Developing the Agile Implementation Playbook for Integrating Evidence-Based Health Care Services Into Clinical Practice

Evaluation of the Interdisciplinary Care Home-bAsed Reablement Program (I-CHARP) for People Living With Cognitive Impairment and Dementia in Care Homes

BACKGROUND

Major knowledge and practice gaps exist in aged care home services to support independence of older people with dementia. This research evaluates an adaptation of a community-based rehabilitation model for care homes, namely Interdisciplinary Care Home-bAsed Reablement Program (I-CHARP), by examining whether (and, if so, how) I-CHARP produces its intended effects and how this programme can be practicably implemented, sustained and scaled up across care homes in Australia.

METHODS

I-CHARP is a 4-month bio-behavioural-environmental rehabilitation model of care, integrated in care home services, supported through the deployment of an implementation strategy, the Research Enabled Aged Care Homes (REACH) network. It consists of (1) 8-12 full individual sessions and additional eight brief follow-ups per resident, tailored to the resident's needs, delivered primarily by a team of an occupational therapist, registered nurse and other allied health staff; (2) environmental modifications/assistive devices up to the value of $400 per resident; and (3) engagement of intervention care home staff, managers and regular visitors. An overarching evaluation approach is participatory action research using a cluster quasi-experimental design and mixed methods. It involves testing of the implementation strategy (REACH network and other approaches) while observing/gathering information on the intervention (I-CHARP) and related outcomes in three cycles. Participants include residents (aged ≥ 60 years with early stages of dementia) and care staff from 16 care homes. Care quality indicators, health care costs, field notes and semi-structured interviews/focus groups with intervention site staff, regular visitors and managers will provide further insights into I-CHARP processes and implementation issues.

DISCUSSION

In the final phase of the project, an Agile Implementation Playbook will be developed for the delivery of reablement care that can be used in routine practice across care homes in Australia. The study findings will also inform future policy development and strategic directions for dementia care in care homes.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Australian New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry, ACTRN12623000885695 Registered 16 August 2023, https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=386088.

PROTOCOL VERSION

1.0 dated 20 July 2023.

The methodology of the Agile Nudge University

Introduction

The Agile Nudge University is a National Institute on Aging-funded initiative to engineer a diverse, interdisciplinary network of scientists trained in Agile processes.

Methods

Members of the network are trained and mentored in rapid, iterative, and adaptive problem-solving techniques to develop, implement, and disseminate evidence-based nudges capable of addressing health disparities and improving the care of people living with Alzheimer's disease and other related dementias (ADRD).

Results

Each Agile Nudge University cohort completes a year-long online program, biweekly coaching and mentoring sessions, monthly group-based problem-solving sessions, and receives access to a five-day Bootcamp and the Agile Nudge Resource Library.

Discussion

The Agile Nudge University is evaluated through participant feedback, competency surveys, and tracking of the funding, research awards, and promotions of participating scholars. The Agile Nudge University is compounding national innovation efforts in overcoming the gaps in the ADRD discovery-to-delivery translational cycle.

Becoming an Agile Change Conductor

Background

It takes decades and millions of dollars for a new scientific discovery to become part of clinical practice. In 2015, the Center for Health Innovation & Implementation Science (CHIIS) launched a Professional Certificate Program in Innovation and Implementation Sciences aimed at transforming healthcare professionals into Agile Change Conductors capable of designing, implementing, and diffusing evidence-based healthcare solutions.

Method

In 2022, the authors surveyed alumni from the 2016-2021 cohorts of the Certificate Program as part of an educational quality improvement inquiry and to evaluate the effectiveness of the program.

Results

Of the 60 alumni contacted, 52 completed the survey (87% response rate) with 60% of graduates being female while 30% were an under-represented minority. On a scale from 1 to 5, the graduates agreed that the certificate benefited their careers (4.308 with a standard deviation (SD) of 0.612); expanded their professional network (4.615, SD of 0.530); and had a large impact on the effectiveness of their leadership (4.288, SD of 0.667), their change management (4.365, SD of 0.742), and their communication (4.392, SD of 0.666). Graduates claimed to use Agile Processes (Innovation, Implementation, or Diffusion), storytelling, and nudging weekly. On a scale from 0 to 10 where 10 indicates reaching a mastery, the average score for different Agile competencies ranged from 5.37 (SD of 2.80) for drafting business proposals to 7.77 (SD of 1.96) for self-awareness. For the 2020 and 2021 cohorts with existing pre and post training competency data, 22 of the 26 competencies saw a statistically significant increase.

