1
|
Lewis CC, Frank HE, Cruden G, Kim B, Stahmer AC, Lyon AR, Albers B, Aarons GA, Beidas RS, Mittman BS, Weiner BJ, Williams NJ, Powell BJ. A research agenda to advance the study of implementation mechanisms. Implement Sci Commun 2024; 5:98. [PMID: 39285504 PMCID: PMC11403843 DOI: 10.1186/s43058-024-00633-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/17/2024] [Accepted: 08/30/2024] [Indexed: 09/20/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Implementation science scholars have made significant progress identifying factors that enable or obstruct the implementation of evidence-based interventions, and testing strategies that may modify those factors. However, little research sheds light on how or why strategies work, in what contexts, and for whom. Studying implementation mechanisms-the processes responsible for change-is crucial for advancing the field of implementation science and enhancing its value in facilitating equitable policy and practice change. The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality funded a conference series to achieve two aims: (1) develop a research agenda on implementation mechanisms, and (2) actively disseminate the research agenda to research, policy, and practice audiences. This article presents the resulting research agenda, including priorities and actions to encourage its execution. METHOD Building on prior concept mapping work, in a semi-structured, 3-day, in-person working meeting, 23 US-based researchers used a modified nominal group process to generate priorities and actions for addressing challenges to studying implementation mechanisms. During each of the three 120-min sessions, small groups responded to the prompt: "What actions need to be taken to move this research forward?" The groups brainstormed actions, which were then shared with the full group and discussed with the support of facilitators trained in structured group processes. Facilitators grouped critical and novel ideas into themes. Attendees voted on six themes they prioritized to discuss in a fourth, 120-min session, during which small groups operationalized prioritized actions. Subsequently, all ideas were collated, combined, and revised for clarity by a subset of the authorship team. RESULTS From this multistep process, 150 actions emerged across 10 priority areas, which together constitute the research agenda. Actions included discrete activities, projects, or products, and ways to shift how research is conducted to strengthen the study of implementation mechanisms. CONCLUSIONS This research agenda elevates actions to guide the selection, design, and evaluation of implementation mechanisms. By delineating recommended actions to address the challenges of studying implementation mechanisms, this research agenda facilitates expanding the field of implementation science, beyond studying what works to how and why strategies work, in what contexts, for whom, and with which interventions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Cara C Lewis
- Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, 1730 Minor Avenue, Suite 1600, Seattle, WA, 98101, USA.
| | - Hannah E Frank
- The Warren Alpert Medical School, Brown University, Box G-BH, Providence, RI, 02912, USA
| | - Gracelyn Cruden
- Chestnut Health System, Lighthouse Institute - OR Group, 1255 Pearl St, Ste 101, Eugene, OR 97401, USA
| | - Bo Kim
- Center for Healthcare Organization and Implementation Research, VA Boston Healthcare System, 150 South Huntington Avenue, Boston, MA, 02130, USA
- Department of Psychiatry, Harvard Medical School, 25 Shattuck Street, Boston, MA, 02115, USA
| | - Aubyn C Stahmer
- UC Davis MIND Institute, 2825 50Th St, Sacramento, CA, 95819, USA
| | - Aaron R Lyon
- Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington, 1959 NE Pacific Street Box 356560, Seattle, WA, 98195-6560, USA
| | - Bianca Albers
- Institute for Implementation Science in Health Care, University of Zurich, Zürich, Switzerland
| | - Gregory A Aarons
- Department of Psychiatry, University of California San Diego, 9500 Gilman Drive La Jolla California, San Diego, 92093, CA, USA
| | - Rinad S Beidas
- Department of Medical Social Sciences, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, 625 N Michigan Avenue, Evanston, IL, 60661, USA
| | - Brian S Mittman
- Division of Health Services Research & Implementation Science, Department of Research & Evaluation, Kaiser Permanente Southern California, 100 S Los Robles Ave, Pasadena, CA, 91101, USA
| | - Bryan J Weiner
- Department of Global Health, School of Public Health, Box 357965, Seattle, WA, 98195, USA
| | - Nate J Williams
- School of Social Work, Boise State University, Boise, ID, 83725, USA
| | - Byron J Powell
- Center for Mental Health Services Research, Brown School, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA
- Center for Dissemination & Implementation, Institute for Public Health, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA
- Division of Infectious Diseases, John T. Milliken Department of Medicine, School of Medicine, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Stadnick NA, Geremia C, Mauri AI, Swanson K, Wynecoop M, Purtle J. A Mixed-Methods Exploration of the Implementation of Policies That Earmarked Taxes for Behavioral Health. Milbank Q 2024. [PMID: 39240049 DOI: 10.1111/1468-0009.12715] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/27/2024] [Revised: 07/10/2024] [Accepted: 08/19/2024] [Indexed: 09/07/2024] Open
Abstract
Policy Points Earmarked tax policies for behavioral health are perceived as having positive impacts related to increasing flexible funding, suggesting benefits to expand this financing approach. Implementation challenges related to these earmarked taxes included tax base volatility that impedes long-term service delivery planning and inequities in the distribution of tax revenue. Recommendations for designing or revising earmarked tax policies include developing clear guidelines and support systems to manage the administrative aspects of earmarked tax programs, cocreating reporting and oversight structures with system and service delivery agents, and selecting revenue streams that are relatively stable across years. CONTEXT Over 200 cities and counties in the United States have implemented policies earmarking tax revenue for behavioral health services. This mixed-methods study was conducted with the aim of characterizing perceptions of the impacts of these earmarked tax policies, strengths and weaknesses of tax policy designs, and factors that influence decision making about how tax revenue is allocated for services. METHODS Study data came from surveys completed by 274 officials involved in behavioral health earmarked tax policy implementation and 37 interviews with officials in a sample of jurisdictions with these taxes-California (n = 16), Washington (n = 12), Colorado (n = 6), and Iowa (n = 3). Interviews primarily explored perceptions of the advantages and drawbacks of the earmarked tax, perceptions of tax policy design, and factors influencing decisions about revenue allocation. FINDINGS A total of 83% of respondents strongly agreed that it was better to have the tax than not, 73.2% strongly agreed that the tax increased flexibility to address complex behavioral health needs, and 65.1% strongly agreed that the tax increased the number of people served by evidence-based practices. Only 43.3%, however, strongly agreed that it was easy to satisfy tax-reporting requirements. Interviews revealed that the taxes enabled funding for services and implementation supports, such as training in the delivery of evidence-based practices, and supplemented mainstream funding sources (e.g., Medicaid). However, some interviewees also reported challenges related to volatility of funding, inequities in the distribution of tax revenue, and, in some cases, administratively burdensome tax reporting. Decisions about tax revenue allocation were influenced by goals such as reducing behavioral health care inequities, being responsive to community needs, addressing constraints of mainstream funding sources, and, to a lesser degree, supporting services considered to be evidence based. CONCLUSIONS Earmarked taxes are a promising financing strategy to improve access to, and quality of, behavioral health services by supplementing mainstream state and federal financing.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nicole A Stadnick
- University of California, San Diego
- Altman Clinical and Translational Research Institute, Dissemination and Implementation Science Center, University of California, San Diego
- Child and Adolescent Services Research Center
| | | | - Amanda I Mauri
- Public Health Policy and Management, School of Global Public Health, New York University
| | - Kera Swanson
- Altman Clinical and Translational Research Institute, Dissemination and Implementation Science Center, University of California, San Diego
| | - Megan Wynecoop
- Public Health Policy and Management, School of Global Public Health, New York University
| | - Jonathan Purtle
- Public Health Policy and Management, School of Global Public Health, New York University
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Crable EL, Sklar M, Kandah A, Samuels HC, Ehrhart MG, Aalsma MC, Hulvershorn L, Willging CE, Aarons GA. Utility of the Leadership and Organizational Change for Implementation-Systems Level (LOCI-SL) strategy for a statewide substance use treatment implementation effort. JOURNAL OF SUBSTANCE USE AND ADDICTION TREATMENT 2024; 164:209433. [PMID: 38852821 DOI: 10.1016/j.josat.2024.209433] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/17/2024] [Revised: 03/14/2024] [Accepted: 05/21/2024] [Indexed: 06/11/2024]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Multi-level and cross-context implementation strategies are needed to support health systems, healthcare delivery organizations, and providers to adopt evidence-based practice (EBP) for substance use disorder (SUD) treatment. However, misalignment between state oversight agencies and healthcare organizations about which services to prioritize and which outcomes are reasonable to expect can hinder implementation success and widespread access to high-quality care. This study investigated the utility of the Leadership and Organizational Change for Implementation-System Level (LOCI-SL) strategy for supporting statewide EBP implementation for SUD treatment. METHODS Nine community mental health centers (CMHCs) contracted by a state agency participated in a combined motivational-enhancement therapy and cognitive behavioral therapy (MET/CBT) implementation effort. Five of the CMHCs also received the LOCI-SL strategy to obtain ongoing implementation support. We conducted 21 individual interviews and three small group interviews with 30 participants across CMHCs and state health agencies to investigate the utility of LOCI-SL in supporting their EBP implementation efforts. Deductive thematic analysis was guided by the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, Sustainment Framework. RESULTS Five themes described CMHCs' LOCI-SL and broader contextual experiences implementing EBPs: (1) LOCI-SL supported executives in Preparation phase activities that holistically considered organizational needs and capacity to implement and sustain EBPs; (2) LOCI-SL facilitated trust and communication processes across Preparation, Implementation, and Sustainment phases to improve EBP uptake; (3) LOCI-SL increased CMHCs' use of implementation climate strengthening activities throughout the Implementation phase; (4) state contracts did not emphasize quality and thus were not sufficient bridging factors to enforce EBP fidelity during Implementation; and, (5) limited funding and low Medicaid reimbursement rates hindered EBP use throughout the Implementation and Sustainment phases. CONCLUSIONS LOCI-SL was viewed as a favorable and useful implementation strategy for supporting statewide adoption of EBPs. However, outer context barriers, including limited financial investments in the treatment system, impeded implementation and sustainment efforts. While previous research suggests that contracts are viable alignment-promoting bridging factors, this study demonstrates the importance of articulating implementation outcome expectations to aid state-contracted organizations in achieving EBP implementation success. This study also highlights the need for multi-level implementation strategies to effectively align implementation expectations between outer- and inner-context entities.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Erika L Crable
- Department of Psychiatry, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA; Herbert Wertheim School of Public Health and Human Longevity Science, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA; ACTRI Dissemination and Implementation Science Center, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, USA; Child and Adolescent Services Research Center, San Diego, CA, USA.
