Study protocol for a type III hybrid effectiveness-implementation trial of strategies to implement firearm safety promotion as a universal suicide prevention strategy in pediatric primary care

Adolescent, Parent, and Provider Perceptions of a Predictive Algorithm to Identify Adolescent Suicide Risk in Primary Care

OBJECTIVE

To understand adolescent, parent, and provider perceptions of a machine learning algorithm for detecting adolescent suicide risk prior to its implementation primary care.

METHODS

We conducted semi-structured, qualitative interviews with adolescents (n = 9), parents (n = 12), and providers (n = 10; mixture of behavioral health and primary care providers) across two major health systems. Interviews were audio recorded and transcribed with analyses supported by use of NVivo. A codebook was developed combining codes derived inductively from interview transcripts and deductively from implementation science frameworks for content analysis.

RESULTS

Reactions to the algorithm were mixed. While many participants expressed privacy concerns, they believed the algorithm could be clinically useful for identifying adolescents at risk for suicide and facilitating follow-up. Parents' past experiences with their adolescents' suicidal thoughts and behaviors contributed to their openness to the algorithm. Results also aligned with several key Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research domains. For example, providers mentioned barriers inherent to the primary care setting such as time and resource constraints likely to impact algorithm implementation. Participants also cited a climate of mistrust of science and health care as potential barriers.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings shed light on factors that warrant consideration to promote successful implementation of suicide predictive algorithms in pediatric primary care. By attending to perspectives of potential end users prior to the development and testing of the algorithm, we can ensure that the risk prediction methods will be well-suited to the providers who would be interacting with them and the families who could benefit.

Family cascade screening for equitable identification of familial hypercholesterolemia: study protocol for a hybrid effectiveness-implementation type III randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) is a heritable disorder affecting 1.3 million individuals in the USA. Eighty percent of people with FH are undiagnosed, particularly minoritized populations including Black or African American people, Asian or Asian American people, and women across racial groups. Family cascade screening is an evidence-based practice that can increase diagnosis and improve health outcomes but is rarely implemented in routine practice, representing an important care gap. In pilot work, we leveraged best practices from behavioral economics and implementation science-including mixed-methods contextual inquiry with clinicians, patients, and health system constituents-to co-design two patient-facing implementation strategies to address this care gap: (a) an automated health system-mediated strategy and (b) a nonprofit foundation-mediated strategy with contact from a foundation-employed care navigator. This trial will test the comparative effectiveness of these strategies on completion of cascade screening for relatives of individuals with FH, centering equitable reach.

METHODS

We will conduct a hybrid effectiveness-implementation type III randomized controlled trial testing the comparative effectiveness of two strategies for implementing cascade screening with 220 individuals with FH (i.e., probands) per arm identified from a large northeastern health system. The primary implementation outcome is reach, or the proportion of probands with at least one first-degree biological relative (parent, sibling, child) in the USA who is screened for FH through the study. Our secondary implementation outcomes include the number of relatives screened and the number of relatives meeting the American Heart Association criteria for FH. Our secondary clinical effectiveness outcome is post-trial proband cholesterol level. We will also use mixed methods to identify implementation strategy mechanisms for implementation strategy effectiveness while centering equity.

DISCUSSION

We will test two patient-facing implementation strategies harnessing insights from behavioral economics that were developed collaboratively with constituents. This trial will improve our understanding of how to implement evidence-based cascade screening for FH, which implementation strategies work, for whom, and why. Learnings from this trial can be used to equitably scale cascade screening programs for FH nationally and inform cascade screening implementation efforts for other genetic disorders.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05750667. Registered 15 February 2023-retrospectively registered, https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05750667 .

A Randomized Control Trial of a Digital Health Tool for Safer Firearm and Medication Storage for Patients with Suicide Risk

Most patients with suicide risk do not receive recommendations to reduce access to lethal means due to a variety of barriers (e.g., lack of provider time, training). Determine if highly efficient population-based EHR messaging to visit the Lock to Live (L2L) decision aid impacts patient-reported storage behaviors. Randomized trial. Integrated health care system serving Denver, CO. Served by primary care or mental health specialty clinic in the 75-99.5th risk percentile on a suicide attempt or death prediction model. Lock to Live (L2L) is a web-based decision aid that incorporates patients' values into recommendations for safe storage of lethal means, including firearms and medications. Anonymous survey that determined readiness to change: pre-contemplative (do not believe in safe storage), contemplative (believe in safe storage but not doing it), preparation (planning storage changes) or action (safely storing). There were 21,131 patients randomized over a 6-month period with a 27% survey response rate. Many (44%) had access to a firearm, but most of these (81%) did not use any safe firearm storage behaviors. Intervention patients were more likely to be categorized as preparation or action compared to controls for firearm storage (OR = 1.30 (1.07-1.58)). When examining action alone, there were no group differences. There were no statistically significant differences for any medication storage behaviors. Selection bias in those who responded to survey. Efficiently sending an EHR invitation message to visit L2L encouraged patients with suicide risk to consider safer firearm storage practices, but a stronger intervention is needed to change storage behaviors. Future studies should evaluate whether combining EHR messaging with provider nudges (e.g., brief clinician counseling) changes storage behavior.ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT05288517.

