Primary Care Practice Change: A Mixed Methods Study

PURPOSE

Practice facilitation is an evidence-informed implementation strategy to support quality improvement (QI) and aid practices in aligning with best evidence. Few studies, particularly of this size and scope, identify strategies that contribute to facilitator effectiveness.

METHODS

We conducted a sequential mixed methods study, analyzing data from EvidenceNOW, a large-scale QI initiative. Seven regional cooperatives employed 162 facilitators to work with 1,630 small or medium-sized primary care practices. Main analyses were based on facilitators who worked with at least 4 practices. Facilitators were defined as more effective if at least 75% of their practices improved on at least 1 outcome measure-aspirin use, blood pressure control, smoking cessation counseling (ABS), or practice change capacity, measured using Change Process Capability Questionnaire-from baseline to follow-up. Facilitators were defined as less effective if less than 50% of their practices improved on these outcomes. Using an immersion crystallization and comparative approach, we analyzed observational and interview data to identify strategies associated with more effective facilitators.

RESULTS

Practices working with more effective facilitators had a 3.6% greater change in the mean percentage of patients meeting the composite ABS measure compared with practices working with less effective facilitators (P <.001). More effective facilitators cultivated motivation by tailoring QI work and addressing resistance, guided practices to think critically, and provided accountability to support change, using these strategies in combination. They were able to describe their work in detail. In contrast, less effective facilitators seldom used these strategies and described their work in general terms. Facilitator background, experience, and work on documentation did not differentiate between more and less effective facilitators.

CONCLUSIONS

Facilitation strategies that differentiate more and less effective facilitators have implications for enhancing facilitator development and training, and can assist all facilitators to more effectively support practice changes.

Facilitation as a component of evidence implementation: a multinational perspective

BACKGROUND

Facilitation is a key component of JBI's approach to evidence implementation along with context analysis and evaluation of process and outcomes. Although the role of facilitation is recognized as a critical component of evidence implementation, what constitutes effective facilitation is poorly understood.

AIM

This article presents a descriptive exploration of facilitation as it occurs in evidence implementation initiatives conducted in various healthcare and geographical contexts. All projects used the JBI approach to evidence implementation.

METHODS

To provide a multinational perspective on how facilitation was operationalized to promote positive changes in clinical practice and health outcomes, five case studies of evidence implementation projects are presented.

RESULTS

The cases highlighted that facilitation is a multifaceted process that can be met through a variety of roles that address aspects of education and capacity building, partnerships, action planning, problem solving and evaluation. Facilitation in all cases appeared to be collaborative, with multiple 'players' within and outside of the health organization being involved in the process. Although there are similarities in activities, facilitation involved some level of local contextualization where there were unique or additional activities performed to accommodate the local needs and requirements of the health organization involved in each case. Numerous contextual factors influenced the success of the implementation initiative.

CONCLUSION

The cases emphasized the complex nature of facilitation as a strategy for evidence implementation, indicating that contextual attributes and features define the range of knowledge, skills, and activities that should take place in order for facilitation to be effective. Although there appears to be some core components, tailoring and adaptation of the facilitation process (or roles) is required.

Improving screening, treatment, and intervention for unhealthy alcohol use in primary care through clinic, practice-based research network, and health plan partnerships: Protocol of the ANTECEDENT study

Background

Unhealthy alcohol use (UAU) is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in the United States, contributing to 95,000 deaths annually. When offered in primary care, screening, brief intervention, referral to treatment (SBIRT), and medication-assisted treatment for alcohol use disorder (MAUD) can effectively address UAU. However, these interventions are not yet routine in primary care clinics. Therefore, our study evaluates tailored implementation support to increase SBIRT and MAUD in primary care.

Methods

ANTECEDENT is a pragmatic implementation study designed to support 150 primary care clinics in Oregon adopting and optimizing SBIRT and MAUD workflows to address UAU. The study is a partnership between the Oregon Health Authority Transformation Center—state leaders in Medicaid health system transformation—SBIRT Oregon and the Oregon Rural Practice-based Research Network. We recruited clinics providing primary care in Oregon and prioritized reaching clinics that were small to medium in size (<10 providers). All participating clinics receive foundational support (i.e., a baseline assessment, exit assessment, and access to the online SBIRT Oregon materials) and may opt to receive tailored implementation support delivered by a practice facilitator over 12 months. Tailored implementation support is designed to address identified needs and may include health information technology support, peer-to-peer learning, workflow mapping, or expert consultation via academic detailing. The study aims are to 1) engage, recruit, and conduct needs assessments with 150 primary care clinics and their regional Medicaid health plans called Coordinated Care Organizations within the state of Oregon, 2) implement and evaluate the impact of foundational and supplemental implementation support on clinic change in SBIRT and MAUD, and 3) describe how practice facilitators tailor implementation support based on context and personal expertise. Our convergent parallel mixed-methods analysis uses RE-AIM (reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation, maintenance). It is informed by a hybrid of the i-PARIHS (integrated Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services) and the Dynamic Sustainability Framework.