| | - Marisa Sklar
- Department of Psychiatry, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA; ACTRI Dissemination and Implementation Science Center, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, USA; Child and Adolescent Services Research Center, San Diego, CA, USA
| | - Alexandra Kandah
- Department of Psychology, University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL, USA
| | | | - Mark G Ehrhart
- Department of Psychology, University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL, USA
| | - Matthew C Aalsma
- Adolescent Behavioral Health Research Program, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, USA; Indiana Clinical and Translational Sciences Institute, Indianapolis, IN, USA
| | - Leslie Hulvershorn
- Adolescent Behavioral Health Research Program, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, USA; Indiana Clinical and Translational Sciences Institute, Indianapolis, IN, USA
| | - Cathleen E Willging
- Southwest Center, Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation, Albuquerque, NM, USA
| | - Gregory A Aarons
- Department of Psychiatry, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA; ACTRI Dissemination and Implementation Science Center, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, USA; Child and Adolescent Services Research Center, San Diego, CA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Smith NR, Levy DE, Falbe J, Purtle J, Chriqui JF. Design considerations for developing measures of policy implementation in quantitative evaluations of public health policy. FRONTIERS IN HEALTH SERVICES 2024; 4:1322702. [PMID: 39076770 PMCID: PMC11285065 DOI: 10.3389/frhs.2024.1322702] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/16/2023] [Accepted: 06/20/2024] [Indexed: 07/31/2024]
Abstract
Typical quantitative evaluations of public policies treat policies as a binary condition, without further attention to how policies are implemented. However, policy implementation plays an important role in how the policy impacts behavioral and health outcomes. The field of policy-focused implementation science is beginning to consider how policy implementation may be conceptualized in quantitative analyses (e.g., as a mediator or moderator), but less work has considered how to measure policy implementation for inclusion in quantitative work. To help address this gap, we discuss four design considerations for researchers interested in developing or identifying measures of policy implementation using three independent NIH-funded research projects studying e-cigarette, food, and mental health policies. Mini case studies of these considerations were developed via group discussions; we used the implementation research logic model to structure our discussions. Design considerations include (1) clearly specifying the implementation logic of the policy under study, (2) developing an interdisciplinary team consisting of policy practitioners and researchers with expertise in quantitative methods, public policy and law, implementation science, and subject matter knowledge, (3) using mixed methods to identify, measure, and analyze relevant policy implementation determinants and processes, and (4) building flexibility into project timelines to manage delays and challenges due to the real-world nature of policy. By applying these considerations in their own work, researchers can better identify or develop measures of policy implementation that fit their needs. The experiences of the three projects highlighted in this paper reinforce the need for high-quality and transferrable measures of policy implementation, an area where collaboration between implementation scientists and policy experts could be particularly fruitful. These measurement practices provide a foundation for the field to build on as attention to incorporating measures of policy implementation into quantitative evaluations grows and will help ensure that researchers are developing a more complete understanding of how policies impact health outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Natalie Riva Smith
- Department of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, United States
| | - Douglas E. Levy
- Mongan Institute Health Policy Research Center, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, United States
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States
| | - Jennifer Falbe
- Human Development and Family Studies Program, Department of Human Ecology, University of California, Davis, CA, United States
| | - Jonathan Purtle
- Department of Public Health Policy & Management, Global Center for Implementation Science, New York University School of Global Public Health, New York, NY, United States
| | - Jamie F. Chriqui
- Institute for Health Research and Policy, University of Illinois Chicago, Chicago, IL, United States
- Department of Health Policy and Administration, School of Public Health, University of Illinois Chicago, Chicago, IL, United States
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Ashcraft LE, Goodrich DE, Hero J, Phares A, Bachrach RL, Quinn DA, Qureshi N, Ernecoff NC, Lederer LG, Scheunemann LP, Rogal SS, Chinman MJ. A systematic review of experimentally tested implementation strategies across health and human service settings: evidence from 2010-2022. Implement Sci 2024; 19:43. [PMID: 38915102 PMCID: PMC11194895 DOI: 10.1186/s13012-024-01369-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/09/2023] [Accepted: 05/27/2024] [Indexed: 06/26/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Studies of implementation strategies range in rigor, design, and evaluated outcomes, presenting interpretation challenges for practitioners and researchers. This systematic review aimed to describe the body of research evidence testing implementation strategies across diverse settings and domains, using the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) taxonomy to classify strategies and the Reach Effectiveness Adoption Implementation and Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework to classify outcomes. METHODS We conducted a systematic review of studies examining implementation strategies from 2010-2022 and registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021235592). We searched databases using terms "implementation strategy", "intervention", "bundle", "support", and their variants. We also solicited study recommendations from implementation science experts and mined existing systematic reviews. We included studies that quantitatively assessed the impact of at least one implementation strategy to improve health or health care using an outcome that could be mapped to the five evaluation dimensions of RE-AIM. Only studies meeting prespecified methodologic standards were included. We described the characteristics of studies and frequency of implementation strategy use across study arms. We also examined common strategy pairings and cooccurrence with significant outcomes. FINDINGS Our search resulted in 16,605 studies; 129 met inclusion criteria. Studies tested an average of 6.73 strategies (0-20 range). The most assessed outcomes were Effectiveness (n=82; 64%) and Implementation (n=73; 56%). The implementation strategies most frequently occurring in the experimental arm were Distribute Educational Materials (n=99), Conduct Educational Meetings (n=96), Audit and Provide Feedback (n=76), and External Facilitation (n=59). These strategies were often used in combination. Nineteen implementation strategies were frequently tested and associated with significantly improved outcomes. However, many strategies were not tested sufficiently to draw conclusions. CONCLUSION This review of 129 methodologically rigorous studies built upon prior implementation science data syntheses to identify implementation strategies that had been experimentally tested and summarized their impact on outcomes across diverse outcomes and clinical settings. We present recommendations for improving future similar efforts.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Laura Ellen Ashcraft
- Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, Corporal Michael Crescenz VA Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
- Department of Biostatistics, Epidemiology, and Informatics, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
| | - David E Goodrich
- Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
- Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
- Clinical & Translational Science Institute, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
| | | | - Angela Phares
- Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
| | - Rachel L Bachrach
- Center for Clinical Management Research, VA Ann Arbor Healthcare System, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
- Department of Psychiatry, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - Deirdre A Quinn
- Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
- Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
| | | | | | - Lisa G Lederer
- Clinical & Translational Science Institute, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
| | - Leslie Page Scheunemann
- Division of Geriatric Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Department of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
- Division of Pulmonary, Allergy, Critical Care, and Sleep Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Department of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
| | - Shari S Rogal
- Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
- Departments of Medicine and Surgery, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Matthew J Chinman
- Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
- Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
- RAND Corporation, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Oswald TK, Nguyen MT, Mirza L, Lund C, Jones HG, Crowley G, Aslanyan D, Dean K, Schofield P, Hotopf M, Das-Munshi J. Interventions targeting social determinants of mental disorders and the Sustainable Development Goals: a systematic review of reviews. Psychol Med 2024; 54:1475-1499. [PMID: 38523245 DOI: 10.1017/s0033291724000333] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 03/26/2024]
Abstract
Globally, mental disorders account for almost 20% of disease burden and there is growing evidence that mental disorders are socially determined. Tackling the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (UN SDGs), which address social determinants of mental disorders, may be an effective way to reduce the global burden of mental disorders. We conducted a systematic review of reviews to examine the evidence base for interventions that map onto the UN SDGs and seek to improve mental health through targeting known social determinants of mental disorders. We included 101 reviews in the final review, covering demographic, economic, environmental events, neighborhood, and sociocultural domains. This review presents interventions with the strongest evidence base for the prevention of mental disorders and highlights synergies where addressing the UN SDGs can be beneficial for mental health.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tassia Kate Oswald
- Department of Psychological Medicine, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, UK
| | - Minh Thu Nguyen
- Discipline of Psychiatry and Mental Health, School of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
| | - Luwaiza Mirza
- Department of Psychological Medicine, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, UK
- University Hospitals Sussex, UK
| | - Crick Lund
- Centre for Global Mental Health, Health Service and Population Research Department, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, UK
- Alan J Flisher Centre for Public Mental Health, Department of Psychiatry and Mental Health, University of Cape Town, South Africa
| | - Hannah Grace Jones
- Department of Psychological Medicine, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, UK
| | - Grace Crowley
- Department of Psychological Medicine, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, UK
- South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Daron Aslanyan
- Department of Psychological Medicine, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, UK
| | - Kimberlie Dean
- Discipline of Psychiatry and Mental Health, School of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
- Justice Health and Forensic Mental Health Network, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Peter Schofield
- School of Life Course and Population Sciences, Faculty of Life Sciences and Medicine, King's College London, UK
| | - Matthew Hotopf
- Department of Psychological Medicine, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, UK
- South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Jayati Das-Munshi
- Department of Psychological Medicine, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, UK
- South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
- ESRC Centre for Society and Mental Health, King's College London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Walker SC, Ahrens KR, Owens MD, Parnes M, Langley J, Ackerley C, Purtle J, Saldana L, Aarons GA, Hogue A, Palinkas LA. Using policy codesign to achieve multi-sector alignment in adolescent behavioral health: a study protocol. Implement Sci Commun 2024; 5:54. [PMID: 38720398 PMCID: PMC11077850 DOI: 10.1186/s43058-024-00583-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/25/2024] [Accepted: 04/06/2024] [Indexed: 05/12/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Policymaking is quickly gaining focus in the field of implementation science as a potential opportunity for aligning cross-sector systems and introducing incentives to promote population health, including substance use disorders (SUD) and their prevention in adolescents. Policymakers are seen as holding the necessary levers for realigning service infrastructure to more rapidly and effectively address adolescent behavioral health across the continuum of need (prevention through crisis care, mental health, and SUD) and in multiple locations (schools, primary care, community settings). The difficulty of aligning policy intent, policy design, and successful policy implementation is a well-known challenge in the broader public policy and public administration literature that also affects local behavioral health policymaking. This study will examine a blended approach of coproduction and codesign (i.e., Policy Codesign), iteratively developed over multiple years to address problems in policy formation that often lead to poor implementation outcomes. The current study evaluates this scalable approach using reproducible measures to grow the knowledge base in this field of study. METHODS This is a single-arm, longitudinal, staggered implementation study to examine the acceptability and short-term impacts of Policy Codesign in resolving critical challenges in behavioral health policy formation. The aims are to (1) examine the acceptability, feasibility, and reach of Policy Codesign within two geographically distinct counties in Washington state, USA; (2) examine the impact of Policy Codesign on multisector policy development within these counties using social network analysis; and (3) assess the perceived replicability of Policy Codesign among leaders and other staff of policy-oriented state behavioral health intermediary organizations across the USA. DISCUSSION This study will assess the feasibility of a specific approach to collaborative policy development, Policy Codesign, in two diverse regions. Results will inform a subsequent multi-state study measuring the impact and effectiveness of this approach for achieving multi-sector and evidence informed policy development in adolescent SUD prevention and treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sarah Cusworth Walker
- Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, USA.