Eight characteristics of rigorous multilevel implementation research: a step-by-step guide

BACKGROUND

Although healthcare is delivered in inherently multilevel contexts, implementation science has no widely endorsed methodological standards defining the characteristics of rigorous, multilevel implementation research. We identify and describe eight characteristics of high-quality, multilevel implementation research to encourage discussion, spur debate, and guide decision-making around study design and methodological issues.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Implementation researchers who conduct rigorous multilevel implementation research demonstrate the following eight characteristics. First, they map and operationalize the specific multilevel context for defined populations and settings. Second, they define and state the level of each construct under study. Third, they describe how constructs relate to each other within and across levels. Fourth, they specify the temporal scope of each phenomenon at each relevant level. Fifth, they align measurement choices and construction of analytic variables with the levels of theories selected (and hypotheses generated, if applicable). Sixth, they use a sampling strategy consistent with the selected theories or research objectives and sufficiently large and variable to examine relationships at requisite levels. Seventh, they align analytic approaches with the chosen theories (and hypotheses, if applicable), ensuring that they account for measurement dependencies and nested data structures. Eighth, they ensure inferences are made at the appropriate level. To guide implementation researchers and encourage debate, we present the rationale for each characteristic, actionable recommendations for operationalizing the characteristics in implementation research, a range of examples, and references to make the characteristics more usable. Our recommendations apply to all types of multilevel implementation study designs and approaches, including randomized trials, quantitative and qualitative observational studies, and mixed methods.

CONCLUSION

These eight characteristics provide benchmarks for evaluating the quality and replicability of multilevel implementation research and promote a common language and reference points. This, in turn, facilitates knowledge generation across diverse multilevel settings and ensures that implementation research is consistent with (and appropriately leverages) what has already been learned in allied multilevel sciences. When a shared and integrated description of what constitutes rigor is defined and broadly communicated, implementation science is better positioned to innovate both methodologically and theoretically.

Preventing Suicide in Health Systems: How Can Implementation Science Help?

Suicide prevention is an emotive, complex goal for clinicians and health systems. Effective interventions for suicidality do exist; however, many patients do not receive them because implementation efforts tend to be time-limited and unsystematic. Implementation science is the study of methods to promote the systematic uptake of research findings and other evidence-based practices into routine practice. This narrative review introduces implementation science to suicide researchers, with a special focus on healthcare settings. We outline prominent theories, methods, and measures, as well as examples of implementation research from suicidology. By embracing the principles of implementation science, suicidologists can help to close the gap between evidence-based practice and routine practice, thereby improving the delivery and uptake of suicide-related interventions and prevention programs.

Design and management considerations for control groups in hybrid effectiveness-implementation trials: Narrative review & case studies

Hybrid effectiveness-implementation studies allow researchers to combine study of a clinical intervention's effectiveness with study of its implementation with the aim of accelerating the translation of evidence into practice. However, there currently exists limited guidance on how to design and manage such hybrid studies. This is particularly true for studies that include a comparison/control arm that, by design, receives less implementation support than the intervention arm. Lack of such guidance can present a challenge for researchers both in setting up but also in effectively managing participating sites in such trials. This paper uses a narrative review of the literature (Phase 1 of the research) and comparative case study of three studies (Phase 2 of the research) to identify common themes related to study design and management. Based on these, we comment and reflect on: (1) the balance that needs to be struck between fidelity to the study design and tailoring to emerging requests from participating sites as part of the research process, and (2) the modifications to the implementation strategies being evaluated. Hybrid trial teams should carefully consider the impact of design selection, trial management decisions, and any modifications to implementation processes and/or support on the delivery of a controlled evaluation. The rationale for these choices should be systematically reported to fill the gap in the literature.

Equitable implementation of S.A.F.E. Firearm: A multi-method pilot study

Attention to health equity is critical in the implementation of firearm safety efforts. We present our operationalization of equity-oriented recommendations in preparation for launch of a hybrid effectiveness-implementation trial focused on firearm safety promotion in pediatric primary care as a universal suicide prevention strategy. In Step 1 of our process, pre-trial engagement with clinican partners and literature review alerted us that delivery of a firearm safety program may vary by patients' medical complexity, race, and ethnicity. In Step 2, we selected the Health Equity Implementation Framework to inform our understanding of contextual determinants (i.e., barriers and facilitators). In Step 3, we leveraged an implementation pilot across 5 pediatric primary care clinics in 2 health system sites to study signals of inequities. Eligible well-child visits for 694 patients and 47 clinicians were included. Our results suggested that medical complexity was not associated with program delivery. We did see potential signals of inequities by race and ethnicity but must interpret with caution. Though we did not initially plan to examine differences by sex assigned at birth, we discovered that clinicians may be more likely to deliver the program to parents of male than female patients. Seven qualitative interviews with clinicians provided additional context. In Step 4, we interrogated equity considerations (e.g., why and how do these inequities exist). In Step 5, we will develop a plan to probe potential inequities related to race, ethnicity, and sex in the fully powered trial. Our process highlights that prospective, rigorous, exploratory work is vital for equity-informed implementation trials.