Discussion

This study will explore how primary care clinics implement SBIRT and MAUD in routine practice and how practice facilitators vary implementation support across diverse clinic settings. Findings will inform how to effectively align implementation support to context, advance our understanding of practice facilitator skill development over time, and ultimately improve detection and treatment of UAU across diverse primary care clinics.

How Type of Practice Ownership Affects Participation with Quality Improvement External Facilitation: Findings from EvidenceNOW

BACKGROUND

Facilitation is an implementation strategy that can help primary care practices improve healthcare quality and build quality improvement (QI) capacity when delivered in a flexible manner by trained professionals. Practice ownership is associated with use of QI. However, little is known about how practices of different ownership participate in external facilitation, and this could inform future initiatives.

OBJECTIVE

Using data from EvidenceNOW, we examined how practice ownership influences participation in external facilitation.

STUDY DESIGN

We used an iterative mixed-methods design.

PARTICIPANTS, APPROACH, AND MEASURES

We collected data from practices on practice characteristics (e.g., location, size, payer mix) and ownership type via surveys and from facilitators on the number of hours, encounters, and months each practice had with a facilitator via facilitation logs. Using multivariable linear regression, we examined the association between facilitation and ownership (n = 1117 practices). We conducted semi-structured interviews with EvidenceNOW leadership (n = 12) and facilitators (n = 51) and observed facilitators in a subset of practices (n = 64); we analyzed this qualitative data for patterns of facilitation.

KEY RESULTS

In the fully adjusted model, differences by ownership were non-significant; FQHCs, however, had significantly less participation in facilitation than clinician-owned practices across two measures (unadjusted difference: - 2.83, p < 0.01 for number of encounters, and - 2.04, p < 0.01 for number of months with encounters). Qualitative data showed that Health System and FQHC ownership influenced types of practices enrolled in EvidenceNOW, and suggested that in these practices lower autonomy and greater complexity compared to clinician-owned ownership influenced facilitation participation patterns.

CONCLUSIONS

Practice ownership shaped how but not how much practices participated in external facilitation. This finding highlights the importance of tailoring facilitation approaches based on ownership-related characteristics in future QI initiatives.

Integration of a task strengthening strategy for hypertension management into HIV care in Nigeria: a cluster randomized controlled trial study protocol

BACKGROUND

In regions with weak healthcare systems, critical shortages of the healthcare workforce, and increasing prevalence of dual disease burdens, there is an urgent need for the implementation of proven effective interventions and strategies to address these challenges. Our mixed-methods hybrid type II effectiveness-implementation study is designed to fill this evidence-to-practice gap. This study protocol describes a cluster randomized controlled trial which evaluates the effectiveness of an implementation strategy, practice facilitation (PF), on the integration, adoption, and sustainability of a task-strengthening strategy for hypertension control (TASSH) intervention within primary healthcare centers (PHCs) in Lagos State, Nigeria.

DESIGN

Guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) and the Reach Effectiveness Adoption Implementation and Maintenance (RE-AIM), this study tests the impact of a proven effective implementation strategy to integrate hypertension management into the HIV care cascade, across 30 PHCs. The study will be conducted in three phases: (1) a pre-implementation phase that will use CFIR to develop a tailored PF intervention for integrating TASSH into HIV clinics; (2) an implementation phase that will use RE-AIM to compare the clinical effectiveness of PF vs. a self-directed condition (receipt of information on TASSH without PF) on BP reduction; and (3) a post-implementation phase that will use RE-AIM to evaluate the effect of PF vs. self-directed condition on adoption and sustainability of TASSH. The PF intervention components comprise (a) an advisory board to provide leadership support for implementing TASSH in PHCs; (b) training of the HIV nurses on TASSH protocol; and (c) training of practice facilitators, who will serve as coaches, provide support, and performance feedback to the HIV nurses.

