Introduction and conceptual model for utilization of prevention research

Translating Liaison Librarians to the Scientific Community

Objective: This study explores the root causes that undermine successful collaborations between scientists and their library liaisons to improve outreach to this population. Methods: This paper uses the Five Whys Technique to explore the reasons why many scientists are unaware of the breadth of services offered by liaison librarians. Existing outreach strategies that address these obstacles are interpreted through the lens of implementation science theories and process models, including Normalization Process Theory. Results: A total of four recommendations—two for liaison librarians and two for libraries as institutions—are provided to enhance the perceived value of liaison services. The recommendations for individuals include aiming to understand scientists’ needs more comprehensively and actively increasing the visibility of services that respond to those needs. Those for libraries focus on cross-functional teams and new forms of assessment. Conclusions: These recommendations emphasize the benefits of collaboration to liaisons, to library programs at large, and to the faculty that liaisons serve. Implementation science can help librarians to understand why certain outreach strategies bring success, and how new services can be implemented more effectively.

The Building Blocks of Implementation Frameworks and Models in Primary Care: A Narrative Review

Background: Our aim is to identify the core building blocks of existing implementation frameworks and models, which can be used as a basis to further develop a framework for the implementation of complex interventions within primary care practices. Within the field of implementation science, various frameworks, and models exist to support the uptake of research findings and evidence-based practices. However, these frameworks and models often are not sufficiently actionable or targeted for use by intervention designers. The objective of this research is to map the similarities and differences of various frameworks and models, in order to find key constructs that form the foundation of an implementation framework or model that is to be developed.

Methods: A narrative review was conducted, searching for papers that describe a framework or model for implementation by means of various search terms, and a snowball approach. The core phases, components, or other elements of each framework or model are extracted and listed. We analyze the similarities and differences between the frameworks and models and elaborate on their core building blocks. These core building blocks form the basis of an overarching model that we will develop based upon this review and put into practice.

Results: A total of 28 implementation frameworks and models are included in our analysis. Throughout 15 process models, a total of 67 phases, steps or requirements are extracted and throughout 17 determinant frameworks a total of 90 components, constructs, or elements are extracted and listed into an Excel file. They are bundled and categorized using NVivo 12© and synthesized into three core phases and three core components of an implementation process as common elements of most implementation frameworks or models. The core phases are a development phase, a translation phase, and a sustainment phase. The core components are the intended change, the context, and implementation strategies.

Discussion: We have identified the core building blocks of an implementation framework or model, which can be synthesized in three core phases and three core components. These will be the foundation for further research that aims to develop a new model that will guide and support intervention designers to develop and implement complex interventions, while taking account contextual factors.

Stages of Change: Moving Community Pharmacies From a Drug Dispensing to Population Health Management Model

Given their clinical training and accessibility, community pharmacists are well positioned to support primary care, especially in providing medication management services. There is limited evidence, however, on implementation of community pharmacist-led services in coordination with other health care providers. The aim of this study was to examine the implementation process of community pharmacies in North Carolina participating in a Medicaid population health management intervention. We conducted semistructured interviews with 40 representatives from high- and low-performing community pharmacies from June to August 2017. We analyzed for themes organized around Rogers's Stages in the Innovation Process in Organizations. Community pharmacies employed numerous implementation strategies such as developing relationships with providers and redefining job responsibilities to ensure pharmacists and pharmacy technicians are working at the top of their license. Findings also revealed differences in the implementation process among high- and low-performing pharmacies. Continued research is needed to determine which implementation strategies improve program performance.

Implementation science in resource-poor countries and communities

Background

Implementation science in resource-poor countries and communities is arguably more important than implementation science in resource-rich settings, because resource poverty requires novel solutions to ensure that research results are translated into routine practice and benefit the largest possible number of people.

Methods

We reviewed the role of resources in the extant implementation science frameworks and literature. We analyzed opportunities for implementation science in resource-poor countries and communities, as well as threats to the realization of these opportunities.

Results

Many of the frameworks that provide theoretical guidance for implementation science view resources as contextual factors that are important to (i) predict the feasibility of implementation of research results in routine practice, (ii) explain implementation success and failure, (iii) adapt novel evidence-based practices to local constraints, and (iv) design the implementation process to account for local constraints. Implementation science for resource-poor settings shifts this view from “resources as context” to “resources as primary research object.” We find a growing body of implementation research aiming to discover and test novel approaches to generate resources for the delivery of evidence-based practice in routine care, including approaches to create higher-skilled health workers—through tele-education and telemedicine, freeing up higher-skilled health workers—through task-shifting and new technologies and models of care, and increasing laboratory capacity through new technologies and the availability of medicines through supply chain innovations. In contrast, only few studies have investigated approaches to change the behavior and utilization of healthcare resources in resource-poor settings. We identify three specific opportunities for implementation science in resource-poor settings. First, intervention and methods innovations thrive under constraints. Second, reverse innovation transferring novel approaches from resource-poor to research-rich settings will gain in importance. Third, policy makers in resource-poor countries tend to be open for close collaboration with scientists in implementation research projects aimed at informing national and local policy.