Hybrid effectiveness-implementation study designs in sports injury prevention research

Despite vast evidence supporting the effectiveness of lower extremity injury prevention programs in a variety of sport settings, age groups, and levels of competition, there is limited evidence on implementation strategies that positively impact the feasibility, scale-up and sustainability of such programs. Sport-related injury prevention is affected by the research-to-practice gap, a pervasive issue in healthcare, where high-quality experimental research is not used in routine clinical practice. An intervention shown to be efficacious in a controlled environment, such as a lab or in a field-study conducted by scientists, will demonstrate a decline in benefit when implemented in the intended clinical setting. Real-world considerations, such as foundational knowledge and training, time constraints, or end user motivation, influence the quality and consistency of implementation. Acknowledging and addressing implementation barriers in a systematic way is essential to promote effective program dissemination. Study design methods that measure both clinical effectiveness and implementation strategies need to be identified. Hybrid effectiveness-implementation designs simultaneously measure both an intervention's effect on clinical outcomes as well as critical information related to implementation strategy; however these study designs are not frequently utilized. The purpose of this mini-review is to describe: the basics of hybrid designs, rationale for using hybrid designs, and examples of how these designs could be used in athletic healthcare injury prevention research.

Explorations of the Role of Digital Technology in HIV-Related Implementation Research: Case Comparisons of Five Ending the HIV Epidemic Supplement Awards

INTRODUCTION

The use of digital technology in HIV-related interventions and implementation strategies is increasing. Whether the use of technology is to directly improve patient outcomes (ie, part of the intervention) or as part of the strategy to implement interventions has important implications. In this article, we present 5 case studies of projects that feature the use of technology in HIV-related implementation research to identify and describe challenges specific to technology-based implementation research about study design, outcome measurement, implementing in an evolving technology landscape, and equity.

METHODS

For each case study, we identified the technological components, classified the components as intervention or implementation strategy, and identified implications for measuring performance and ensuring equity. The Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, and Sustainment framework was used to identify the research stage of each project.

RESULTS

Technology is being leveraged across a diverse array of implementation strategies to promote Ending the HIV Epidemic in the United States. The case studies were primarily in the exploration and preparation phases of implementation, yet technology played a different role in each project- developing educational materials, mass media to recruit participants or distribute evidence-based campaigns, providing training, guiding tailoring, and implementing novel methods to democratize intervention development.

DISCUSSION

Technology can play multiple roles in HIV-related implementation research projects, including serving as the intervention, being leveraged within implementation strategies, or both. We identified multiple considerations across projects that should be taken into account when measuring success and planning for equitable and sustained impact.

Harnessing the Single-Session Intervention approach to promote scalable implementation of evidence-based practices in healthcare

Effective implementation of evidence-based practices often involves multi-level strategies targeting individual-, organizational-, and system-level determinants of change. Although these multi-level implementation approaches can successfully facilitate EBP uptake, they tend to be complex and resource intensive. Accordingly, there is a need for theory-driven, generalizable approaches that can enhance efficiency, cost-effectiveness, and scalability of existing implementation approaches. We propose the Single-Session Intervention approach as an unexplored path to developing low-cost and scalable implementation strategies, especially those targeting individual-level behavior change. We argue that single-session strategies (S3) for implementation, which can simultaneously target myriad barriers to individual behavior change, may promote clinicians' EBP uptake and sustainment in a manner that is low-resource and scalable. We first overview the evidence-base supporting the Single-Session Intervention approach for patient-level outcomes; situate this approach within the implementation science literature by outlining its intersections with a leading framework, the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF), as an exemplar; and illustrate how the TDF might directly inform the design and evaluation of single-session strategies for EBP implementation. Overall, single-session strategies (S3) for implementation reflect a promising but yet-to-be-tested means of streamlining and scaling individual-level behavior change efforts in healthcare settings. Future partnered research is needed to gauge the potential of this approach across diverse clinical and community contexts.

Reflections on 10 years of effectiveness-implementation hybrid studies

This article provides new reflections and recommendations from authors of the initial effectiveness-implementation hybrid study manuscript and additional experts in their conceptualization and application. Given the widespread and continued use of hybrid studies, critical appraisals are necessary. The article offers reflections across five conceptual and methodological areas. It begins with the recommendation to replace the term "design" in favor of "study." The use of the term "design" and the explicit focus on trial methodology in the original paper created confusion. The essence of hybrid studies is combining research questions concerning intervention effectiveness and implementation within the same study, and this can and should be achieved by applying a full range of research designs. Supporting this recommendation, the article then offers guidance on selecting a hybrid study type based on evidentiary and contextual information and stakeholder concerns/preferences. A series of questions are presented that have been designed to help investigators select the most appropriate hybrid type for their study situation. The article also provides a critique on the hybrid 1-2-3 typology and offers reflections on when and how to use the typology moving forward. Further, the article offers recommendations on research designs that align with each hybrid study type. Lastly, the article offers thoughts on how to integrate costs analyses into hybrid studies.