Conclusion

The Graduate Certificate has been able to create a network of Agile Change Conductors competent to design, implement, and diffuse evidence-based care within the healthcare delivery system. Further improvements in building dissemination mastery and program expansion initiatives are advised.

Applying concepts from "rapid" and "agile" implementation to advance implementation research

Background

The translation of research findings into practice can be improved to maximize benefits more quickly and with greater flexibility. To expedite translation, researchers have developed innovative approaches to implementation branded as “rapid” and “agile” implementation. Rapid implementation has roots in precision medicine and agile implementation has roots in systems engineering and software design. Research has shown that innovation often derives from learning and applying ideas that have impacted other fields.

Implications for implementation researchers

This commentary examines “rapid” and “agile” approaches to implementation and provides recommendations to implementation researchers stemming from these approaches. Four key ideas are synthesized that may be broadly applicable to implementation research, including (1) adopting a problem orientation, (2) applying lessons from behavioral economics, (3) using adaptive study designs and adaptive interventions, and (4) using multi-level models to guide implementation. Examples are highlighted from the field where researchers are applying these key ideas to illustrate their potential impact.

Conclusions

“Rapid” and “agile” implementation approaches to implementation stem from diverse fields. Elements of these approaches show potential for advancing implementation research, although adopting them may entail shifting scientific norms in the field.

A Mobile, Electronic Health Record-Connected Application for Managing Team Workflows in Inpatient Care

BACKGROUND

 Clinical workflows require the ability to synthesize and act on existing and emerging patient information. While offering multiple benefits, in many circumstances electronic health records (EHRs) do not adequately support these needs.

OBJECTIVES

 We sought to design, build, and implement an EHR-connected rounding and handoff tool with real-time data that supports care plan organization and team-based care. This article first describes our process, from ideation and development through implementation; and second, the research findings of objective use, efficacy, and efficiency, along with qualitative assessments of user experience.

METHODS

 Guided by user-centered design and Agile development methodologies, our interdisciplinary team designed and built Carelign as a responsive web application, accessible from any mobile or desktop device, that gathers and integrates data from a health care institution's information systems. Implementation and iterative improvements spanned January to July 2016. We assessed acceptance via usage metrics, user observations, time-motion studies, and user surveys.

RESULTS

 By July 2016, Carelign was implemented on 152 of 169 total inpatient services across three hospitals staffing 1,616 hospital beds. Acceptance was near-immediate: in July 2016, 3,275 average unique weekly users generated 26,981 average weekly access sessions; these metrics remained steady over the following 4 years. In 2016 and 2018 surveys, users positively rated Carelign's workflow integration, support of clinical activities, and overall impact on work life.

CONCLUSION

 User-focused design, multidisciplinary development teams, and rapid iteration enabled creation, adoption, and sustained use of a patient-centered digital workflow tool that supports diverse users' and teams' evolving care plan organization needs.

Going Remote-Demonstration and Evaluation of Remote Technology Delivery and Usability Assessment With Older Adults: Survey Study

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic necessitated "going remote" with the delivery, support, and assessment of a study intervention targeting older adults enrolled in a clinical trial. While remotely delivering and assessing technology is not new, there are few methods available in the literature that are proven to be effective with diverse populations, and none for older adults specifically. Older adults comprise a diverse population, including in terms of their experience with and access to technology, making this a challenging endeavor.

OBJECTIVE

Our objective was to remotely deliver and conduct usability testing for a mobile health (mHealth) technology intervention for older adult participants enrolled in a clinical trial of the technology. This paper describes the methodology used, its successes, and its limitations.