Conclusions

Implementation science in resource-poor countries and communities offers important opportunities for future discoveries and reverse innovation. To harness this potential, funders need to strongly support research projects in resource-poor settings, as well as the training of the next generation of implementation scientists working on new ways to create healthcare resources where they lack most and to ensure that those resources are utilized to deliver care that is based on the latest research results.

Expanding the Concept of Translational Research: Making a Place for Environmental Health Sciences

The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) introduces a new translational research framework that builds upon previous biomedical models to create a more comprehensive and integrated environmental health paradigm. The framework was developed as a graphical construct that illustrates the complexity of designing, implementing, and tracking translational research in environmental health. We conceptualize translational research as a series of concentric rings and nodes, defining "translation" as movement either from one ring to another or between nodes on a ring. A "Fundamental Questions" ring expands upon the research described in other frameworks as "basic" to include three interrelated concepts critical to basic science research: research questions, experimental settings, and organisms. This feature enables us to capture more granularity and thus facilitates an approach for categorizing translational research and its growth over time. We anticipate that the framework will help researchers develop compelling long-term translational research stories and accelerate public health impacts by clearly mapping out opportunities for collaborations. By using this paradigm, researchers everywhere will be better positioned to design research programs, identify research partners based on cross-disciplinary research needs, identify stakeholders who are likely to use the research for environmental decision-making and intervention, and track progress toward common goals. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP3657.

Using Principles of Complex Adaptive Systems to Implement Secondary Prevention of Coronary Heart Disease in Primary Care

CONTEXT

Primary care practice.

OBJECTIVE

To test whether the principles of complex adaptive systems are applicable to implementation of team-based primary care.

DESIGN

We used complex adaptive system principles to implement team-based care in a private, five-clinic primary care practice. We compared randomly selected samples of patients with coronary heart disease (CHD) and diabetes before system implementation (March 1, 2009, to February 28, 2010) and after system implementation (December 1, 2011, to March 31, 2013).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Rates of patients meeting the composite goals for CHD (blood pressure < 140/90 mmHg, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol level < 100 mg/dL, tobacco-free, and using aspirin unless contraindicated) and diabetes (CHD goal plus hemoglobin A1c concentration < 8%) before and after the intervention. We also measured provider and patient satisfaction with preventive services.

RESULTS

The proportion of patients with CHD who met the composite goal increased from 40.3% to 59.9% (p < 0.0001) because documented aspirin use increased (65.2%-97.5%, p < 0.0001) and attainment of the cholesterol goal increased (77.0%-83.9%, p = 0.0041). The proportion of diabetic patients meeting the composite goal rose from 24.5% to 45.4% (p < 0.0001) because aspirin use increased (58.6%-97.6%, p < 0.0001). Increased percentages of patients meeting the CHD and diabetes composite goals were not significantly different (p = 0.2319). Provider satisfaction with preventive services delivery increased significantly (p = 0.0017). Patient satisfaction improved but not significantly.

CONCLUSION

Principles of complex adaptive systems can be used to implement team-based care systems for patients with CHD and possibly diabetic patients.

Enhancing Resident Safety by Preventing Healthcare-Associated Infection: A National Initiative to Reduce Catheter-Associated Urinary Tract Infections in Nursing Homes

Preventing healthcare-associated infection (HAI) is a key contributor to enhancing resident safety in nursing homes. In 2013, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services approved a plan to enhance resident safety by reducing HAIs in nursing homes, with particular emphasis on reducing indwelling catheter use and catheter-associated urinary tract infection (CAUTI). Lessons learned from a recent multimodal Targeted Infection Prevention program in a group of nursing homes as well as a national initiative to prevent CAUTI in over 950 acute care hospitals called "On the CUSP: STOP CAUTI" will now be implemented in nearly 500 nursing homes in all 50 states through a project funded by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ). This "AHRQ Safety Program in Long-Term Care: HAIs/CAUTI" will emphasize professional development in catheter utilization, catheter care and maintenance, and antimicrobial stewardship as well as promoting patient safety culture, team building, and leadership engagement. We anticipate that an approach integrating technical and socio-adaptive principles will serve as a model for future initiatives to reduce other infections, multidrug resistant organisms, and noninfectious adverse events among nursing home residents.