DISCUSSION

This study is one of few, if any trials, to evaluate the impact of an implementation strategy for integrating hypertension management into HIV care, on clinical and implementation outcomes. Findings from this study will advance implementation science research on the effectiveness of tailoring an implementation strategy for the integration of an evidence-based, system-level hypertension control intervention into HIV care and treatment.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT04704336 ). Registered on 11 January 2021.

Facilitation activities for change response: a qualitative study on infection prevention and control professionals during a pandemic in Brazil

Purpose

Facilitation activities support implementation of evidence-based interventions within healthcare organizations. Few studies have attempted to understand how facilitation activities are performed to promote the uptake of evidence-based interventions in hospitals from resource-poor countries during crises such as pandemics. This paper aims to explore facilitation activities by infection prevention and control (IPC) professionals in 16 hospitals from 9 states in Brazil during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Design/methodology/approach

Primary and secondary data were collected between March and December 2020. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 21 IPC professionals in Brazilian hospitals during the COVID-19 pandemic. Public and internal documents were used for data triangulation. The data were analyzed through thematic analysis technique.

Findings

Building on the change response theory, this study explores the facilitation activities from the cognitive, behavioral and affective aspects. The facilitation activities are grouped in three overarching dimensions: (1) creating and sustaining legitimacy to continuous and rapid changes, (2) fostering capabilities for continuous changes and (3) accelerating individual commitment.

Practical implications

During crises such as pandemics, facilitation activities by IPC professionals need to embrace all the cognitive, behavioral and affective aspects to stimulate positive attitudes of frontline workers toward continuous and urgent changes.

Originality/value

This study provides unique and timely empirical evidence on the facilitation activities that support the implementation of evidence-based interventions by IPC professionals during crises in hospitals in a resource-poor country.

From novice to expert: methods for transferring implementation facilitation skills to improve healthcare delivery

BACKGROUND

There is substantial evidence that facilitation can address the challenges of implementing evidence-based innovations. However, facilitators need a wide variety of complex skills; lack of these can have a negative effect on implementation outcomes. Literature suggests that novice and less experienced facilitators need ongoing support from experts to develop these skills. Yet, no studies have investigated the transfer process. During a test of a facilitation strategy applied at 8 VA primary care clinics, we explored the techniques and processes an expert external facilitator utilized to transfer her skills to two initially novice internal facilitators who became experts.

METHODS

In this qualitative descriptive study, we conducted monthly debriefings with three facilitators over a 30-month period and documented these in detailed notes. Debriefings with the expert facilitator focused on how she trained and mentored facilitation trainees. We also conducted, recorded, and transcribed two semi-structured qualitative interviews with each facilitator and queried them about training content and process. We used a mix of inductive and deductive approaches to analyze data; our analysis was informed by a review of mentoring, coaching, and cognitive apprenticeship literature. We also used a case comparison approach to explore how the expert tailored her efforts.

RESULTS

The expert utilized 21 techniques to transfer implementation facilitation skills. Techniques included both active (providing information, modeling, and coaching) and participatory ones. She also used techniques to support learning, i.e., cognitive supports (making thinking visible, using heuristics, sharing experiences), psychosocial supports, strategies to promote self-learning, and structural supports. Additionally, she transferred responsibility for facilitation through a dynamic process of interaction with trainees and site stakeholders. Finally, the expert varied the level of focus on particular skills to tailor her efforts to trainee and local context.

CONCLUSIONS

This study viewed the journey from novice to expert facilitator through the lens of the expert who transferred facilitation skills to support implementation of an evidence-based program. It identified techniques and processes that may foster transfer of these skills and build organizational capacity for future implementation efforts. As the first study to document the implementation facilitation skills transfer process, findings have research and practical implications.

Does coaching matter? Examining the impact of specific practice facilitation strategies on implementation of quality improvement interventions in the Healthy Hearts in the Heartland study

BACKGROUND

Practice facilitation is a multicomponent implementation strategy used to improve the capacity for practices to address care quality and implementation gaps. We sought to assess whether practice facilitators use of coaching strategies aimed at improving self-sufficiency were associated with improved implementation of quality improvement (QI) interventions in the Healthy Hearts in the Heartland Study.

METHODS

We mapped 27 practice facilitation activities to a framework that classifies practice facilitation strategies by the degree to which the practice develops its own process expertise (Doing Tasks, Project Management, Consulting, Teaching, and Coaching) and then used regression tree analysis to group practices by facilitation strategies experienced. Kruskal-Wallis tests were used to assess whether practice groups identified by regression tree analysis were associated with successful implementation of QI interventions and practice and study context variables.

