Stakeholder impact on the implementation of integrated care: Opportunities to consider for patient-centered outcomes research

Rapid implementation mapping to identify implementation determinants and strategies for cervical cancer control in Nigeria

Background

Cervical cancer constitutes a huge burden among women in Nigeria, particularly HIV-infected women. However, the provision and uptake of cervical cancer screening and treatment is limited in Nigeria. Understanding implementation determinants is essential for the effective translation of such evidence-based interventions into practice, particularly in low-resource settings. COVID-19 pandemic necessitated online collaboration making implementation mapping challenging in some ways, while providing streamlining opportunities. In this study, we describe the use of a virtual online approach for implementation mapping (steps 1-3) to identify implementation determinants, mechanisms, and strategies to implement evidence-based cervical cancer screening and treatment in existing HIV infrastructure in Nigeria.

Methods

This study used a mixed methods study design with a virtual modified nominal group technique (NGT) process aligning with Implementation Mapping steps 1-3. Eleven stakeholders (six program staff and five healthcare providers and administrators) participated in a virtual NGT process which occurred in two phases. The first phase utilized online surveys, and the second phase utilized an NGT and implementation mapping process. The Exploration, Preparation, Implementation and Sustainment (EPIS) framework was used to elicit discussion around determinants and strategies from the outer context (i.e., country and regions), inner organizational context of existing HIV infrastructure, bridging factors that relate to bi-directional influences, and the health innovation to be implemented (in this case cervical cancer screening and treatment). During the NGT, the group ranked implementation barriers and voted on implementation strategies using Mentimeter.

Results

Eighteen determinants to integrating cervical cancer screening and treatment into existing comprehensive HIV programs were related to human resources capacity, access to cervical cancer services, logistics management, clinic, and client-related factors. The top 3 determinants included gaps in human resources capacity, poor access to cervical cancer services, and lack of demand for services resulting from lack of awareness about the disease and servicesA set of six core implementation strategies and two enhanced implementation strategies were identified.

Conclusions

Rapid Implementation Mapping is a feasible and acceptable approach for identifying and articulating implementation determinants, mechanisms, and strategies for complex healthcare interventions in LMICs.

Undertaking rapid evaluations during the COVID-19 pandemic: Lessons from evaluating COVID-19 remote home monitoring services in England

Introduction

Rapid evaluations can offer evidence on innovations in health and social care that can be used to inform fast-moving policy and practise, and support their scale-up according to previous research. However, there are few comprehensive accounts of how to plan and conduct large-scale rapid evaluations, ensure scientific rigour, and achieve stakeholder engagement within compressed timeframes.

Methods

Using a case study of a national mixed-methods rapid evaluation of COVID-19 remote home monitoring services in England, conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic, this manuscript examines the process of conducting a large-scale rapid evaluation from design to dissemination and impact, and reflects on the key lessons for conducting future large-scale rapid evaluations. In this manuscript, we describe each stage of the rapid evaluation: convening the team (study team and external collaborators), design and planning (scoping, designing protocols, study set up), data collection and analysis, and dissemination.

Results

We reflect on why certain decisions were made and highlight facilitators and challenges. The manuscript concludes with 12 key lessons for conducting large-scale mixed-methods rapid evaluations of healthcare services. We propose that rapid study teams need to: (1) find ways of quickly building trust with external stakeholders, including evidence-users; (2) consider the needs of the rapid evaluation and resources needed; (3) use scoping to ensure the study is highly focused; (4) carefully consider what cannot be completed within a designated timeframe; (5) use structured processes to ensure consistency and rigour; (6) be flexible and responsive to changing needs and circumstances; (7) consider the risks associated with new data collection approaches of quantitative data (and their usability); (8) consider whether it is possible to use aggregated quantitative data, and what that would mean when presenting results, (9) consider using structured processes & layered analysis approaches to rapidly synthesise qualitative findings, (10) consider the balance between speed and the size and skills of the team, (11) ensure all team members know roles and responsibilities and can communicate quickly and clearly; and (12) consider how best to share findings, in discussion with evidence-users, for rapid understanding and use.

Conclusion

These 12 lessons can be used to inform the development and conduct of future rapid evaluations in a range of contexts and settings.

Digital Health Interventions for Depression and Anxiety Among People with Chronic Conditions: Scoping Review (Preprint)

Background

Chronic conditions are characterized by their long duration (≥1 year), need for ongoing medical attention, and limitations in activities of daily living. These can often co-occur with depression and anxiety as common and detrimental comorbidities among the growing population living with chronic conditions. Digital health interventions (DHIs) hold promise in overcoming barriers to accessing mental health support for these individuals; however, the design and implementation of DHIs for depression and anxiety in people with chronic conditions are yet to be explored.

Objective

This study aimed to explore what is known in the literature regarding DHIs for the prevention, detection, or treatment of depression and anxiety among people with chronic conditions.

Methods

A scoping review of the literature was conducted using the Arksey and O’Malley framework. Searches of the literature published in 5 databases between 1990 and 2019 were conducted in April 2019 and updated in March 2021. To be included, studies must have described a DHI tested with, or designed for, the prevention, detection, or treatment of depression or anxiety in people with common chronic conditions (arthritis, asthma, diabetes mellitus, heart disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, cancer, stroke, and Alzheimer disease or dementia). Studies were independently screened by 2 reviewers against the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Both quantitative and qualitative data were extracted, charted, and synthesized to provide a descriptive summary of the trends and considerations for future research.

Results

Database searches yielded 11,422 articles across the initial and updated searches, 53 (0.46%) of which were included in this review. DHIs predominantly sought to provide treatment (44/53, 83%), followed by detection (5/53, 9%) and prevention (4/53, 8%). Most DHIs were focused on depression (36/53, 68%), guided (32/53, 60%), tailored to chronic physical conditions (19/53, 36%), and delivered through web-based platforms (20/53, 38%). Only 2 studies described the implementation of a DHI.

Conclusions

As a growing research area, DHIs offer the potential to address the gap in care for depression and anxiety among people with chronic conditions; however, their implementation in standard care is scarce. Although stepped care has been identified as a promising model to implement efficacious DHIs, few studies have investigated the use of DHIs for depression and anxiety among chronic conditions using such models. In developing stepped care, we outlined DHI tailoring, guidance, and intensity as key considerations that require further research.

Practice What We Preach: Beginning a Journey to Embrace Patient-Centered Outcomes Research

Background: Patient-centered outcomes research seeks to answer patient-centered questions. The process includes varied locations and individuals throughout the care continuum to address individual differences and constraints in implementation and dissemination. Problem: This paper intends to answer this question: do academic nurses practice what they preach by assisting patient-centered outcomes research and researchers through their engagement with patients, caregivers, and other community stakeholder partners in nursing research? Approach: This paper provides an overview of how academic nurses in a single institution (the University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston School of Nursing) began to embrace patient-centered outcomes research. Conclusion: Whether academic nurses are practicing what they preach in terms of patient-centered outcomes research remains uncertain. More examples from academia are required to make that determination. Academic nurses worldwide have embarked on a steep learning curve to embrace patient-centered outcomes research. This journey will require patience and a systematic strategy.