| | - Kym R Ahrens
- Seattle Children's Hospital and Research Institute, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Mandy D Owens
- Addictions, Drug & Alcohol Institute, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - McKenna Parnes
- Seattle Children's Hospital and Research Institute, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Joe Langley
- Lab For Living, Sheffield Hallam University, Sheffield, UK
| | - Christine Ackerley
- Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, USA
| | - Jonathan Purtle
- Department of Public Health Policy and Management, Global Center for Implementation Science, New York University, New York City, USA
| | - Lisa Saldana
- Chestnut Health Systems, Lighthouse Institute, Eugene, OR, USA
| | - Gregory A Aarons
- Department of Psychiatry, UC San Diego ACTRI Dissemination and Implementation Science Center, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA
| | - Aaron Hogue
- Partnership to End Addiction, New York, NY, USA
| | - Lawrence A Palinkas
- Herbert Wertheim School of Public Health and Human Longevity Science, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Adsul P, Shelton RC, Oh A, Moise N, Iwelunmor J, Griffith DM. Challenges and Opportunities for Paving the Road to Global Health Equity Through Implementation Science. Annu Rev Public Health 2024; 45:27-45. [PMID: 38166498 DOI: 10.1146/annurev-publhealth-060922-034822] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/04/2024]
Abstract
Implementation science focuses on enhancing the widespread uptake of evidence-based interventions into routine practice to improve population health. However, optimizing implementation science to promote health equity in domestic and global resource-limited settings requires considering historical and sociopolitical processes (e.g., colonization, structural racism) and centering in local sociocultural and indigenous cultures and values. This review weaves together principles of decolonization and antiracism to inform critical and reflexive perspectives on partnerships that incorporate a focus on implementation science, with the goal of making progress toward global health equity. From an implementation science perspective, wesynthesize examples of public health evidence-based interventions, strategies, and outcomes applied in global settings that are promising for health equity, alongside a critical examination of partnerships, context, and frameworks operationalized in these studies. We conclude with key future directions to optimize the application of implementation science with a justice orientation to promote global health equity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Prajakta Adsul
- Department of Internal Medicine, School of Medicine, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA;
- Cancer Control and Population Science Research Program, University of New Mexico Comprehensive Cancer Center, Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA
| | - Rachel C Shelton
- Department of Sociomedical Sciences, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA
| | - April Oh
- National Cancer Institute, Rockville, Maryland, USA
| | - Nathalie Moise
- Center for Behavioral Cardiovascular Health, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Juliet Iwelunmor
- Division of Infectious Diseases, School of Medicine, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri, USA
| | | |
Collapse
|
9
|
Ashcraft LE, Cabrera KI, Lane-Fall MB, South EC. Leveraging Implementation Science to Advance Environmental Justice Research and Achieve Health Equity through Neighborhood and Policy Interventions. Annu Rev Public Health 2024; 45:89-108. [PMID: 38166499 DOI: 10.1146/annurev-publhealth-060222-033003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/04/2024]
Abstract
Environmental justice research is increasingly focused on community-engaged, participatory investigations that test interventions to improve health. Such research is primed for the use of implementation science-informed approaches to optimize the uptake and use of interventions proven to be effective. This review identifies synergies between implementation science and environmental justice with the goal of advancing both disciplines. Specifically, the article synthesizes the literature on neighborhood-, community-, and policy-level interventions in environmental health that address underlying structural determinants (e.g., structural racism) and social determinants of health. Opportunities to facilitate and scale the equitable implementation of evidence-based environmental health interventions are highlighted, using urban greening as an illustrative example. An environmental justice-focused version of the implementation science subway is provided, which highlights these principles: Remember and Reflect, Restore and Reclaim, and Reinvest. The review concludes with existing gaps and future directions to advance the science of implementation to promote environmental justice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Laura Ellen Ashcraft
- Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, Corporal Michael J. Crescenz VA Medical Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
- Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
- Department of Biostatistics, Epidemiology, and Informatics, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA;
| | - Keven I Cabrera
- Division of Emergency Medicine, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
- Urban Health Lab, Department of Emergency Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Meghan B Lane-Fall
- Department of Biostatistics, Epidemiology, and Informatics, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA;
- Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
- Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
- Penn Implementation Science Center (PISCE), University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Eugenia C South
- Urban Health Lab, Department of Emergency Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
- Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
- Department of Emergency Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Purtle J, Stadnick NA, Wynecoop M, Walker SC, Bruns EJ, Aarons GA. A Tale of Two Taxes: Implementation of Earmarked Taxes for Behavioral Health Services in California and Washington State. Psychiatr Serv 2024; 75:410-418. [PMID: 37933132 PMCID: PMC11139541 DOI: 10.1176/appi.ps.20230257] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/08/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The authors sought to characterize perceptions of the impacts, attributes, and support for taxes earmarked for behavioral health services and to compare perceptions of the taxes among professionals in California and Washington, two states differing in earmarked tax designs. METHODS Surveys were completed by 155 public agency and community organization professionals involved in tax implementation in California (N=87) and Washington State (N=68) during 2022-2023 (29% response rate). Respondents indicated their perceptions of the taxes' impacts, attributes, and support. Responses were summed as aggregate scores and were also analyzed as individual items. Bivariate analyses were used to compare responses of professionals in California versus Washington State. RESULTS Earmarked taxes were generally regarded positively. Of the respondents, >80% strongly agreed that the taxes increased funding for services and were helpful, and only 10% strongly agreed that the taxes decreased behavioral health funding from other sources. Substantially more respondents in California than in Washington State strongly agreed that taxes' reporting requirements were complicated (45% vs. 5%, p<0.001) and that the taxes increased unjustified scrutiny of services or systems (33% vs. 2%, p<0.001). However, more respondents in California than in Washington State also strongly agreed that the taxes increased public awareness about behavioral health (56% vs. 15%, p<0.001) and decreased behavioral health stigma (47% vs. 14%, p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS Perceptions of the strengths and weaknesses of taxes earmarked for behavioral health services may vary by design features of the tax. Such features include stigma-reduction initiatives and tax spending and reporting requirements.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jonathan Purtle
- Global Center for Implementation Science, Department of Public Health Policy and Management, New York University School of Global Public Health, New York City (Purtle, Wynecoop); Dissemination and Implementation Science Center, Department of Psychiatry, Altman Clinical and Translational Research Institute, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla (Stadnick, Aarons); Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle (Walker, Bruns)
| | - Nicole A Stadnick
- Global Center for Implementation Science, Department of Public Health Policy and Management, New York University School of Global Public Health, New York City (Purtle, Wynecoop); Dissemination and Implementation Science Center, Department of Psychiatry, Altman Clinical and Translational Research Institute, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla (Stadnick, Aarons); Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle (Walker, Bruns)
| | - Megan Wynecoop
- Global Center for Implementation Science, Department of Public Health Policy and Management, New York University School of Global Public Health, New York City (Purtle, Wynecoop); Dissemination and Implementation Science Center, Department of Psychiatry, Altman Clinical and Translational Research Institute, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla (Stadnick, Aarons); Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle (Walker, Bruns)
| | - Sarah C Walker
- Global Center for Implementation Science, Department of Public Health Policy and Management, New York University School of Global Public Health, New York City (Purtle, Wynecoop); Dissemination and Implementation Science Center, Department of Psychiatry, Altman Clinical and Translational Research Institute, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla (Stadnick, Aarons); Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle (Walker, Bruns)
| | - Eric J Bruns
- Global Center for Implementation Science, Department of Public Health Policy and Management, New York University School of Global Public Health, New York City (Purtle, Wynecoop); Dissemination and Implementation Science Center, Department of Psychiatry, Altman Clinical and Translational Research Institute, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla (Stadnick, Aarons); Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle (Walker, Bruns)
| | - Gregory A Aarons
- Global Center for Implementation Science, Department of Public Health Policy and Management, New York University School of Global Public Health, New York City (Purtle, Wynecoop); Dissemination and Implementation Science Center, Department of Psychiatry, Altman Clinical and Translational Research Institute, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla (Stadnick, Aarons); Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle (Walker, Bruns)
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Houghtaling B, Short E, Shanks CB, Stotz SA, Yaroch A, Seligman H, Marriott JP, Eastman J, Long CR. Implementation of Food is Medicine Programs in Healthcare Settings: A Narrative Review. J Gen Intern Med 2024:10.1007/s11606-024-08768-w. [PMID: 38662283 DOI: 10.1007/s11606-024-08768-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/27/2023] [Accepted: 04/10/2024] [Indexed: 04/26/2024]
Abstract
Food is Medicine (FIM) programs to improve the accessibility of fruits and vegetables (FVs) or other healthy foods among patients with low income and diet-related chronic diseases are promising to improve food and nutrition security in the United States (US). However, FIM programs are relatively new and implementation guidance for healthcare settings using an implementation science lens is lacking. We used a narrative review to describe the evidence base on barriers and facilitators to FIM program integration in US healthcare settings following the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, and Sustainment (EPIS) Framework. Evidence surrounding the EPIS Inner Context was a focus, including constructs Leadership, Organizational Characteristics, Quality and Fidelity Monitoring and Support, Organizational Staffing Processes, and Individual Characteristics. Peer-reviewed and grey literature about barriers and facilitators to FIM programs were of interest, defined as programs that screen and refer eligible patients with diet-related chronic disease experiencing food insecurity to healthy, unprepared foods. Thirty-one sources were included in the narrative review, including 22 peer-reviewed articles, four reports, four toolkits, and one thesis. Twenty-eight sources (90%) described EPIS Inner Context facilitators and 26 sources (84%) described FIM program barriers. The most common barriers and facilitators to FIM programs were regarding Quality and Fidelity Monitoring and Support (e.g., use of electronic medical records for tracking and evaluation, strategies to support implementation) and Organizational Staffing Processes (e.g., clear delineation of staff roles and capacity); although, barriers and facilitators to FIM programs were identified among all EPIS Inner Context constructs. We synthesized barriers and facilitators to create an EPIS-informed implementation checklist for healthcare settings for use among healthcare organizations/providers, partner organizations, and technical assistance personnel. We discuss future directions to align FIM efforts with implementation science terminology and theories, models, and frameworks to improve the implementation evidence base and support FIM researchers and practitioners.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Bailey Houghtaling
- Gretchen Swanson Center for Nutrition, Omaha, NE, USA.
- Department of Human Nutrition, Foods, and Exercise, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA, USA.
| | - Eliza Short
- Gretchen Swanson Center for Nutrition, Omaha, NE, USA
| | | | - Sarah A Stotz
- Gretchen Swanson Center for Nutrition, Omaha, NE, USA
- Department of Food Science and Human Nutrition, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA
| | - Amy Yaroch
- Gretchen Swanson Center for Nutrition, Omaha, NE, USA
| | - Hilary Seligman
- Gretchen Swanson Center for Nutrition, Omaha, NE, USA
- Division of General Internal Medicine and Center for Vulnerable Populations, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | | | - Jenna Eastman
- Gretchen Swanson Center for Nutrition, Omaha, NE, USA
| | | |
Collapse
|
12
|
Purtle J, Stadnick NA, Wynecoop M, Walker SC, Bruns EJ, Aarons GA. Acceptability and feasibility of policy implementation strategies for taxes earmarked for behavioral health services. FRONTIERS IN HEALTH SERVICES 2024; 4:1304049. [PMID: 38638608 PMCID: PMC11025354 DOI: 10.3389/frhs.2024.1304049] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/28/2023] [Accepted: 03/21/2024] [Indexed: 04/20/2024]
Abstract
Background This study's aims are to: (1) Compare the acceptability and feasibility of five types of implementation strategies that could be deployed to increase the reach of evidence-based practices (EBPs) with revenue from policies that earmark taxes for behavioral health services, and (2) Illustrate how definitions of implementation strategies and measures of acceptability and feasibility can be used in policy-focused implementation science research. Methods Web-based surveys of public agency and community organization professionals involved with earmarked tax policy implementation were completed in 2022-2023 (N = 211, response rate = 24.9%). Respondents rated the acceptability and feasibility of five types of implementation strategies (dissemination, implementation process, integration, capacity-building, and scale-up). Aggregate acceptability and feasibility scores were calculated for each type of strategy (scoring range 4-20). Analyses of variance compared scores across strategies and between organizational actor types. Findings For acceptability, capacity-building strategies had the highest rating (M = 16.3, SD = 3.0), significantly higher than each of the four other strategies, p ≤ . 004), and scale-up strategies had the lowest rating (M = 15.6). For feasibility, dissemination strategies had the highest rating (M = 15.3, significantly higher than three of the other strategies, p ≤ .002) and scale-up strategies had the lowest rating (M = 14.4). Conclusions Capacity-building and dissemination strategies may be well-received and readily deployed by policy implementers to support EBPs implementation with revenue from taxes earmarked for behavioral health services. Adapting definitions of implementation strategies for policy-focused topics, and applying established measures of acceptability and feasibility to these strategies, demonstrates utility as an approach to advance research on policy-focused implementation strategies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jonathan Purtle
- Department of Public Health Policy & Management, Global Center for Implementation Science, New York University School of Global Public Health, New York, NY, United States
| | - Nicole A. Stadnick
- Department of Psychiatry, Altman Clinical and Translational Research Institute Dissemination and Implementation Science Center, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA, United States
| | - Megan Wynecoop
- Department of Public Health Policy & Management, Global Center for Implementation Science, New York University School of Global Public Health, New York, NY, United States
| | - Sarah C. Walker
- Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA, United States
| | - Eric J. Bruns
- Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA, United States
| | - Gregory A. Aarons
- Department of Psychiatry, Altman Clinical and Translational Research Institute Dissemination and Implementation Science Center, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA, United States
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Shelton RC, Brownson RC. Enhancing Impact: A Call to Action for Equitable Implementation Science. PREVENTION SCIENCE : THE OFFICIAL JOURNAL OF THE SOCIETY FOR PREVENTION RESEARCH 2024; 25:174-189. [PMID: 37878237 PMCID: PMC11133096 DOI: 10.1007/s11121-023-01589-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 10/02/2023] [Indexed: 10/26/2023]
Abstract
Despite investments in evidence-based interventions and Implementation Science, most evidence-based interventions are not widely or routinely adopted, delivered, or sustained in many real-world community and healthcare settings. This gap is even greater in settings and populations experiencing numerous social and structural barriers to health, with important implications for persistent patterns in health inequities. In this Viewpoint, as part of a Special Issue on Advancing the Adaptability of Chronic Disease Prevention and Management through Implementation Science, we outline seven calls to action for the field of Implementation Science, with the goal of encouraging researchers, practitioners, and funders to be more intentional and accountable in applying Implementation Science to have greater impact on promoting health equity. Calls to action include (1) enhance public health, community, and multi-sectoral partnerships to promote health equity and equitable implementation; (2) revisit and build the evidence base needed to promote health equity and impact at multiple levels; (3) prioritize focus on policy development, dissemination, and implementation; (4) be agile and responsive in application of Implementation Science frameworks, processes, and methods; (5) identify and redefine meaningful metrics for equity and impact; (6) disseminate scientific evidence and research to a diverse range of partners and potential beneficiaries; and (7) extend focus on de-implementation, mis-implementation, and sustainability which are central to enhancing health equity. Additionally, we outline why a focus on prevention and public health is essential to making progress towards health equity in Implementation Science, summarize important advancements that the field has made towards making equity more foundational, and pose important research questions to enhance equitable impact of work in this area.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rachel C Shelton
- Mailman School of Public Health, Department of Sociomedical Sciences, Columbia University, 722 W 168th Street, New York, NY, 10032, USA.