RESULTS

There was no association between number of strategies performed by practice facilitators and number of QI interventions implemented. Regression tree analysis identified 4 distinct practice groups based on the number of Project Management and Coaching strategies performed. The median number of interventions increased across the groups. Practices receiving > 4 project management and > 6 coaching activities implemented a median of 17 of 35 interventions. Groups did not differ significantly by practice size, association with a healthcare network, or practice type. Statistically significant differences in practice location, number and duration of facilitator visits, and early study termination emerged among the groups, compared to the overall practice population.

CONCLUSIONS

Practices that engage in more coaching-based strategies with practice facilitators are more likely to implement more QI interventions, and practice receptivity to these strategies was not dependent on basic practice demographics.

Fidelity evaluation of the compared procedures for conducting the PVS-PREDIAPS implementation strategy to optimize diabetes prevention in primary care

Background

Assessing the fidelity of an implementation strategy is important to understand why and how the strategy influences the uptake of evidence-based interventions. The present study aims to assess the fidelity of the two procedures for engaging primary care (PC) professionals and for the deployment of an implementation strategy for optimizing type 2 diabetes prevention in routine PC within the PREDIAPS randomized cluster implementation trial.

Method

We conducted a mixed-method fidelity evaluation study of the PVS-PREDIAPS implementation strategy. Nine PC centers from the Basque Health Service (Osakidetza) were allocated to two different procedures to engage physicians and nurses and deploy a implementation strategy to model and adapt the clinical intervention and its implementation to their specific contexts: a Global procedure, promoting the cooperation of all healthcare professionals from the beginning; or a Sequential procedure, centered first on nurses who then pursued the pragmatic cooperation of physicians. Process indicators of the delivery and receipt of implementation strategy actions, documented modifications to the planned implementation strategy, and a structured group interview with centers’ leaders were all used to assess the following components of fidelity: adherence, dose, quality of delivery, professionals’ responsiveness and program differentiation.

Results

Generally, the procedures compared for professionals engagement and deployment of the implementation strategy were carried out with the planned differentiation. Nonetheless, some unexpected between-group differences were observed, the initial rate of collaboration of nurses being higher in the Sequential (93%) than in the Global (67%) groups. Exposure rate to the programed implementation actions (% of hours received out of those delivered) were similar in both groups by professional category, with nurses (86%) having a higher rate of exposure than physicians (75%). Professionals identified half of the planned discrete strategies and their rating of strategies’ perceived usefulness was overwhelmingly positive, with few differences between Sequential and Global centers.

Conclusions

The PVS-PREDIAPS implementation strategy has been implemented with high fidelity and minor unplanned reactive modifications. Professionals’ exposure to the implementation strategy was high in both groups. The centers’ organizational context (i.e., work overload) led to small mismatches between groups in participation and exposure of professionals to implementation actions.

Trial registration

Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT03254979. Registered 16 August 2017.

Attributes of High-Performing Small Practices in a Guideline Implementation: A Multiple-Case Study

Objective

HealthyHearts NYC was a stepped wedge randomized control trial that tested the effectiveness of practice facilitation on the adoption of cardiovascular disease guidelines in small primary care practices. The objective of this study was to identify was to identify attributes of small practices that signaled they would perform well in a practice facilitation intervention implementation.

Methods

A mixed methods multiple-case study design was used. Six small practices were selected representing 3 variations in meeting the practice-level benchmark of >70% of hypertensive patients having controlled blood pressure. Inductive and deductive approaches were used to identify themes and assign case ratings. Cross-case rating comparison was used to identify attributes of high performing practices.

Results

Our first key finding is that the high-performing and improved practices in our study looked and acted similarly during the intervention implementation. The second key finding is that 3 attributes emerged in our analysis of determinants of high performance in small practices: (1) advanced use of the EHR; (2) dedicated resources and commitment to quality improvement; and (3) actively engaged lead clinician and office manager.

Conclusions

These attributes may be important determinants of high performance, indicating not only a small practice’s capability to engage in an intervention but possibly also its readiness to change. We recommend developing tools to assess readiness to change, specifically for small primary care practices, which may help external agents, like practice facilitators, better translate intervention implementations to context.

