A systematic review of dissemination and implementation science capacity building programs around the globe

Positioning implementation science in national immunization programmes to improve coverage equity and advance progress toward Immunization Agenda 2030: An urgent global health imperative

Despite the availability of effective vaccines for preventing common childhood infectious diseases, there is still significant disparities in access and utilization across many low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). The factors that drive these disparities are often multilevel, originating from individuals, health facilities, health systems and communities, and also multifaceted. Implementation science has emerged as a field to help address "know-do" gaps in health systems, and can play a significant role in strengthening immunization systems to understand and solve implementation barriers that limit access and uptake within their contexts. This article presents a reflexive perspective on how to position implementation research in immunization programmes to improve coverage equity. Furthermore, key points of synergy between implementation research and vaccination are highlighted, and some potential practice changes that can be applied within specific contexts were proposed. Using a human rights lens, it was concluded that the cost that is associated with implementation failure in immunization programmes is significant and unjust, and future directions for implementation research to optimize its application in practice settings have been recommended.

A research agenda to advance the study of implementation mechanisms

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.

Community-Engaged Implementation Strategies in Occupational Therapy: A Scoping Review

IMPORTANCE

 Despite the potential of community-engaged implementation research (CEIR) in developing strategies to accelerate the translation of evidence-based interventions (EBIs), there is a noticeable knowledge gap in the current state of CEIR in occupational therapy. A synthesis of the concept, purpose, and operationalization of CEIR is necessary.

OBJECTIVE

 To identify the contexts, purposes, and operationalization of CEIR, focusing on implementation strategies in occupational therapy.

DATA SOURCES

 PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Scopus, and Web of Science.

STUDY SELECTION AND DATA COLLECTION

 We included studies that were explicit and intentional about CEIR and that focused on implementation strategies to support the translation of occupational therapy interventions, clinical guidelines, practice models, theories, or assessments. We extracted the research context (e.g., partners, recruitment), purpose (e.g., why community-engaged research was used), and operationalization (e.g., community engagement [CE] activities, how their findings inform the research) using thematic analysis.

FINDINGS

 Of 3,219 records, 6 studies were included. Involved partners were mainly occupational therapy practitioners from existing networks. CEIR that focuses on implementation strategies informs various aspects of research design, ranging from study design to sustainability, by developing community-academia partnerships, building implementation capacity, and creating implementation strategies across diverse research areas. Current research has used various but mostly traditional CE activities (e.g., focus groups).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

 We synthesized evidence on CEIR focused on implementation strategies in occupational therapy. Intentional efforts are needed to collaborate with diverse partners, explore innovative CE activities, produce equitable outputs, and develop multilevel implementation strategies to accelerate the translation of EBIs into practice. Plain-Language Summary: In this review, we synthesize evidence on the contexts, purposes, and operationalization of community-engaged implementation research (CEIR), focusing on implementation strategies in occupational therapy research. We found that current implementation efforts mainly rely on occupational therapy practitioners as community partners and use traditional recruitment methods and community engagement activities. In turn, they develop implementation strategies that mainly target practitioners without comprehensive, multilevel implementation support. We suggest more equitable collaboration with diverse partners to effectively promote the implementation and dissemination of evidence-based interventions in occupational therapy practice.

Closing the gap: advancing implementation science through training and capacity building

In their article on "Navigating the Field of Implementation Science Towards Maturity: Challenges and Opportunities," Chambers and Emmons describe the rapid growth of implementation science along with remaining challenges. A significant gap remains in training and capacity building. Formats for capacity building include university degree programs, summer training institutes, workshops, and conferences. In this letter, we describe and amplify on five key areas, including the need to (1) identify advanced competencies, (2) increase the volume and reach of trainings, (3) sustain trainings, (4) build equity focused trainings, and (5) develop global capacity. We hope that the areas we highlight will aid in addressing several key challenges to prioritize in future efforts to build greater capacity in implementation science.

MOOC-based blended learning for knowledge translation capacity-building: A qualitative evaluative study

This qualitative study investigated the effectiveness of blended learning using MOOCs (massive open online courses) for capacity-building in knowledge translation (KT). The evaluation followed Kirkpatrick's updated model. A total of 23 semi-directed interviews were conducted with participants working at a research centre in Côte d'Ivoire, with a first wave of interviews immediately post-training and a second wave after five months. Results showed that the training met learners' needs, with both the content and teaching format being deemed appropriate. Learners reacted positively to face-to-face activities and affirmed the importance of coaching for putting learning into practice. Specific KT skills and principles appeared to have been acquired, such as a procedure for structuring the KT process and improved skills for communicating and presenting scientific knowledge. Five months after the training, encouraging changes were reported, but the sustainability of the new KT practices remained uncertain. KT capacity-building initiatives in low- and middle-income countries struggle to meet demand. Little is known about effective KT training in that context, and even less in non-anglophone countries. The study presented here contributes to the understanding of success factors from the learners' standpoint.

A Nurse-Led Implementation Science Specialist Program

ABSTRACT

A well-known challenge in health care is integrating evidence into practice. Implementation science (IS) is a growing field that promotes the sustainable application of evidence-based practice (EBP) to clinical care. Health care organizations have an opportunity to support sustainable change by creating robust IS infrastructures that engage nurses in the clinical environment. Integrating IS into a nursing shared governance model is an ideal vehicle to empower direct care nurses to sustain EBP. Importantly, an IS infrastructure may also promote nurse retention and increase interdisciplinary collaboration. This article, the first in a series on applying IS, describes how a multisite health care organization developed a systemwide nurse-led IS Specialist program within a shared governance model.

Disseminating for impact: creating curriculum activities for translational dissemination for the clinical and translational research workforce

There has been an increased focus on the practices associated with dissemination for the translation of research to clinical practice and ultimately, policy. Simultaneously, there has been attention placed on the role of the clinical research workforce in supporting optimal dissemination efforts for impact and societal benefit. Curriculums focused on education opportunities for dissemination for translational scientists have been under-reported. The Translational Science Benefits Model (TSBM) is a framework that has been developed to support assessment of clinical and translational research outcomes that measure impact (both in the clinical and community setting) beyond traditional citations in academic journals/bibliometric activities. The TSBM framework outlines more than 30 different facets of impact and can provide a basis for operationalizing broad impacts of research for translational and clinical scientists. Engagement science offers methods and modalities to work with individual stakeholders, and collaborators in a team science model, and engagement with external scholars and society. This article will describe the use of the TSBM framework and engagement science strategies to develop a translational dissemination framework with novel components for evaluation of dissemination and implementation activities. We propose using the translational dissemination framework to guide the development of an educational curriculum for the clinical research workforce. We outline the educational domains and proposed evaluation criteria essential in implementing this innovative translational dissemination educational content for the clinical and translational research workforce.