- Columbia University, Irving Institute for Clinical and Translational Research, New York, NY, 10032, USA.
| | - Ross C Brownson
- Prevention Research Center, Brown School at Washington University in St. Louis, 1 Brookings Drive, Campus, Box 1196, St. Louis, MO, 63130, USA
- Department of Surgery, Division of Public Health Sciences, and Alvin J. Siteman Cancer Center, Washington University School of Medicine, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, 63130, USA
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Welsh JW, Dopp AR, Durham RM, Sitar SI, Passetti LL, Hunter SB, Godley MD, Winters KC. Narrative review: Revised Principles and Practice Recommendations for Adolescent Substance Use Treatment and Policy. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry 2024:S0890-8567(24)00140-0. [PMID: 38537736 PMCID: PMC11422521 DOI: 10.1016/j.jaac.2024.03.010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/11/2023] [Revised: 01/24/2024] [Accepted: 03/18/2024] [Indexed: 04/08/2024]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE In 2014, the U.S. National Institute on Drug Abuse released the "Principles of Adolescent Substance Use Disorder Treatment," summarizing previously established evidence and outlining principles of effective assessment, treatment, and aftercare for substance use disorders (SUD). Winters et al. (2018) updated these principles to be developmentally appropriate for adolescents. This review builds on that formative work and recommends updated adolescent assessment, treatment, and aftercare principles and practices. METHOD The Cochrane, MEDLINE-PubMed, and PsychInfo databases were searched for relevant studies with new data about adolescent substance use services. This article updates the 13 original principles; condenses the 8 original modalities into 5 practices; and highlights implications for public policy approaches, future funding, and research. RESULTS Key recommendations from the principles include integrating care for co-occurring mental health disorders and SUDs, improving service accessibility including through the educational system, maintaining engagement, and addressing tension between agencies when collaborating with other youth service systems. Updates to the treatment practices include adoption of Screening, Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT), investment in social programs and family involvement in treatment, expanding access to behavioral therapies and medications, increasing funding to harm reduction services, supporting reimbursement for continuing care services, and increasing investment in research. CONCLUSION These revised principles of adolescent assessment, treatment, and aftercare approaches and practices aim to establish guidance and evidence-based practices for treatment providers, while encouraging necessary support from policymakers and funding agencies to improve the standard of care for adolescent SUD services.
Collapse
|
15
|
Figueroa R, Houghtaling B. Food is Medicine and implementation science: A recipe for health equity. Transl Behav Med 2024; 14:234-240. [PMID: 38366890 DOI: 10.1093/tbm/ibae005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/18/2024] Open
Abstract
Diet-related chronic diseases such as Type II diabetes, cardiometabolic diseases, and cancer are among the leading causes of death in the USA. Nutrition security has emerged as a target outcome and a national priority for preventative medicine and the treatment of diet-related chronic diseases. Food is Medicine (FIM) initiatives encompass programs and interventions to meet priority population's needs across food and nutrition security continuums as a mechanism to address persistent food and nutrition inequities. In this position statement, we draw on implementation science, specifically the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, and Sustainment (EPIS) Framework and health equity principles to provide guidance on FIM initiatives. As the FIM evidence base continues to grow, we encourage the EPIS framework be applied as one lens through which we can improve our understanding of FIM implementation among multiple contexts to understand what works, for whom, and under what circumstances. Ultimately, this position statement aims to call to action the incorporation of implementation science and equity principles into FIM efforts.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Roger Figueroa
- Division of Nutritional Sciences, College of Human Ecology, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA
| | - Bailey Houghtaling
- Gretchen Swanson Center for Nutrition, Omaha, NE, USA
- Department of Human Nutrition, Foods, and Exercise, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA, USA
- School of Nutrition and Food Sciences, Louisiana State University (LSU) & LSU Agricultural Center, Baton Rouge, LA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Moore SA, Cooper JM, Malloy J, Lyon AR. Core Components and Implementation Determinants of Multilevel Service Delivery Frameworks Across Child Mental Health Service Settings. ADMINISTRATION AND POLICY IN MENTAL HEALTH AND MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH 2024; 51:172-195. [PMID: 38117431 PMCID: PMC10850020 DOI: 10.1007/s10488-023-01320-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 11/01/2023] [Indexed: 12/21/2023]
Abstract
Multilevel service delivery frameworks are approaches to structuring and organizing a spectrum of evidence-based services and supports, focused on assessment, prevention, and intervention designed for the local context. Exemplar frameworks in child mental health include positive behavioral interventions and supports in education, collaborative care in primary care, and systems of care in community mental health settings. Yet, their high-quality implementation has lagged. This work proposes a conceptual foundation for multilevel service delivery frameworks spanning diverse mental health service settings that can inform development of strategic implementation supports. We draw upon the existing literature for three exemplar multilevel service delivery frameworks in different child mental health service settings to (1) identify core components common to each framework, and (2) to highlight prominent implementation determinants that interface with each core component. Six interrelated components of multilevel service delivery frameworks were identified, including, (1) a systems-level approach, (2) data-driven problem solving and decision-making, (3) multiple levels of service intensity using evidence-based practices, (4) cross-linking service sectors, (5) multiple providers working together, including in teams, and (6) built-in implementation strategies that facilitate delivery of the overall model. Implementation determinants that interface with core components were identified at each contextual level. The conceptual foundation provided in this paper has the potential to facilitate cross-sector knowledge sharing, promote generalization across service settings, and provide direction for researchers, system leaders, and implementation intermediaries/practitioners working to strategically support the high-quality implementation of these frameworks.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stephanie A Moore
- School of Education, University of California Riverside, Riverside, CA, 92521, USA.
| | | | - JoAnne Malloy
- Institute on Disability, College of Health and Human Services, University of New Hampshire, Durham, USA
| | - Aaron R Lyon
- Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, USA
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Su HI, Kaiser BN, Crable EL, Ortega RF, Yoeun SW, Economou MA, Fernandez E, Romero SAD, Aarons GA, McMenamin SB. Implementation of state health insurance benefit mandates for cancer-related fertility preservation: following policy through a complex system. Implement Sci 2024; 19:14. [PMID: 38365808 PMCID: PMC10870606 DOI: 10.1186/s13012-024-01343-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/12/2023] [Accepted: 01/20/2024] [Indexed: 02/18/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND A myriad of federal, state, and organizational policies are designed to improve access to evidence-based healthcare, but the impact of these policies likely varies due to contextual determinants of, reinterpretations of, and poor compliance with policy requirements throughout implementation. Strategies enhancing implementation and compliance with policy intent can improve population health. Critically assessing the multi-level environments where health policies and their related health services are implemented is essential to designing effective policy-level implementation strategies. California passed a 2019 health insurance benefit mandate requiring coverage of fertility preservation services for individuals at risk of infertility due to medical treatments, in order to improve access to services that are otherwise cost prohibitive. Our objective was to document and understand the multi-level environment, relationships, and activities involved in using state benefit mandates to facilitate patient access to fertility preservation services. METHODS We conducted a mixed-methods study and used the policy-optimized exploration, preparation, implementation, and sustainment (EPIS) framework to analyze the implementation of California's fertility preservation benefit mandate (SB 600) at and between the state insurance regulator, insurer, and clinic levels. RESULTS Seventeen publicly available fertility preservation benefit mandate-relevant documents were reviewed. Interviews were conducted with four insurers; 25 financial, administrative, and provider participants from 16 oncology and fertility clinics; three fertility pharmaceutical representatives; and two patient advocates. The mandate and insurance regulator guidance represented two "Big P" (system level) policies that gave rise to a host of "little p" (organizational) policies by and between the regulator, insurers, clinics, and patients. Many little p policies were bridging factors to support implementation across levels and fertility preservation service access. Characterizing the mandate's functions (i.e., policy goals) and forms (i.e., ways that policies were enacted) led to identification of (1) intended and unintended implementation, service, and patient outcomes, (2) implementation processes by level and EPIS phase, (3) actor-delineated key processes and heterogeneity among them, and (4) inner and outer context determinants that drove adaptations. CONCLUSIONS Following the midstream and downstream implementation of a state health insurance benefit mandate, data generated will enable development of policy-level implementation strategies, evaluation of determinants and important outcomes of effective implementation, and design of future mandates to improve fit and fidelity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- H Irene Su
- Moores Cancer Center and Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, San Diego, CA, 92093, USA.
| | - Bonnie N Kaiser
- Department of Anthropology and Global Health Program, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, San Diego, CA, 92093, USA
| | - Erika L Crable
- Department of Psychiatry, Altman Clinical and Translational Research Institute Dissemination and Implementation Science Center, Herbert Wertheim School of Public Health and Human Longevity Science, University of California, La Jolla, Los Angeles, CA, 92093, USA
- Child and Adolescent Services Research Center, San Diego, CA, USA
| | - Ricardo Flores Ortega
- Moores Cancer Center and Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, San Diego, CA, 92093, USA
| | - Sara W Yoeun
- Herbert Wertheim School of Public Health and Human Longevity Science, University of California, La Jolla, Loss Angeles, CA, 92093, USA
| | - Melina A Economou
- Department of Anthropology and Global Health Program, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, San Diego, CA, 92093, USA
| | - Estefania Fernandez
- Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, San Diego, CA, 92093, USA
| | - Sally A D Romero
- Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences and Herbert Wertheim School of Public Health and Human Longevity Science, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, San Diego, CA, 92093, USA
| | - Gregory A Aarons
- Child and Adolescent Services Research Center, San Diego, CA, USA
- Department of Psychiatry and Altman Clinical and Translational Research Institute Dissemination and Implementation Science Center, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, San Diego, CA, 92093, USA
| | - Sara B McMenamin
- Herbert Wertheim School of Public Health and Human Longevity Science, University of California, La Jolla, Loss Angeles, CA, 92093, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Roy V, Buonora M, Simon C, Dooling B, Joudrey P. Adoption of methadone take home policy by U.S. state opioid treatment authorities during COVID-19. THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF DRUG POLICY 2024; 124:104302. [PMID: 38183861 DOI: 10.1016/j.drugpo.2023.104302] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/04/2023] [Revised: 12/15/2023] [Accepted: 12/19/2023] [Indexed: 01/08/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Patients face well documented problems accessing methadone from opioid treatment programs (OTPs) in the U.S., yet addressing these barriers has proven difficult due in part to the sheer number of actors governing treatment, including state authorities. Changes in federal methadone regulations during COVID-19 offer an opportunity to study the timing and extent of U.S. state opioid treatment authority (SOTA) adoption of policies expanding take home dosing for methadone treatment since March 2020. METHODS We completed a policy scan between February 23 and May 2, 2023 on state adoption and subsequent rescinding of federal regulatory exemptions for expanded take-home dosing. This scan involved three components: a policy survey of SOTAs, a freedom of information act (FOIA) request of SAMHSA, and outreach to members of National Survivors Union (NSU)'s methadone work group. RESULTS Of the 39 of 50 (78 %) SOTAs that responded, only 2 states (HI and MT) indicated that they never adopted federal exemptions for expanded take-home dosing. Of the 37 adopting states, all adopted the exemptions within the first month after the agency's announcement. Additionally, four SOTAs (OH, IN, FL, MS) indicated that their state subsequently rescinded expanded take-home dosing for methadone. CONCLUSIONS Among responding states, regulations expanding take-home dosing appear to have been adopted by U.S. SOTAs in a widespread and rapid manner at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, but some states have begun to rescind such policies. Our findings suggest that state regulators can rapidly modify OTP regulations in response to federal policy changes. SOTA policies are likely to become critical factors in the adoption of methadone treatment innovations if new federal regulatory flexibilities become permanent.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Victor Roy
- Yale National Clinician Scholars Program, Yale University School of Medicine. Sterling Hall of Medicine Room 1E-61, 333 Cedar Street, New Haven, CT 06510, United States; West Haven Veterans Affairs Medical Center, West Haven, CT 06516, United States.