METHODS

We developed a conceptual model for remote operations, called the Framework for Agile and Remote Operations (FAR Ops), that combined the general requirements for spaceflight operations with Agile project management processes to quickly respond to this challenge. Using this framework, we iteratively created care packages that differed in their contents based on participant needs and were sent to study participants to deliver the study intervention-a medication management app-and assess its usability. Usability data were collected using the System Usability Scale (SUS) and a novel usability questionnaire developed to collect more in-depth data.

RESULTS

In the first 6 months of the project, we successfully delivered 21 care packages. We successfully designed and deployed a minimum viable product in less than 6 weeks, generally maintained a 2-week sprint cycle, and achieved a 40% to 50% return rate for both usability assessment instruments. We hypothesize that lack of engagement due to the pandemic and our use of asynchronous communication channels contributed to the return rate of usability assessments being lower than desired. We also provide general recommendations for performing remote usability testing with diverse populations based on the results of our work, including implementing screen sharing capabilities when possible, and determining participant preference for phone or email communications.

CONCLUSIONS

The FAR Ops model allowed our team to adopt remote operations for our mHealth trial in response to interruptions from the COVID-19 pandemic. This approach can be useful for other research or practice-based projects under similar circumstances or to improve efficiency, cost, effectiveness, and participant diversity in general. In addition to offering a replicable approach, this paper tells the often-untold story of practical challenges faced by mHealth projects and practical strategies used to address them.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04121858; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04121858.

Agile Innovation to transform healthcare: innovating in complex adaptive systems is an everyday process, not a light bulb event

Innovation is essential to transform healthcare delivery systems, but in complex adaptive systems innovation is more than ‘light bulb events’ of inspired creativity. To achieve true innovation, organisations must adopt a disciplined, customer-centred process. We developed the process of Agile Innovation as an approach any complex adaptive organisation can adopt to achieve rapid, systematic, customer-centred development and testing of innovative interventions. Agile Innovation incorporates insights from design thinking, Agile project management, and complexity and behavioural sciences. It was refined through experiments in diverse healthcare organisations. The eight steps of Agile Innovation are: (1) confirm demand; (2) study the problem; (3) scan for solutions; (4) plan for evaluation and termination; (5) ideate and select; (6) run innovation development sprints; (7) validate solutions; and (8) package for launch. In addition to describing each of these steps, we discuss examples of and challenges to using Agile Innovation. We contend that once Agile Innovation is mastered, healthcare delivery organisations can habituate it as the go-to approach to projects, thus incorporating innovation into how things are done, rather than treating innovation as a light bulb event.

The "State of Implementation" Progress Report (SIPREP): a pilot demonstration of a navigation system for implementation

BACKGROUND

Implementation of new clinical programs across diverse facilities in national healthcare systems like the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) can be extraordinarily complex. Implementation is a dynamic process, influenced heavily by local organizational context and the individual staff at each medical center. It is not always clear in the midst of implementation what issues are most important to whom or how to address them. In recognition of these challenges, implementation researchers within VHA developed a new systemic approach to map the implementation work required at different stages and provide ongoing, detailed, and nuanced feedback about implementation progress.

METHODS

This observational pilot demonstration project details how a novel approach to monitoring implementation progress was applied across two different national VHA initiatives. Stage-specific grids organized the implementation work into columns, rows, and cells, identifying specific implementation activities at the site level to be completed along with who was responsible for completing each implementation activity. As implementation advanced, item-level checkboxes were crossed off and cells changed colors, offering a visual representation of implementation progress within and across sites across the various stages of implementation.

RESULTS

Applied across two different national initiatives, the SIPREP provided a novel navigation system to guide and inform ongoing implementation within and across facilities. The SIPREP addressed different needs of different audiences, both described and explained how to implement the program, made ample use of visualizations, and revealed both what was happening and not happening within and across sites. The final SIPREP product spanned distinct stages of implementation.

CONCLUSIONS

The SIPREP made the work of implementation explicit at the facility level (i.e., who does what, and when) and provided a new common way for all stakeholders to monitor implementation progress and to help keep implementation moving forward. This approach could be adapted to a wide range of settings and interventions and is planned to be integrated into the national deployment of two additional VHA initiatives within the next 12 months.