Critical examination of knowledge to action models and implications for promoting health equity

Introduction

Knowledge and effective interventions exist to address many current global health inequities. However, there is limited awareness, uptake, and use of knowledge to inform action to improve the health of disadvantaged populations. The gap between knowledge and action to improve health equity is of concern to health researchers and practitioners. This study identifies and critically examines the usefulness of existing knowledge to action models or frameworks for promoting health equity.

Methods

We conducted a scoping review of existing literature to identify knowledge to action (KTA) models or frameworks and critiqued the models using a health equity support rubric.

Results

We identified forty-eight knowledge to action models or frameworks. Six models scored between eight and ten of a maximum 12 points on the health equity support rubric. These high scoring models or frameworks all mentioned equity-related concepts. Attention to multisectoral approaches was the factor most often lacking in the low scoring models. The concepts of knowledge brokering, integrative processes, such as those in some indigenous health research, and Ecohealth applied to KTA all emerged as promising areas.

Conclusions

Existing knowledge to action models or frameworks can help guide knowledge translation to support action on the social determinants of health and health equity. There is a need to further test existing models or frameworks. This process should be informed by participatory and integrative research. There is room to develop more robust equity supporting models.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12939-015-0178-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Making sense of implementation theories, models and frameworks

BACKGROUND

Implementation science has progressed towards increased use of theoretical approaches to provide better understanding and explanation of how and why implementation succeeds or fails. The aim of this article is to propose a taxonomy that distinguishes between different categories of theories, models and frameworks in implementation science, to facilitate appropriate selection and application of relevant approaches in implementation research and practice and to foster cross-disciplinary dialogue among implementation researchers.

DISCUSSION

Theoretical approaches used in implementation science have three overarching aims: describing and/or guiding the process of translating research into practice (process models); understanding and/or explaining what influences implementation outcomes (determinant frameworks, classic theories, implementation theories); and evaluating implementation (evaluation frameworks). This article proposes five categories of theoretical approaches to achieve three overarching aims. These categories are not always recognized as separate types of approaches in the literature. While there is overlap between some of the theories, models and frameworks, awareness of the differences is important to facilitate the selection of relevant approaches. Most determinant frameworks provide limited "how-to" support for carrying out implementation endeavours since the determinants usually are too generic to provide sufficient detail for guiding an implementation process. And while the relevance of addressing barriers and enablers to translating research into practice is mentioned in many process models, these models do not identify or systematically structure specific determinants associated with implementation success. Furthermore, process models recognize a temporal sequence of implementation endeavours, whereas determinant frameworks do not explicitly take a process perspective of implementation.

Translating cancer prevention and control research into the community setting: workforce implications

A gap exists between cancer prevention research and its translation into community practice. Two strategies to reduce this gap are community-based participatory research (CBPR) and dissemination research. CBPR offers an avenue to engage academic and community partners, thereby providing mechanisms for joint learning and application of knowledge. Dissemination research examines the movement of evidence-based public health and clinical innovations to practice settings. While applying these approaches may reduce the gap between research and practice, the cancer prevention workforce may be inadequate in size, insufficiently trained, lack resources and incentives, or face structural barriers to effectively participate in CBPR and disseminate evidence-based research findings into practice. Information on translating cancer prevention information to communities and workforce implications was obtained from a panel of experts and through a review of the literature on CBPR and dissemination research. The expert panel and literature review identified major barriers to successfully conducting CBPR and dissemination research in community settings. Barriers included inadequate policies; insufficient networking and communication infrastructures; unsupportive research cultures, climates, and mindsets; inadequate researcher and practitioner education; and limited CBPR and dissemination research with adequate study designs. No specific estimates of the cancer prevention workforce were found; however, indirect evidence for a shortfall were identified. We recommend expanding CBPR training for academic and community partners; increasing funding for dissemination research and practice; supporting proven partnerships; and providing strategic coordination for government agencies, research institutions, nongovernmental organizations, and the private sector to foster better dissemination of information and integration of community-based cancer prevention and control programs and practices. Specific challenges and needs that must be addressed to improve the translation of cancer prevention research into community settings were identified.

A thematic analysis of theoretical models for translational science in nursing: mapping the field

The quantity and diversity of conceptual models in translational science may complicate rather than advance the use of theory. This paper offers a comparative thematic analysis of the models available to inform knowledge development, transfer, and utilization. Literature searches identified 47 models for knowledge translation. Four thematic areas emerged: (1) evidence-based practice and knowledge transformation processes, (2) strategic change to promote adoption of new knowledge, (3) knowledge exchange and synthesis for application and inquiry, and (4) designing and interpreting dissemination research. This analysis distinguishes the contributions made by leaders and researchers at each phase in the process of discovery, development, and service delivery. It also informs the selection of models to guide activities in knowledge translation. A flexible theoretical stance is essential to simultaneously develop new knowledge and accelerate the translation of that knowledge into practice behaviors and programs of care that support optimal patient outcomes.