| | - Michele Buonora
- Yale National Clinician Scholars Program, Yale University School of Medicine. Sterling Hall of Medicine Room 1E-61, 333 Cedar Street, New Haven, CT 06510, United States; West Haven Veterans Affairs Medical Center, West Haven, CT 06516, United States; Department of Internal Medicine and Program in Addiction Medicine, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, United States
| | - Caty Simon
- Whose Corner Is It Anyway. 1187 Northhampton St, Floor 1, Holyoke MA, 01040, United States; National Survivors Union, NC, United States; NC Survivors Union, NC, United States
| | - Bridget Dooling
- Moritz College of Law, The Ohio State University. 55 West 12th Avenue, Drinko Hall. Colombus, OH 43210-1391. United States
| | - Paul Joudrey
- Division of General Internal Medicine, Center for Research on Health Care, University of Pittsburgh. 230 McKee Place. Suite 600. Pittsburgh, PA 15213. United States
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Hennessy M, O'Donoghue K. Bridging the gap between pregnancy loss research and policy and practice: insights from a qualitative survey with knowledge users. Health Res Policy Syst 2024; 22:15. [PMID: 38273374 PMCID: PMC10809434 DOI: 10.1186/s12961-024-01103-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/28/2023] [Accepted: 01/05/2024] [Indexed: 01/27/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The loss of a pregnancy or the death of baby around the time of their birth can have profound impacts on parents, families and staff involved. There is much opportunity to enhance the systematic uptake of evidence-based interventions to enhance service provision, lived experiences and outcomes. Challenges exist to translating pregnancy loss research evidence into policy and practice, however. Pregnancy loss remains a neglected area of research and resourcing and is steeped in stigma. While barriers and facilitators to the use of research evidence by decision-makers in public health and health services are well documented, we aimed to better understand the factors that influence the translation of pregnancy loss research into practice and policy. METHODS We conducted a qualitative online survey of pregnancy loss research knowledge users in Ireland, identified through our clinical and academic networks, between January and March 2022. The survey comprised ten questions, with three closed questions, informed by the Knowledge Translation Planning Template©. Questions included who could benefit from pregnancy loss research, perceived barriers and facilitators to the use of research evidence and preferred knowledge translation strategies. We analysed data using reflexive thematic analysis. RESULTS We included data from 46 participants in our analysis, from which we generated two central themes. The first-'End the silence; stigma and inequality around pregnancy loss to enhance awareness and understanding, public health and services and supports'-addresses issues related to the stigma, sensitivities and silence, lack of awareness and understanding, and lack of relevance or priority afforded to pregnancy loss. The second theme-'Use a range of tailored, accessible approaches to engage a large, diverse range of knowledge users'-highlights the need to use relevant, accessible, and engaging information, resources or materials in knowledge translation efforts, and a variety of tailored approaches to suit different audiences, including materials, workshops/webinars, media, knowledge brokers and champions or opinion leaders. CONCLUSIONS Our analysis provides rich insights into the barriers and facilitators to knowledge translation in the field of pregnancy loss research. We identified key strategies that can be used to inform knowledge translation planning in Ireland, and which have international applicability.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marita Hennessy
- Pregnancy Loss Research Group, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University College Cork, Cork, T12 YE02, Ireland.
- INFANT Research Centre, University College Cork, Cork, T12 YE02, Ireland.
| | - Keelin O'Donoghue
- Pregnancy Loss Research Group, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University College Cork, Cork, T12 YE02, Ireland
- INFANT Research Centre, University College Cork, Cork, T12 YE02, Ireland
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Lane J, Stergachis A. Combining legal epidemiology and implementation science to improve global access to medicines: challenges and opportunities. FRONTIERS IN HEALTH SERVICES 2024; 3:1291183. [PMID: 38264186 PMCID: PMC10803399 DOI: 10.3389/frhs.2023.1291183] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/08/2023] [Accepted: 12/08/2023] [Indexed: 01/25/2024]
Abstract
Laws and policies affecting access to medicines have been in the global health spotlight for decades, yet our understanding of their effects remains substantially underdeveloped. The emerging field of legal epidemiology combined with the methods of implementation science presents an opportunity to help address this gap. Legal epidemiology refers to the scientific study and deployment of law as a factor in the cause, distribution, and prevention of disease and injury in a population. Legal epidemiology studies consist of a systematic collection and coding of laws and policies relating to a particular topic. Quasi-experimental or observational research methods can then be applied to take advantage of natural experiments resulting from heterogenous adoption and/or implementation of laws and policies. Often legal epidemiology studies fail to account for heterogenous law implementation processes, presenting a need and opportunity to integrate implementation science methods. Researchers may face challenges in integrating these methods for access to medicines studies, including data access issues and a complex legal and implementation environment. Yet, the opportunities presented by increasingly transparent legal environments, improved monitoring of medicine availability, universal health coverage expansion, and electronic health and insurance records integration may facilitate overcoming these challenges. Improved collaboration and communication between researchers, health authorities, manufacturers, and health providers from public and private sectors will be critical. In spite of the challenges, combining the fields of legal epidemiology and implementation science may present an important strategy toward creating a legal and policy environment that supports global and equitable access to medicines.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jeff Lane
- Department of Global Health, School of Public Health, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States
| | - Andy Stergachis
- Departments of Pharmacy and Global Health, Schools of Pharmacy and Public Health, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Shattuck D, Willging CE, Peterson J, Ramos MM. Outer-context determinants on the implementation of school-based interventions for LGBTQ+ adolescents. IMPLEMENTATION RESEARCH AND PRACTICE 2024; 5:26334895241249417. [PMID: 38666140 PMCID: PMC11044576 DOI: 10.1177/26334895241249417] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 04/28/2024] Open
Abstract
Background Schools are critical venues for supporting LGBTQ+ youth well-being. Implementing LGBTQ-supportive practices can decrease experiences of stigmatization, discrimination, and victimization that lead to adverse mental health outcomes like anxiety, depression, and suicidality. However, schools are also subject to a wide range of outer-context pressures that may influence their priorities and implementation of LGBTQ-supportive practices. We assessed the role of emergent outer-context determinants in the context of a 5-year cluster randomized controlled trial to study the implementation of LGBTQ-supportive evidence-informed practices (EIPs) in New Mexico high schools. Method Using an iterative coding approach, we analyzed qualitative data from annual interviews with school professionals involved in EIP implementation efforts. Results The analysis yielded three categories of outer-context determinants that created challenges and opportunities for implementation: (a) social barriers related to heterocentrism, cisgenderism, and religious conservatism; (b) local, state, and national policy and political discourse; and (c) crisis events. Conclusions By exploring the implications of outer-context determinants for the uptake of LGBTQ-supportive practices, we demonstrate that these elements are dynamic-not simply reducible to barriers or facilitators-and that assessing outer-context determinants shaping implementation environments is crucial for addressing LGBTQ health equity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Daniel Shattuck
- Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation (PIRE)—Southwest Center, Albuquerque, NM, USA
| | - Cathleen E. Willging
- Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation (PIRE)—Southwest Center, Albuquerque, NM, USA
| | - Jeffery Peterson
- School of Public and Community Health Services, University of Montana, Missoula, Montana, USA
| | - Mary M. Ramos
- Department of Pediatrics, University of New Mexico School of Medicine, Albuquerque, NM, USA
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Rochette C, Mériade L, Cassière F. A grounded theory-based qualitative approach for examining local implementation of public health policies during crises. MethodsX 2023; 11:102439. [PMID: 38023318 PMCID: PMC10630630 DOI: 10.1016/j.mex.2023.102439] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/13/2023] [Accepted: 10/12/2023] [Indexed: 12/01/2023] Open
Abstract
Background COVID-19's emergence questions the agility of health policy deployment in a context of urgency. This exceptional pandemic offers a unique Implementation Science study opportunity. It reveals how actors adapt, coordinate, and mitigate an unknown global threat to safeguard populations from an initially mysterious virus. Limited research has explored how involved players act and adapt their practices to fulfil health protection missions during a global health crisis. Bridging the gap between public policy expectations and achievements requires a methodology for stakeholder identification and implementation practice description. Objective Focusing on COVID-19 management in France's second-largest region, we investigate ministerial recommendation implementation and the emergence of new links, coordination modes, and practices. Methods Due to the novel subject, we adopted grounded theory. Initial documentary data collection identifies stakeholders for subsequent interviews. Open-ended coding of collected discourse enables content analysis. Results Findings reveal a crisis-driven re-evaluation of stakeholder relationships. This research identifies three levels of implementation of health policies at the local level (administrative, organizational and operational) and reveals different types of coordination specific to each of these levels. Our results provide insights on how to better coordinate and implement healthcare policies in a period of crisis. Recommendations include real-life simulations of large-scale crises. Conclusion Our work establishes a methodological foundation for analysing coordination dynamics. Future research could compare these findings with other unpredictable health emergencies, such as episiotomic veterinary health crises.•The first step of the method is to analyse the guidelines of health policy implementation during the Covid-19 crisis and to identify the main stakeholders in charge of the local health policy implementation.•The second step consists of interviewing these stakeholders using a co-constructed sample and structural coding of their speech to reveal the forms of coordination between stakeholders.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Corinne Rochette
- IAE Clermont Auvergne – ClerMa, Research Chair "Santé et Territoires" University Clermont Auvergne, 11 Boulevard Charles de Gaulle, Clermont-Ferrand 63 000, France
| | - Laurent Mériade
- IAE Clermont Auvergne – ClerMa, Research Chair "Santé et Territoires" University Clermont Auvergne, 11 Boulevard Charles de Gaulle, Clermont-Ferrand 63 000, France
| | - François Cassière
- IAE Clermont Auvergne – ClerMa, Research Chair "Santé et Territoires" University Clermont Auvergne, 11 Boulevard Charles de Gaulle, Clermont-Ferrand 63 000, France
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Smith NR, Hassmiller Lich K, Ng SW, Hall MG, Trogdon JG, Frerichs L. Implementation costs of sugary drink policies in the United States. J Public Health Policy 2023; 44:566-587. [PMID: 37714964 PMCID: PMC10841536 DOI: 10.1057/s41271-023-00435-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 08/11/2023] [Indexed: 09/17/2023]
Abstract
To support implementation of important public health policies, policymakers need information about implementation costs over time and across stakeholder groups. We assessed implementation costs of two federal sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) policies of current policy interest and with evidence to support their effects: excise taxes and health warning labels. Our analysis encompassed the entire policy life cycle using the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, and Sustainment framework. We identified implementation actions using key informant interviews and developed quantitative estimates of implementation costs using published literature and government documents. Results show that implementation costs vary over time and among stakeholders. Explicitly integrating implementation science theory and using mixed methods improved the comprehensiveness of our results. Although this work is specific to federal SSB policies, the process can inform how we understand the costs of many public health policies, providing crucial information for public health policy making.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Natalie Riva Smith
- Department of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health, 677 Huntington Ave, Boston, MA, 02115, USA.
| | - Kristen Hassmiller Lich
- Department of Health Policy and Management, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Shu Wen Ng
- Department of Nutrition, Gillings School of Global Public Health, Carolina Population Center, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
- Carolina Population Center, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Marissa G Hall
- Carolina Population Center, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
- Department of Health Behavior, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
- Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Justin G Trogdon
- Department of Health Policy and Management, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Leah Frerichs
- Department of Health Policy and Management, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Van Deinse TB, Zielinski MJ, Holliday SB, Rudd BN, Crable EL. The application of implementation science methods in correctional health intervention research: a systematic review. Implement Sci Commun 2023; 4:149. [PMID: 38001546 PMCID: PMC10675852 DOI: 10.1186/s43058-023-00521-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/03/2023] [Accepted: 10/28/2023] [Indexed: 11/26/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Improving access to high-quality healthcare for individuals in correctional settings is critical to advancing health equity in the United States. Compared to the general population, criminal-legal involved individuals experience higher rates of chronic health conditions and poorer health outcomes. Implementation science frameworks and strategies offer useful tools to integrate health interventions into criminal-legal settings and to improve care. A review of implementation science in criminal-legal settings to date is necessary to advance future applications. This systematic review summarizes research that has harnessed implementation science to promote the uptake of effective health interventions in adult criminal-legal settings. METHODS A systematic review of seven databases (Academic Search Premier, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, PsycINFO, Social Work Abstracts, ProQuest Criminal Justice Database, ProQuest Sociological Abstracts, MEDLINE/PubMed) was conducted. Eligible studies used an implementation science framework to assess implementation outcomes, determinants, and/or implementation strategies in adult criminal-legal settings. Qualitative synthesis was used to extract and summarize settings, study designs, sample characteristics, methods, and application of implementation science methods. Implementation strategies were further analyzed using the Pragmatic Implementation Reporting Tool. RESULTS Twenty-four studies met inclusion criteria. Studies implemented interventions to address infectious diseases (n=9), substance use (n=6), mental health (n=5), co-occurring substance use and mental health (n=2), or other health conditions (n=2). Studies varied in their operationalization and description of guiding implementation frameworks/taxonomies. Sixteen studies reported implementation determinants and 12 studies measured implementation outcomes, with acceptability (n=5), feasibility (n=3), and reach (n=2) commonly assessed. Six studies tested implementation strategies. Systematic review results were used to generate recommendations for improving implementation success in criminal-legal contexts. CONCLUSIONS The focus on implementation determinants in correctional health studies reflects the need to tailor implementation efforts to complex organizational and inter-agency contexts. Future studies should investigate policy factors that influence implementation success, design, and test implementation strategies tailored to determinants, and investigate a wider array of implementation outcomes relevant to criminal-legal settings, health interventions relevant to adult and juvenile populations, and health equity outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION A study protocol (CRD42020114111) was registered with Prospero.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tonya B Van Deinse
- University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Social Work, Chapel Hill, USA.