Embedding and Sustaining a Focus on Function in Specialty Research and Care

Function and the independent performance of daily activities are of critical importance to older adults. Although function was once a domain of interest primarily limited to geriatricians, transdisciplinary research has demonstrated its value across the spectrum of medical and surgical care. Nonetheless, integrating a functional perspective into medical and surgical therapeutics has yet to be implemented consistently into clinical practice. This article summarizes the presentations and discussions from a workshop, "Embedding/Sustaining a Focus on Function in Specialty Research and Care," held on January 31 to February 1, 2019. The third in a series supported by the National Institute on Aging and the John A. Hartford Foundation, the workshop aimed to identify scientific gaps and recommend research strategies to advance the implementation of function in care of older adults. Transdisciplinary leaders discussed implementation of mobility programs and functional assessments, including comprehensive geriatric assessment; integrating cognitive and sensory functional assessments; the role of culture, environment, and community in incorporating function into research; innovative methods to better identify functional limitations, techniques, and interventions to facilitate functional gains; and the role of the health system in fostering integration of function. Workshop participants emphasized the importance of aligning goals and assessments and adopting a team science approach that includes clinicians and frontline staff in the planning, development, testing, and implementation of tools and initiatives. This article summarizes those discussions.

Untold Stories in User-Centered Design of Mobile Health: Practical Challenges and Strategies Learned From the Design and Evaluation of an App for Older Adults With Heart Failure

Background

User-centered design (UCD) is a powerful framework for creating useful, easy-to-use, and satisfying mobile health (mHealth) apps. However, the literature seldom reports the practical challenges of implementing UCD, particularly in the field of mHealth.

Objective

This study aims to characterize the practical challenges encountered and propose strategies when implementing UCD for mHealth.

Methods

Our multidisciplinary team implemented a UCD process to design and evaluate a mobile app for older adults with heart failure. During and after this process, we documented the challenges the team encountered and the strategies they used or considered using to address those challenges.

Results

We identified 12 challenges, 3 about UCD as a whole and 9 across the UCD stages of formative research, design, and evaluation. Challenges included the timing of stakeholder involvement, overcoming designers’ assumptions, adapting methods to end users, and managing heterogeneity among stakeholders. To address these challenges, practical recommendations are provided to UCD researchers and practitioners.

Conclusions

UCD is a gold standard approach that is increasingly adopted for mHealth projects. Although UCD methods are well-described and easily accessible, practical challenges and strategies for implementing them are underreported. To improve the implementation of UCD for mHealth, we must tell and learn from these traditionally untold stories.

Critical Care Recovery Center: a model of agile implementation in intensive care unit (ICU) survivors

BACKGROUND

As many as 70% of intensive care unit (ICU) survivors suffer from long-term physical, cognitive, and psychological impairments known as post-intensive care syndrome (PICS). We describe how the first ICU survivor clinic in the United States, the Critical Care Recovery Center (CCRC), was designed to address PICS using the principles of Agile Implementation (AI).

METHODS

The CCRC was designed using an eight-step process known as the AI Science Playbook. Patients who required mechanical ventilation or were delirious ≥48 hours during their ICU stay were enrolled in the CCRC. One hundred twenty subjects who completed baseline HABC-M CG assessments and had demographics collected were included in the analysis to identify baseline characteristics that correlated with higher HABC-M CG scores. A subset of patients and caregivers also participated in focus group interviews to describe their perceptions of PICS.

RESULTS

Quantitative analyses showed that the cognitive impairment was a major concern of caregivers. Focus group data also confirmed that caregivers of ICU survivors (n = 8) were more likely to perceive cognitive and mental health symptoms than ICU survivors (n = 10). Caregivers also described a need for ongoing psychoeducation about PICS, particularly cognitive and mental health symptoms, and for ongoing support from other caregivers with similar experiences.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study demonstrated how the AI Science Playbook was used to build the first ICU survivor clinic in the United States. Caregivers of ICU survivors continue to struggle with PICS, particularly cognitive impairment, months to years after discharge. Future studies will need to examine whether the CCRC model of care can be adapted to other complex patient populations seen by health-care professionals.