Introducing an interactional approach to exploring facilitation as an implementation intervention: examining the utility of Conversation Analysis

BACKGROUND

The widely adopted integrated-Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (i-PARIHS) framework identifies facilitation as a 'core ingredient' for successful implementation. Indeed, most implementation scientists agree that a certain degree of facilitation is required to translate research into clinical practice; that is, there must be some intentional effort to assist the implementation of evidence-based approaches and practices into healthcare. Yet understandings of what constitutes facilitation and how to facilitate effectively remain largely theoretical and, therefore, provide scant practical guidance to ensure facilitator success. Implementation Science theories and frameworks often describe facilitation as an activity accomplished in, and through, formal and informal communication amongst facilitators and those involved in the implementation process (i.e. 'recipients'). However, the specific communication practices that constitute and enable effective facilitation are currently inadequately understood.

AIM

In this debate article, we argue that without effective facilitation-a practice requiring significant interactional and interpersonal skills-many implementation projects encounter difficulties. Therefore, we explore whether and how the application of Conversation Analysis, a rigorous research methodology for researching patterns of interaction, could expand existing understandings of facilitation within the Implementation Science field. First, we illustrate how Conversation Analysis methods can be applied to identifying what facilitation looks like in interaction. Second, we draw from existing conversation analytic research into facilitation outside of Implementation Science to expand current understandings of how facilitation might be achieved within implementation.

CONCLUSION

In this paper, we argue that conversation analytic methods show potential to understand and refine facilitation as a critical, and inherently interactional, component of implementation efforts. Conversation analytic investigations of facilitation as it occurs in real-time between participants could inform mechanisms to (1) improve understandings of how to achieve successful implementation through facilitation, (2) overcome difficulties and challenges in implementation related to interpersonal communication and interaction, (3) inform future facilitator training and (4) inform refinement of existing facilitation theories and frameworks (e.g. i-PARIHS) currently used in implementation interventions.

Implementation of Community-Based Resource Referrals for Cardiovascular Disease Self-Management

PURPOSE

Describe primary care practices' implementation of CommunityRx-H3, a community resource referral intervention that utilized practice facilitators to support cardiovascular disease (CVD) prevention quality improvement.

METHODS

Qualitative focus groups were conducted with practice facilitators to elicit perceptions of practices' experiences with CommunityRx-H3, practice-level factors affecting, and practice facilitator strategies to promote implementation. Qualitative data were analyzed using directed content analysis. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research was applied deductively to organize and interpret findings.

RESULTS

Fourteen of all 19 practice facilitators participated. Practice facilitators perceived that staff attitudes about connecting patients to community resources for CVD were largely positive. Practices were already using a range of non-systematic strategies to refer to community resources. Practice-level factors that facilitated CommunityRx-H3 implementation included clinician "champions," engaged practice managers, and a practice culture that valued community resources. Implementation barriers included a practice's unwillingness to integrate the intervention into existing workflows, limited staff capacity to complete the resource inventory, and unavailability or cost of materials needed to print the resource referral list ("HealtheRx-H3"). Practice facilitator strategies to promote implementation included supporting ongoing customization of the HealtheRx-H3 and material support. Practice facilitators felt implementation would be improved by integration of CommunityRx-H3 with electronic medical record workflows and alternative methods for engaging practices in the implementation process.

CONCLUSIONS

Practice facilitators are increasingly being utilized by primary care practices to support quality improvement interventions and, as shown here, can also play an important role in implementation science. This study yields insights to improve implementation of community resource referral solutions to support primary care CVD prevention efforts.

Barriers and Facilitators in the Recruitment and Retention of More Than 250 Small Independent Primary Care Practices for EvidenceNOW

Few studies have examined factors that facilitate recruitment of small independent practices (SIPs) (<5 full-time clinicians) to participate in research and methods for optimizing retention. The authors analyzed qualitative data (eg, recruiter's field notes and diary entries, provider interviews) to identify barriers and facilitators encountered in recruiting and retaining 257 practices in HealthyHearts New York City (NYC). This study was a stepped-wedge randomized controlled trial that took place 2015 through 2018 across 5 boroughs in NYC. Three main factors facilitated rapid recruitment: (1) a prior well-established relationship with the local health department, (2) alignment of project goals with practice priorities, and (3) providing appropriate monetary incentives. Retention was facilitated through similar mechanisms and an ongoing multifaceted communication strategy. This article identifies specific strategies that enhance recruitment of SIPs and fills gaps in knowledge about factors that influence retention in the context of a design that requires waiting to receive the intervention.