| | - Melissa J Zielinski
- University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences Psychiatric Research Institute, Little Rock, USA
| | | | | | - Erika L Crable
- Department of Psychiatry, University of California San Diego, San Diego, USA
| |
Collapse
|
25
|
Wortham WK, Rodwin AH, Purtle J, Munson MR, Raghavan R. Revisiting the policy ecology framework for implementation of evidence-based practices in mental health settings. Implement Sci 2023; 18:58. [PMID: 37936123 PMCID: PMC10629012 DOI: 10.1186/s13012-023-01309-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/03/2023] [Accepted: 10/01/2023] [Indexed: 11/09/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Over the past three decades, policy actors and actions have been highly influential in supporting the implementation of evidence-based practices (EBPs) in mental health settings. An early examination of these actions resulted in the Policy Ecology Framework (PEF), which was originally developed as a tactical primer for state and local mental health regulators in the field of child mental health. However, the policy landscape for implementation has evolved significantly since the original PEF was published. An interrogation of the strategies originally proposed in the PEF is necessary to provide an updated menu of strategies to improve our understanding of the mechanisms of policy action and promote system improvement. OBJECTIVES This paper builds upon the original PEF to address changes in the policy landscape for the implementation of mental health EBPs between 2009 and 2022. We review the current state of policy strategies that support the implementation of EBPs in mental health care and outline key areas for policy-oriented implementation research. Our review identifies policy strategies at federal, state, agency, and organizational levels, and highlights developments in the social context in which EBPs are implemented. Furthermore, our review is organized around some key changes that occurred across each PEF domain that span organizational, agency, political, and social contexts along with subdomains within each area. DISCUSSION We present an updated menu of policy strategies to support the implementation of EBPs in mental health settings. This updated menu of strategies considers the broad range of conceptual developments and changes in the policy landscape. These developments have occurred across the organizational, agency, political, and social contexts and are important for policymakers to consider in the context of supporting the implementation of EBPs. The updated PEF expands and enhances the specification of policy levers currently available, and identifies policy targets that are underdeveloped (e.g., de-implementation and sustainment) but are becoming visible opportunities for policy to support system improvement. The updated PEF clarifies current policy efforts within the field of implementation science in health to conceptualize and better operationalize the role of policy in the implementation of EBPs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Whitney K Wortham
- Silver School of Social Work, New York University, 1 Washington Square North, New York, NY, 10003, USA.
| | - Aaron H Rodwin
- Silver School of Social Work, New York University, 1 Washington Square North, New York, NY, 10003, USA
| | - Jonathan Purtle
- Department of Public Health Policy & Management, Global Center for Implementation Science, School of Global Public Health, New York University, 708 Broadway, New York, NY, 10003, USA
| | - Michelle R Munson
- Silver School of Social Work, New York University, 1 Washington Square North, New York, NY, 10003, USA
| | - Ramesh Raghavan
- Silver School of Social Work, New York University, 1 Washington Square North, New York, NY, 10003, USA
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Kim B, Cruden G, Crable EL, Quanbeck A, Mittman BS, Wagner AD. A structured approach to applying systems analysis methods for examining implementation mechanisms. Implement Sci Commun 2023; 4:127. [PMID: 37858215 PMCID: PMC10588196 DOI: 10.1186/s43058-023-00504-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/08/2023] [Accepted: 09/23/2023] [Indexed: 10/21/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND It is challenging to identify and understand the specific mechanisms through which an implementation strategy affects implementation outcomes, as implementation happens in the context of complex, multi-level systems. These systems and the mechanisms within each level have their own dynamic environments that change frequently. For instance, sequencing may matter in that a mechanism may only be activated indirectly by a strategy through another mechanism. The dosage or strength of a mechanism may vary over time or across different health care system levels. To elucidate the mechanisms relevant to successful implementation amidst this complexity, systems analysis methods are needed to model and manage complexity. METHODS The fields of systems engineering and systems science offer methods-which we refer to as systems analysis methods-to help explain the interdependent relationships between and within systems, as well as dynamic changes to systems over time. When applied to studying implementation mechanisms, systems analysis methods can help (i) better identify and manage unknown conditions that may or may not activate mechanisms (both expected mechanisms targeted by a strategy and unexpected mechanisms that the methods help detect) and (ii) flexibly guide strategy adaptations to address contextual influences that emerge after the strategy is selected and used. RESULTS In this paper, we delineate a structured approach to applying systems analysis methods for examining implementation mechanisms. The approach includes explicit steps for selecting, tailoring, and evaluating an implementation strategy regarding the mechanisms that the strategy is initially hypothesized to activate, as well as additional mechanisms that are identified through the steps. We illustrate the approach using a case example. We then discuss the strengths and limitations of this approach, as well as when these steps might be most appropriate, and suggest work to further the contributions of systems analysis methods to implementation mechanisms research. CONCLUSIONS Our approach to applying systems analysis methods can encourage more mechanisms research efforts to consider these methods and in turn fuel both (i) rigorous comparisons of these methods to alternative mechanisms research approaches and (ii) an active discourse across the field to better delineate when these methods are appropriate for advancing mechanisms-related knowledge.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Bo Kim
- VA Boston Healthcare System, 150 South Huntington Avenue, Boston, MA, 02130, USA.
- Harvard Medical School, 25 Shattuck Street, Boston, MA, 02115, USA.
| | - Gracelyn Cruden
- Chestnut Health Systems, Lighthouse Institute-Oregon Group, 1255 Pearl Street, Eugene, OR, 97401, USA
| | - Erika L Crable
- UC San Diego, 9500 Gilman Drive, La Jolla, CA, 92093, USA
- Child and Adolescent Services Research Center, 3665 Kearny Villa Road, San Diego, CA, 92123, USA
- UC San Diego ACTRI Dissemination and Implementation Science Center, 9500 Gilman Drive, La Jolla, CA, 92093, USA
| | - Andrew Quanbeck
- University of Wisconsin-Madison, 610 North Whitney Way, Madison, WI, 53705, USA
| | - Brian S Mittman
- Kaiser Permanente Southern California, 200 North Lewis Street, Orange, CA, 92868, USA
- University of Southern California, 2025 Zonal Avenue, Los Angeles, CA, 90089, USA
- UCLA, 405 Hilgard Avenue, Los Angeles, CA, 90095, USA
| | - Anjuli D Wagner
- University of Washington, 3980 15Th Avenue NE, Seattle, WA, 98195, USA
| |
Collapse
|
27
|
Dopp AR, Hunter SB, Godley MD, González I, Bongard M, Han B, Cantor J, Hindmarch G, Lindquist K, Wright B, Schlang D, Passetti LL, Wright KL, Kilmer B, Aarons GA, Purtle J. Comparing organization-focused and state-focused financing strategies on provider-level reach of a youth substance use treatment model: a mixed-method study. Implement Sci 2023; 18:50. [PMID: 37828518 PMCID: PMC10571404 DOI: 10.1186/s13012-023-01305-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/05/2023] [Accepted: 09/18/2023] [Indexed: 10/14/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Financial barriers in substance use disorder service systems have limited the widespread adoption-i.e., provider-level reach-of evidence-based practices (EBPs) for youth substance use disorders. Reach is essential to maximizing the population-level impact of EBPs. One promising, but rarely studied, type of implementation strategy for overcoming barriers to EBP reach is financing strategies, which direct financial resources in various ways to support implementation. We evaluated financing strategies for the Adolescent Community Reinforcement Approach (A-CRA) EBP by comparing two US federal grant mechanisms, organization-focused and state-focused grants, on organization-level A-CRA reach outcomes. METHOD A-CRA implementation took place through organization-focused and state-focused grantee cohorts from 2006 to 2021. We used a quasi-experimental, mixed-method design to compare reach between treatment organizations funded by organization-focused versus state-focused grants (164 organizations, 35 states). Using administrative training records, we calculated reach as the per-organization proportion of trained individuals who received certification in A-CRA clinical delivery and/or supervision by the end of grant funding. We tested differences in certification rate by grant type using multivariable linear regression models that controlled for key covariates (e.g., time), and tested threats to internal validity from our quasi-experimental design through a series of sensitivity analyses. We also drew on interviews and surveys collected from the treatment organizations and (when relevant) interviews with state administrators to identify factors that influenced reach. RESULTS The overall certification rates were 27 percentage points lower in state-focused versus organization-focused grants (p = .01). Sensitivity analyses suggested these findings were not explained by confounding temporal trends nor by organizational or state characteristics. We did not identify significant quantitative moderators of reach outcomes, but qualitative findings suggested certain facilitating factors were more influential for organization-focused grants (e.g., strategic planning) and certain barrier factors were more impactful for state-focused grants (e.g., states finding it difficult to execute grant activities). DISCUSSION As the first published comparison of EBP reach outcomes between financing strategies, our findings can help guide state and federal policy related to financing strategies for implementing EBPs that reduce youth substance use. Future work should explore contextual conditions under which different financing strategies can support the widespread implementation of EBPs for substance use disorder treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alex R Dopp
- RAND Corporation, 1776 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA, 90401, USA.