Diffusion theory and knowledge dissemination, utilization, and integration in public health

Legislators and their scientific beneficiaries express growing concerns that the fruits of their investment in health research are not reaching the public, policy makers, and practitioners with evidence-based practices. Practitioners and the public lament the lack of relevance and fit of evidence that reaches them and barriers to their implementation of it. Much has been written about this gap in medicine, much less in public health. We review the concepts that have guided or misguided public health in their attempts to bridge science and practice through dissemination and implementation. Beginning with diffusion theory, which inspired much of public health's work on dissemination, we compare diffusion, dissemination, and implementation with related notions that have served other fields in bridging science and practice. Finally, we suggest ways to blend diffusion with other theory and evidence in guiding a more decentralized approach to dissemination and implementation in public health, including changes in the ways we produce the science itself.

Utilization of prevention research: searching for evidence

OBJECTIVE

Understanding the process of translating prevention research into practice calls for systematic efforts to assess the state of the published literature on the utilization of prevention research in public health programs and policy. This review describes the search strategy, methods, results, and challenges in identifying and reviewing literature relevant to this objective.

METHODS

Systematic searches of topics related to prevention research in literature published in 1995-2002 revealed 86 empiric articles in 12 public health areas.

RESULTS

A lack of uniform terminology, variation in publication sources, and limited descriptions of the stages of research utilization (e.g., adoption and implementation) in the published literature posed major challenges to identifying articles that met study criteria. Most accepted articles assessed the adoption or implementation of prevention research; four examined long-term sustainability. There was approximately equal distribution of reported research set in either health services or public health settings. Few of the articles contained search terms reflecting all four concept areas (prevention, public health, research, and use) targeted by the literature search.

CONCLUSIONS

Refining terms used in prevention research and research utilization could address lack of shared and unique definitions. Expanded reporting of research utilization stages in reports of prevention research could lead to improved literature searches and contribute to more successful adoption, implementation, and further use of prevention research products.

A framework for research utilization applied to seven case studies

BACKGROUND

It is widely acknowledged that prevention research often is not fully or adequately used in health practice and/or policies. This study sought to answer two main questions: (1) Are there characteristics of research utilization in communities that suggest stages in a process? (2) What factors, including barriers and facilitators, are associated with the use of prevention research in community-based programs, policies, and practices?

METHODS

Researchers used a multiple case study design to retrospectively describe the research-utilization process. A conceptual framework modified from Rogers's diffusion of innovations model and Green's theory of participation were used. Data were gathered from archival sources and interviews with key people related to any one of seven community-based practices, programs, or policies. Fifty-two semistructured interviews were conducted with program or project staff members, funding agency project managers, community administrators and leaders, community project liaisons, innovation champions, and other members of the research user system.

RESULTS

Participation in the process of research utilization was described by using characteristics of collaborative efforts among stakeholders. Program champions or agents linking research resources to the community moved the research-utilization process forward. Practices, programs, or policies characterized by greater community participation generally resulted in more advanced stages of research utilization.

CONCLUSIONS

Investigating the interactions among and contributions of linking agents and resource and user systems can illuminate the potential paths of prevention research utilization in community settings. Because community participation is a critical factor in research utilization, prevention researchers must take into account the context and needs of communities throughout the research process.

Adoption and implementation of mandated diabetes registries by community health centers

BACKGROUND

Innovations adopted by healthcare organizations are often externally mandated. However, few studies examine how mandated innovations progress from adoption to sustained effective use. This study uses Rogers's model of organizational innovation to explore community health centers' (CHCs') mandated adoption and implementation of disease registries in the federal Health Disparities Collaborative (HDC).

METHODS

Case studies were conducted on six CHCs in North Carolina participating in the HDC on type 2 diabetes mellitus. Data were collected from semistructured interviews with key staff, and from site-level and individual-level surveys.

RESULTS

Although disease registry adoption and implementation were mandated, CHCs exercised prerogative in the timing of registry adoption and the functions emphasized. Executive and medical director involvement, often directly on the HDC teams, was the single most salient influence on adoption and implementation. Staff members' personal experience with diabetes also provided context and gave registries added significance. Participants lauded HDC's technique of small-scale, rapid-cycle change, but valued even more shared problem solving and peer learning among HDC teams. However, lack of cross-training, inadequate resources, and staff turnover posed serious threats to sustainability of the registries.

CONCLUSIONS

The present study illustrates the usefulness of Rogers's model for studying mandated innovation and highlights several key factors, including direct, personal involvement of organizational leadership, and shared problem solving and peer learning facilitated by the HDC. However, these six CHCs elected to participate early in the HDC, and may not be typical of North Carolina's remaining CHCs. Furthermore, most face important long-term challenges that threaten routinization.