1
|
Reid MJ, Tetteh EK, Ingaiza LM, Bradley CD, Dolcini MM, McKay VR. High Impact for Whom? A Qualitative Analysis of Organization Concerns About the Transition to High-Impact Prevention Policy. Health Promot Pract 2023; 24:932-943. [PMID: 35533246 DOI: 10.1177/15248399221091537] [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: 11/17/2022]
Abstract
HIV represents a significant health burden in the United States. In 2012, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) stopped recommending many once-promoted interventions as part of a shift from one HIV intervention policy, Diffusion of Effective Behavioral Interventions (DEBI), to another, High Impact Prevention (HIP). Twenty-nine staff members from 10 organizations were interviewed to explore how organizations reacted to this shift. Three major themes emerged: (1) Personal experience, community assessment, and epidemiological evidence influenced organizations' perceptions of efficacy and preference for earlier interventions. (2) Organizations were concerned that HIP interventions were not a good fit for their priority populations. (3) Organizations were frustrated with the top-down approach by the CDC prioritizing HIP interventions over earlier interventions. These results indicate that organizations continue to see value in and provide DEBI interventions. In addition, a more participatory process incorporating qualitative evidence and organizations' experiences may be necessary to achieve widespread de-implementation of DEBI interventions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | - M Margaret Dolcini
- School of Social and Behavioral Health Sciences, College of Public Health and Human Sciences, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR, USA
| | | |
Collapse
|
2
|
Davey-Rothwellh M, Owczarzak J, Collins K, Dolcini MM, Tobin K, Mitchell F, Jones A, Latkin C. Lessons Learned from Implementing the SHIELD Intervention: A Peer Education Intervention for People Who Use Drugs. AIDS Behav 2021; 25:3472-3481. [PMID: 33913060 DOI: 10.1007/s10461-021-03275-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 04/19/2021] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
Abstract
HIV prevention and care peer education interventions have demonstrated effectiveness at changing HIV risk and care behaviors among a variety of at-risk populations in different settings. However, little is known about the implementation of this type of intervention in community-based settings. Further, there is limited information available regarding the facilitators and barriers to implementing peer education interventions in community-based settings. In this study, we explore implementation facilitators, barriers, and strategies to overcome these barriers among 12 organizations that implemented the SHIELD intervention, an evidenced-based peer education intervention for people who use drugs. Guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, we identified several facilitators and barriers at the outer, inner individuals, and intervention level of the implementation process. Future evidence-based public health programs should, in addition to addressing effectiveness, be relevant to the needs and lives of clients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Melissa Davey-Rothwellh
- Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Health, Behavior, and Society, Baltimore, MD, USA.
- Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Health, Behavior, and Society, 2213 McElderry Street, 2nd Floor, Baltimore, MD, 21212, USA.
| | - Jill Owczarzak
- Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Health, Behavior, and Society, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Karina Collins
- Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Health, Behavior, and Society, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - M Margaret Dolcini
- Oregon State University, College of Public Health and Health Sciences, School of Social and Behavioral Health Sciences, Corvallis, OR, USA
| | - Karin Tobin
- Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Health, Behavior, and Society, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Frances Mitchell
- Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Health, Behavior, and Society, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Abenea Jones
- Pennsylvania State University, College of Health and Human Development, Health and Family Studies, University Park, PA, USA
| | - Carl Latkin
- Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Health, Behavior, and Society, Baltimore, MD, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
McKay VR, Tetteh EK, Reid MJ, Ingaiza LM, Combs TB. Persistence of inefficient HIV prevention interventions: a mixed-method analysis of the reasons why. Transl Behav Med 2021; 11:1789-1794. [PMID: 33950250 DOI: 10.1093/tbm/ibab055] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Growing evidence suggests that public health organizations continue to provide inefficient interventions even when better intervention options may be available. Factors informing an organization's decision to continue providing inefficient interventions are unclear. We present an analysis of HIV service organizations to understand factors influencing organizations to continue or end interventions. Between 2017 and 2019, HIV service organizations were recruited from the Center for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC) website gettested.org, in the 20 metropolitan areas with the highest HIV incidence. Organizations were eligible to participate if they had provided at least one of 37 HIV prevention interventions identified as inefficient by the CDC. 877 organizations were recruited, with a response rate of 66%, (n = 578). Thirty-eight percent (n = 213) of organizations met the eligibility criteria, and 188 organizations completed the survey asking about reasons for continuing or ending interventions. Funding status (41%, n = 79) and client demand for interventions (60%, n = 116) were reported as the primary driving factors why organizations continued ineffective interventions. Scientific evidence was a rarely reported reason for ending an inefficient intervention (12%, n = 23). Qualitative responses indicated interventions were continued if clients demanded interventions they found useful or if staff perceived interventions as improving client behavior and health outcomes. Conversely, interventions were ended if client demand or retention was low, not relevant to the target population or funding ended. The decision to continue or end inefficient interventions is influenced by a number of factors-most often by funding and client interest but not scientific evidence.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Virginia R McKay
- The Brown School, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA
| | - Emmanuel K Tetteh
- The Brown School, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA
| | - Miranda J Reid
- The Brown School, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA
| | - Lucy M Ingaiza
- The Brown School, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA
| | - Todd B Combs
- The Brown School, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
McKay VR, Tetteh EK, Reid MJ, Ingaiza LM. Better Service by Doing Less: Introducing De-implementation Research in HIV. Curr HIV/AIDS Rep 2020; 17:431-437. [PMID: 32794070 PMCID: PMC7492471 DOI: 10.1007/s11904-020-00517-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/17/2023]
Abstract
The course of HIV research has led to a multitude of interventions to prevent and treat HIV. With the arrival of more effective interventions comes the need to end, or de-implement, less effective interventions. PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To describe the state of de-implementation research in HIV and provide a rationale for expanded research in this area. RECENT FINDINGS: Existing studies have identified a set of HIV-specific interventions appropriate for de-implementing and described the persistence of interventions that should be ended. However, to our knowledge, strategies to successfully promote appropriate de-implementation of HIV-specific interventions have not been examined. De-implementing interventions that are no longer needed is an opportunity to improve the quality and effectiveness of HIV services. Opportunities to expand this field of research abound.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Virginia R McKay
- The Brown School, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, 63130, USA.
| | - Emmanuel K Tetteh
- The Brown School, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, 63130, USA
| | - Miranda J Reid
- The Brown School, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, 63130, USA
| | - Lucy M Ingaiza
- The Brown School, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, 63130, USA
| |
Collapse
|