| | - Sarah B Hunter
- RAND Corporation, 1776 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA, 90401, USA
| | - Mark D Godley
- Chestnut Health Systems, 448 Wylie Drive, Normal, IL, 61761, USA
| | | | - Michelle Bongard
- RAND Corporation, 1776 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA, 90401, USA
| | - Bing Han
- Department of Research and Evaluation, Division of Biostatistics Research, Kaiser Permanente Southern California, 100 South Los Robles Avenue 2nd Floor, Pasadena, CA, 91101, USA
| | - Jonathan Cantor
- RAND Corporation, 1776 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA, 90401, USA
| | - Grace Hindmarch
- RAND Corporation, 1776 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA, 90401, USA
| | - Kerry Lindquist
- RAND Corporation, 1776 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA, 90401, USA
| | - Blanche Wright
- RAND Corporation, 1776 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA, 90401, USA
- Department of Health Policy and Management, University of California Los Angeles, 650 Charles Young Dr. S., 31-269 CHS Box 951772, Los Angeles, CA, 90095, USA
| | - Danielle Schlang
- RAND Corporation, 1776 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA, 90401, USA
| | - Lora L Passetti
- Chestnut Health Systems, 448 Wylie Drive, Normal, IL, 61761, USA
| | - Kelli L Wright
- Chestnut Health Systems, 448 Wylie Drive, Normal, IL, 61761, USA
| | - Beau Kilmer
- RAND Corporation, 1776 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA, 90401, USA
| | - Gregory A Aarons
- Department of Psychiatry and Altman Clinical and Translational Research Institute Dissemination and Implementation Science Center, University of California San Diego, 9500 Gilman Dr. (0812), La Jolla, San Diego, CA, 92093, USA
| | - Jonathan Purtle
- Department of Public Health Policy & Management and Global Center for Implementation Science, New York University School of Global Public Health, 708 Broadway, New York, NY, 10003, USA
| |
Collapse
|
28
|
Irene Su H, Kaiser B, Crable E, Ortega RF, Yoeun SW, Economou M, Fernandez E, Romero SA, Aarons GA, McMenamin SB. Implementation of state health insurance benefit mandates for cancer-related fertility preservation: Following policy through a complex system. RESEARCH SQUARE 2023:rs.3.rs-3340894. [PMID: 37886467 PMCID: PMC10602193 DOI: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-3340894/v1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/28/2023]
Abstract
Background A myriad of federal, state, and organizational policies are designed to improve access to evidence-based healthcare, but the impact of these policies likely varies due to contextual determinants, re-interpretations of and poor compliance with policy requirements throughout implementation. Strategies enhancing implementation and compliance with policy intent can improve population health. Critically assessing the multi-level environments where health policies and their related health services are implemented is essential to designing effective policy-level implementation strategies. California passed a 2019 health insurance benefit mandate requiring coverage of fertility preservation (FP) services for individuals at risk of infertility due to medical treatments to improve access to services that are otherwise cost-prohibitive. Our objective was to document and understand multi-level environment, relationships, and activities involved in using state benefit mandates to facilitate patient access to FP services. Methods We conducted a mixed-methods study and used the policy-optimized Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, Sustainment (EPIS) framework to analyze implementation of California's fertility preservation benefit mandate (SB 600) at and between the state insurance regulator, insurer and clinic levels. Results Seventeen publicly available FP benefit mandate-relevant documents were reviewed, and four insurers, 25 financial, administrative and provider participants from 16 oncology and fertility clinics, three fertility pharmaceutical representatives, and two patient advocates were interviewed. The mandate and insurance regulator guidance represented two "Big P" (system level) policies that gave rise to a host of "little p" (organizational) policies by and between the regulator, insurers, clinics, and patients. Many little p policies were bridging factors to support implementation across levels and FP service access. Characterizing the mandate's functions (i.e., policy goals) and forms (i.e., ways that policies were enacted) led to identification of (1) intended and unintended implementation, service, and patient outcomes; (2) implementation processes by level, EPIS phase; (3) actor-delineated key processes and heterogeneity among them; and (4) inner and outer context determinants that drove adaptations. Conclusions Following the mid- and down-stream implementation of a state health insurance benefit mandate, data generated will enable development of policy level implementation strategies, evaluation of determinants and important outcomes of effective implementation, and design of future mandates to improve fit and fidelity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- H Irene Su
- University of California San Diego Moores Cancer Center
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
29
|
Cruden G, Crable EL, Lengnick-Hall R, Purtle J. Who's "in the room where it happens"? A taxonomy and five-step methodology for identifying and characterizing policy actors. Implement Sci Commun 2023; 4:113. [PMID: 37723580 PMCID: PMC10506261 DOI: 10.1186/s43058-023-00492-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/04/2023] [Accepted: 08/28/2023] [Indexed: 09/20/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Engaging policy actors in research design and execution is critical to increasing the practical relevance and real-world impact of policy-focused dissemination and implementation science. Identifying and selecting which policy actors to engage, particularly actors involved in "Big P" public policies such as laws, is distinct from traditional engaged research methods. This current study aimed to develop a transparent, structured method for iteratively identifying policy actors involved in key policy decisions-such as adopting evidence-based interventions at systems-scale-and to guide implementation study sampling and engagement approaches. A flexible policy actor taxonomy was developed to supplement existing methods and help identify policy developers, disseminators, implementers, enforcers, and influencers. METHODS A five-step methodology for identifying policy actors to potentially engage in policy dissemination and implementation research was developed. Leveraging a recent federal policy as a case study-The Family First Prevention Services Act (FFPSA)-publicly available documentation (e.g., websites, reports) were searched, retrieved, and coded using content analysis to characterize the organizations and individual policy actors in the "room" during policy decisions. RESULTS The five steps are as follows: (1) clarify the policy implementation phase(s) of interest, (2) identify relevant proverbial or actual policymaking "rooms," (3) identify and characterize organizations in the room, (4) identify and characterize policy actors in the "room," and (5) quantify (e.g., count actors across groups), summarize, and compare "rooms" to develop or select engagement approaches aligned with the "room" and actors. The use and outcomes of each step are exemplified through the FFPSA case study. CONCLUSIONS The pragmatic and transparent policy actor identification steps presented here can guide researchers' methods for continuous sampling and successful policy actor engagement. Future work should explore the utility of the proposed methods for guiding selection and tailoring of engagement and implementation strategies (e.g., research-policy actor partnerships) to improve both "Big P" and "little p" (administrative guidelines, procedures) policymaking and implementation in global contexts.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gracelyn Cruden
- Chestnut Health System, Lighthouse Institute-Oregon Group, Eugene, OR, 97401, USA.
| | - Erika L Crable
- Department of Psychiatry, University of California San Diego, San Diego, CA, USA
| | | | - Jonathan Purtle
- School of Global Public Health, New York University, New York City, NY, USA
| |
Collapse
|
30
|
Purtle J, Moucheraud C, Yang LH, Shelley D. Four very basic ways to think about policy in implementation science. Implement Sci Commun 2023; 4:111. [PMID: 37700360 PMCID: PMC10496363 DOI: 10.1186/s43058-023-00497-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/11/2023] [Accepted: 09/04/2023] [Indexed: 09/14/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Policy is receiving increasing attention in the field of implementation science. However, there remains a lack of clear, concise guidance about how policy can be conceptualized in implementation science research. Building on Curran's article "Implementation science made too simple"-which defines "the thing" as the intervention, practice, or innovation in need of implementation support-we offer a typology of four very basic ways to conceptualize policy in implementation science research. We provide examples of studies that have conceptualized policy in these different ways and connect aspects of the typology to established frameworks in the field. The typology simplifies and refines related typologies in the field. Four very basic ways to think about policy in implementation science research. 1) Policy as something to adopt: an evidence-supported policy proposal is conceptualized as "the thing" and the goal of research is to understand how policymaking processes can be modified to increase adoption, and thus reach, of the evidence-supported policy. Policy-focused dissemination research is well-suited to achieve this goal. 2) Policy as something to implement: a policy, evidence-supported or not, is conceptualized as "the thing" and the goal of research is to generate knowledge about how policy rollout (or policy de-implementation) can be optimized to maximize benefits for population health and health equity. Policy-focused implementation research is well-suited to achieve this goal. 3) Policy as context to understand: an evidence-supported intervention is "the thing" and policies are conceptualized as a fixed determinant of implementation outcomes. The goal of research is to understand the mechanisms through which policies affect implementation of the evidence-supported intervention. 4) Policy as strategy to use: an evidence-supported intervention is "the thing" and policy is conceptualized as a strategy to affect implementation outcomes. The goal of research is to understand, and ideally test, how policy strategies affect implementation outcomes related to the evidence-supported intervention. CONCLUSION Policy can be conceptualized in multiple, non-mutually exclusive ways in implementation science. Clear conceptualizations of these distinctions are important to advancing the field of policy-focused implementation science and promoting the integration of policy into the field more broadly.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jonathan Purtle
- Department of Public Health Policy & Management, Global Center for Implementation Science, New York University School of Global Public Health, 708 Broadway, New York, NY, 10003, USA.
| | - Corrina Moucheraud
- Department of Public Health Policy & Management, Global Center for Implementation Science, New York University School of Global Public Health, 708 Broadway, New York, NY, 10003, USA
| | - Lawrence H Yang
- Department of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Global Center for Implementation Science, New York University School of Global Public Health, Global Mental Health and Stigma Program, 708 Broadway, New York, NY, 10003, USA
| | - Donna Shelley
- Department of Public Health Policy & Management, Global Center for Implementation Science, New York University School of Global Public Health, 708 Broadway, New York, NY, 10003, USA
| |
Collapse
|
31
|
Asada Y, Kroll-Desrosiers A, Chriqui JF, Curran GM, Emmons KM, Haire-Joshu D, Brownson RC. Applying hybrid effectiveness-implementation studies in equity-centered policy implementation science. FRONTIERS IN HEALTH SERVICES 2023; 3:1220629. [PMID: 37771411 PMCID: PMC10524255 DOI: 10.3389/frhs.2023.1220629] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/10/2023] [Accepted: 08/21/2023] [Indexed: 09/30/2023]
Abstract
Policy implementation science (IS) is complex, dynamic, and fraught with unique study challenges that set it apart from biomedical or clinical research. One important consideration is the ways in which policy interacts with local contexts, such as power and social disadvantage (e.g., based on ability, race, class, sexual identity, geography). The complex nature of policy IS and the need for more intentional integration of equity principles into study approaches calls for creative adaptations to existing implementation science knowledge and guidance. Effectiveness-implementation hybrid studies were developed to enhance translation of clinical research by addressing research questions around the effectiveness of an intervention and its implementation in the same study. The original work on hybrid designs mainly focused on clinical experimental trials; however, over the last decade, researchers have applied it to a wide range of initiatives and contexts, including more widespread application in community-based studies. This perspectives article demonstrates how effectiveness-implementation hybrid studies can be adapted for and applied to equity-centered policy IS research. We draw upon principles of targeted universalism and Equity in Implementation Research frameworks to guide adaptations to hybrid study typologies, and suggest research and engagement activities to enhance equity considerations; for example, in the design and testing of implementing strategies. We also provide examples of equity-centered policy IS studies. As the field of policy IS rapidly evolves, these adapted hybrid type studies are offered to researchers as a starting guide.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yuka Asada
- Community Health Sciences, School of Public Health, University of Illinois Chicago (UIC), Chicago, IL, United States
| | - Aimee Kroll-Desrosiers
- VA Central Western Massachusetts Health Care System, Leeds, MA, United States
- Department of Population and Quantitative Health Sciences, UMass Chan Medical School, Worcester, MA, United States
- Department of Health Policy and Promotion, School of Public Health and Health Sciences, UMass Amherst, Amherst, MA, United States
| | - Jamie F. Chriqui
- Health Policy Research, Institute for Health Research and Policy, School of Public Health, University of Illinois Chicago, Chicago, IL, United States
- Department of Health Policy and Administration, School of Public Health, University of Illinois Chicago, Chicago, IL, United States
| | - Geoffrey M. Curran
- Departments of Pharmacy Practice and Psychiatry, Center for Implementation Research, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, AR, United States
| | - Karen M. Emmons
- Department of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, United States
| | - Debra Haire-Joshu
- Department is Public Health, Brown School at Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, United States
| | - Ross C. Brownson
- Prevention Research Center, Brown School at Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, United States
- Division of Public Health Sciences, Department of Surgery, Alvin J. Siteman Cancer Center, Washington University School of Medicine, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, United States
| |
Collapse
|
32
|
Waddell A, Goodwin D, Spassova G, Bragge P. "The Terminology Might Be Ahead of Practice": Embedding Shared Decision Making in Practice-Barriers and Facilitators to Implementation of SDM in the Context of Maternity Care. MDM Policy Pract 2023; 8:23814683231199943. [PMID: 37743932 PMCID: PMC10517621 DOI: 10.1177/23814683231199943] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/05/2023] [Accepted: 07/20/2023] [Indexed: 09/26/2023] Open
Abstract
Background. It is a patient's right to be included in decisions about their health care. Implementing shared decision making (SDM) is important to enable active communication between clinicians and patients. Although health policy makers are increasingly mandating SDM implementation, SDM adoption has been slow. This study explored stakeholders' organizational- and system-level barriers and facilitators to implementing policy mandated SDM in maternity care in Victoria, Australia. Method. Twenty-four semi-structured interviews were conducted with participants including clinicians, health service administrators and decision makers, and government policy makers. Data were mapped to the Theoretical Domains Framework to identify barriers and facilitators to SDM implementation. Results. Factors identified as facilitating SDM implementation included using a whole-of-system approach, providing additional implementation resources, correct documentation facilitated by electronic medical records, and including patient outcomes in measurement. Barriers included health service lack of capacity, unclear policy definitions of SDM, and policy makers' lack of resources to track implementation. Conclusion. This is the first study to our knowledge to explore barriers and facilitators to SDM implementation from the perspective of multiple actors following policy mandating SDM in tertiary health services in Australia. The primary finding was that there are concerns that SDM implementation policy is outpacing practice. Nonclinical staff play a crucial role translating policy to practice. Addressing organizational- and system-level barriers and facilitators to SDM implementation should be a key concern of health policy makers, health services, and staff. Highlights New government policies require shared decision making (SDM) implementation in hospitals.There is limited evidence for how to implement SDM in hospital settings.There are concerns SDM implementation policy is outpacing practice.Understanding and capacity for SDM varies considerably among stakeholders.Whole of system approaches and electronic medical records are seen to facilitate SDM.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alex Waddell
- Monash Sustainable Development Institute, Monash University, Clayton, VIC, Australia
- Safer Care Victoria, Victorian Department of Health, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Denise Goodwin
- Behaviour Works Australia Health Programs, Monash Sustainable Development Institute, Monash University, Clayton, VIC, Australia
| | - Gerri Spassova
- Department of Marketing, Monash Business School, Caulfield East, VIC, Australia
| | - Peter Bragge
- Monash Sustainable Evidence Review Service, Monash Sustainable Development Institute, Monash University, Clayton, VIC, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
33
|
Mériade L, Rochette C, Cassière F. Local implementation of public health policies revealed by the COVID-19 crisis: the French case. Implement Sci 2023; 18:25. [PMID: 37353837 DOI: 10.1186/s13012-023-01277-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/13/2022] [Accepted: 05/22/2023] [Indexed: 06/25/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Improving health system performance depends on the quality of health policy implementation at the local level. However, in general, the attention of researchers is mainly directed towards issues of health policy design and evaluation rather than implementation at the local level. The management of the COVID-19 crisis, especially in Europe, has particularly highlighted the complexity of implementing health policies, decided at the national or supranational level, at the local level. METHODS We conducted 23 semi-structured interviews with the main stakeholders in the management of the COVID-19 crisis in the second largest French region in order to identify the different actors and modes of coordination of the local implementation of health policies that this crisis management illustrates in a very visible way. Our methodology is complemented by a content analysis of the main guidelines and decisions related to this implementation. RESULTS The analysis of these data allows us to identify three levels of implementation of health policies at the local level (administrative, organizational and operational). Interviews also reveal the existence of different types of coordination specific to each of these levels of local implementation of health policies. These results then make it possible to identify important managerial avenues for promoting global coordination of these three levels of implementation. CONCLUSIONS Although research on health services emphasizes the existence of several levels of local implementation of health policies, it offers little in the way of definition or characterization of these levels. The identification in this study of the three levels of local implementation of health policies and their specific forms of coordination contribute to a more precise characterization of this implementation in order to promote, in practice, its global coordination.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Laurent Mériade
- IAE Clermont Auvergne, CleRMa, Research Chair "Santé Et Territoires", University Clermont Auvergne, 11 Boulevard Charles de Gaulle, Clermont-Ferrand, 63000, France.
| | - Corinne Rochette
- IAE Clermont Auvergne, CleRMa, Research Chair "Santé Et Territoires", University Clermont Auvergne, 11 Boulevard Charles de Gaulle, Clermont-Ferrand, 63000, France
| | - François Cassière
- IAE Clermont Auvergne, CleRMa, Research Chair "Santé Et Territoires", University Clermont Auvergne, 11 Boulevard Charles de Gaulle, Clermont-Ferrand, 63000, France
| |
Collapse
|
34
|
Zatzick D, Palinkas L, Chambers DA, Whiteside L, Moloney K, Engstrom A, Prater L, Russo J, Wang J, Abu K, Iles-Shih M, Bulger E. Integrating pragmatic and implementation science randomized clinical trial approaches: a PRagmatic Explanatory Continuum Indicator Summary-2 (PRECIS-2) analysis. Trials 2023; 24:288. [PMID: 37085877 PMCID: PMC10122352 DOI: 10.1186/s13063-023-07313-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/06/2022] [Accepted: 04/17/2023] [Indexed: 04/23/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Over the past two decades, pragmatic and implementation science clinical trial research methods have advanced substantially. Pragmatic and implementation studies have natural areas of overlap, particularly relating to the goal of using clinical trial data to leverage health care system policy changes. Few investigations have addressed pragmatic and implementation science randomized trial methods development while also considering policy impact. METHODS The investigation used the PRagmatic Explanatory Continuum Indicator Summary-2 (PRECIS-2) and PRECIS-2-Provider Strategies (PRECIS-2-PS) tools to evaluate the design of two multisite randomized clinical trials that targeted patient-level effectiveness outcomes, provider-level practice changes and health care system policy. Seven raters received PRECIS-2 training and applied the tools in the coding of the two trials. Descriptive statistics were produced for both trials, and PRECIS-2 wheel diagrams were constructed. Interrater agreement was assessed with the Intraclass Correlation (ICC) and Kappa statistics. The Rapid Assessment Procedure Informed Clinical Ethnography (RAPICE) qualitative approach was applied to understanding integrative themes derived from the PRECIS-2 ratings and an end-of-study policy summit. RESULTS The ICCs for the composite ratings across the patient and provider-focused PRECIS-2 domains ranged from 0.77 to 0.87, and the Kappa values ranged from 0.25 to 0.37, reflecting overall fair-to-good interrater agreement for both trials. All four PRECIS-2 wheels were rated more pragmatic than explanatory, with composite mean and median scores ≥ 4. Across trials, the primary intent-to-treat analysis domain was consistently rated most pragmatic (mean = 5.0, SD = 0), while the follow-up/data collection domain was rated most explanatory (mean range = 3.14-3.43, SD range = 0.49-0.69). RAPICE field notes identified themes related to potential PRECIS-2 training improvements, as well as policy themes related to using trial data to inform US trauma care system practice change; the policy themes were not captured by the PRECIS-2 ratings. CONCLUSIONS The investigation documents that the PRECIS-2 and PRECIS-2-PS can be simultaneously used to feasibly and reliably characterize clinical trials with patient and provider-level targets. The integration of pragmatic and implementation science clinical trial research methods can be furthered by using common metrics such as the PRECIS-2 and PRECIS-2-PS. Future study could focus on clinical trial policy research methods development. TRIAL REGISTRATION DO-SBIS ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00607620. registered on January 29, 2008. TSOS ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02655354, registered on July 27, 2015.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Douglas Zatzick
- Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, USA.
| | - Lawrence Palinkas
- Department of Children, Youth, and Families, California School of Social Work, University of Southern, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - David A Chambers
- Implementation Science, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD, USA
| | - Lauren Whiteside
- Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, USA
| | - Kathleen Moloney
- Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, USA
| | - Allison Engstrom
- Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, USA
| | - Laura Prater
- Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, USA
| | - Joan Russo
- Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, USA
| | - Jin Wang
- Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, USA
| | - Khadija Abu
- Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, USA
| | - Matt Iles-Shih
- Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, USA
| | - Eileen Bulger
- Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, USA
- Department of Surgery, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, USA
| |
Collapse
|
35
|
Purtle J, Stadnick NA, Wynecoop M, Bruns EJ, Crane ME, Aarons G. A policy implementation study of earmarked taxes for mental health services: study protocol. Implement Sci Commun 2023; 4:37. [PMID: 37004117 PMCID: PMC10067193 DOI: 10.1186/s43058-023-00408-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/27/2023] [Accepted: 03/05/2023] [Indexed: 04/03/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Insufficient funding is frequently identified as a critical barrier to the implementation and sustainment of evidence-based practices (EBPs). Thus, increasing access to funding is recognized as an implementation strategy. Policies that create earmarked taxes-defined as taxes for which revenue can only be spent on specific activities-are an increasingly common mental health financing strategy that could improve the reach of EBPs. This project's specific aims are to (1) identify all jurisdictions in the USA that have implemented earmarked taxes for mental health and catalogue information about tax design; (2) characterize experiences implementing earmarked taxes among local (e.g., county, city) mental health agency leaders and other government and community organization officials and assess their perceptions of the acceptability and feasibility of different types of policy implementation strategies; and (3) develop a framework to guide effect earmarked tax designs, inform the selection of implementation strategies, and disseminate the framework to policy audiences. METHODS The project uses the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, Sustainment (EPIS) framework to inform data collection about the determinants and processes of tax implementation and Leeman's typology of implementation strategies to examine the acceptability and feasibility strategies which could support earmarked tax policy implementation. A legal mapping will be conducted to achieve aim 1. To achieve aim 2, a survey will be conducted of 300 local mental health agency leaders and other government and community organization officials involved with the implementation of earmarked taxes for mental health. The survey will be followed by approximately 50 interviews with these officials. To achieve aim 3, quantitative and qualitative data will be integrated through a systematic framework development and dissemination process. DISCUSSION This exploratory policy implementation process study will build the evidence base for outer-context implementation determinants and strategies by focusing on policies that earmarked taxes for mental health services.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jonathan Purtle
- Department of Public Health Policy & Management, Global Center for Implementation Science, New York University School of Global Public Health, 708, Broadway, New York, NY, 10003, USA.
| | - Nicole A Stadnick
- Department of Psychiatry, Dissemination and Implementation Science Center, Altman Clinical and Translational Research Institute, University of California San Diego, 9500 Gilman Drive, La Jolla, CA, 92093, USA
| | - Megan Wynecoop
- Department of Public Health Policy & Management, Global Center for Implementation Science, New York University School of Global Public Health, 708, Broadway, New York, NY, 10003, USA
| | - Eric J Bruns
- Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington School of Medicine, 6200 NE 74Th St, Building 29, Suite 110, Seattle, WA, 98115, USA
| | - Margaret E Crane
- Department of Psychology, Temple University, Weiss Hall, 1701 N 13Th St, Philadelphia, PA, 19122, USA
- Department of Psychiatry, New York Presbyterian-Weill Cornell Medicine, 425 E 61St St, New York, NY, 10065, USA
| | - Gregory Aarons
- Department of Psychiatry, Dissemination and Implementation Science Center, Altman Clinical and Translational Research Institute, University of California San Diego, 9500 Gilman Drive, La Jolla, CA, 92093, USA
| |
Collapse
|
36
|
Crable EL, Grogan CM, Purtle J, Roesch SC, Aarons GA. Tailoring dissemination strategies to increase evidence-informed policymaking for opioid use disorder treatment: study protocol. Implement Sci Commun 2023; 4:16. [PMID: 36797794 PMCID: PMC9936679 DOI: 10.1186/s43058-023-00396-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/27/2022] [Accepted: 01/30/2023] [Indexed: 02/18/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Policy is a powerful tool for systematically altering healthcare access and quality, but the research to policy gap impedes translating evidence-based practices into public policy and limits widespread improvements in service and population health outcomes. The US opioid epidemic disproportionately impacts Medicaid members who rely on publicly funded benefits to access evidence-based treatment including medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD). A myriad of misaligned policies and evidence-use behaviors by policymakers across federal agencies, state Medicaid agencies, and managed care organizations limit coverage of and access to MOUD for Medicaid members. Dissemination strategies that improve policymakers' use of current evidence are critical to improving MOUD benefits and reducing health disparities. However, no research describes key determinants of Medicaid policymakers' evidence use behaviors or preferences, and few studies have examined data-driven approaches to developing dissemination strategies to enhance evidence-informed policymaking. This study aims to identify determinants and intermediaries that influence policymakers' evidence use behaviors, then develop and test data-driven tailored dissemination strategies that promote MOUD coverage in benefit arrays. METHODS Guided by the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, and Sustainment (EPIS) framework, we will conduct a national survey of state Medicaid agency and managed care organization policymakers to identify determinants and intermediaries that influence how they seek, receive, and use research in their decision-making processes. We will use latent class methods to empirically identify subgroups of agencies with distinct evidence use behaviors. A 10-step dissemination strategy development and specification process will be used to tailor strategies to significant predictors identified for each latent class. Tailored dissemination strategies will be deployed to each class of policymakers and assessed for their acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility for delivering evidence about MOUD benefit design. DISCUSSION This study will illuminate key determinants and intermediaries that influence policymakers' evidence use behaviors when designing benefits for MOUD. This study will produce a critically needed set of data-driven, tailored policy dissemination strategies. Study results will inform a subsequent multi-site trial measuring the effectiveness of tailored dissemination strategies on MOUD benefit design and implementation. Lessons from dissemination strategy development will inform future research about policymakers' evidence use preferences and offer a replicable process for tailoring dissemination strategies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Erika L Crable
- Department of Psychiatry, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA.
- Child and Adolescent Services Research Center, San Diego, CA, USA.
- University of California, San Diego Altman Clinical and Translational Research Institute Dissemination and Implementation Science Center, La Jolla, CA, USA.
| | - Colleen M Grogan
- Crown Family School of Social Work, Policy, and Practice, The University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Jonathan Purtle
- Department of Public Health Policy and Management, New York University School of Global Public Health, New York City, NY, USA
- Global Center for Implementation Science, New York University School of Global Public Health, New York City, NY, USA
| | - Scott C Roesch
- Child and Adolescent Services Research Center, San Diego, CA, USA
- Department of Psychology, San Diego State University, San Diego, CA, USA
| | - Gregory A Aarons
- Department of Psychiatry, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA
- Child and Adolescent Services Research Center, San Diego, CA, USA
- University of California, San Diego Altman Clinical and Translational Research Institute Dissemination and Implementation Science Center, La Jolla, CA, USA
| |
Collapse
|