Community and partner engagement in dissemination and implementation research at the National Institutes of Health: an analysis of recently funded studies and opportunities to advance the field

Charting Progress in the Science of Technical Assistance for Implementation of Evidence-Based Interventions

Technical assistance (TA) has long been a strategy utilized to support implementation of a range of different evidence-based interventions within clinical, community and other service settings. Great progress has come in extending the evidence base to support TA's use across multiple contexts, the result of more extensive categorizing of implementation strategies to support systematic studies of their effectiveness in facilitating successful implementation. This commentary builds on that progress to suggest several opportunities for future investigation and collaborative activity among researchers, practitioners, policymakers and other key decision-makers in hopes of continuing to build the success highlighted in this special issue and elsewhere. Authors call for increased attention to operationalization and tailoring of TA, considering how TA services can be sustained over time and how to consider externally-provided TA versus that housed within an organization. In addition, the commentary suggests a few key areas for capacity-building that can increase the quality, reach, and impact of TA for the future.

Implementation Science's Role in Community Engagement for Substance Use Prevention

Until recently, the field of implementation science has provided limited insight and guidance on the use of community engagement and partnership to support implementation of evidence-based practices. Listing community engagement as a barrier to optimal implementation is often the extent of the discussion. An article recently published by Perry et al. (PS 24:61-76, 2023) details what community engagement can entail and documents how this engagement can shape opioid use prevention research. The article also describes benefits of engaging community partners in prevention interventions, particularly for opioid use disorder, and the feasibility of employing multiple levels of engagement to do so. The article concludes by emphasizing areas for future research including examining the role community engagement has on the success of prevention interventions and the impact on long-term intervention outcomes. To respond to the Perry et al. (PS 24:61-76, 2023) article, our team conducted a literature scan of recently published implementation science and community engagement manuscripts, which demonstrated a growing body of research on the subject. We summarize these findings by offering suggested approaches for integrating implementation science and community engagement for substance use prevention programs and suggestions for advancing this intersection.

Establishing NIH Community Implementation Programs to improve maternal health

The United States has seen increasing trends of maternal mortality in recent years. Within this health crisis there are large disparities whereby underserved and minoritized populations are bearing a larger burden of maternal morbidity and mortality. While new interventions to improve maternal health are being developed, there are opportunities for greater integration of existing evidence-based interventions into routine practice, especially for underserved populations, including those residing in maternity care deserts. In fact, over 80 percent of maternal deaths are preventable with currently available interventions. To spur equitable implementation of existing interventions, the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute launched the Maternal-Health Community Implementation Program (MH-CIP) in 2021. In 2023, the National Institutes of Health's Implementing a Maternal health and PRegnancy Outcomes Vision for Everyone (IMPROVE) initiative partnered with the NHLBI to launch the IMPROVE Community Implementation Program (IMPROVE-CIP). By design, CIPs engage disproportionately impacted communities and partner with academic researchers to conduct implementation research. This commentary overviews the impetus for creating these programs, program goals, structure, and offers a high-level overview of the research currently supported. Lastly, the potential outcomes of these programs are contextualized within the landscape of maternal health initiatives in the United States.

Practitioner perspectives on equitable implementation of evidence-based interventions for cancer prevention and control

Longstanding inequities in cancer prevention and control require novel approaches to improve evidence-based intervention implementation. Exploring and elevating the perspectives of cancer prevention and control practitioners working to advance health equity and equitably implement evidence-based interventions is an important yet underutilized step among researchers working in this space. The purpose of this study was to explore practitioners' perspectives of how health equity is defined and integrated into their work, challenges of advancing health equity for implementation in local settings, and associated strategies. We conducted virtual key informant interviews and focus groups with 16 US practitioners (e.g. clinicians, health administrators, public health professionals) in 2021-2022. Interviews and focus groups were audio recorded and transcribed. Data were coded using inductive content analysis and summarized into themes. Four major themes emerged: (i) how health equity is conceptualized as a process and outcome; (ii) need to shift equity mindsets; (iii) importance of community partnerships; (iv) organizational policies and strategies for fostering equity in implementation. Respondents noted the need for research and medical communities to learn about the importance and benefits of allowing communities to shape implementation to advance equity in the delivery of evidence-based interventions and outcomes. Additionally, respondents emphasized that institutional leaders should initiate changes regarding equitable implementation at the organizational- and system-levels. Respondents endorsed the need to address equity issues related to the implementation of cancer prevention and control programs, practices, and policies. Many findings can be applied beyond cancer prevention and control to support equitable implementation and outcomes more generally.

Applying cognitive walkthrough methodology to improve the usability of an equity-focused implementation strategy

BACKGROUND

Our research team partnered with primary care and quality improvement staff in Federally Qualified Community Health Centers (CHCs) to develop Partnered and Equity Data-Driven Implementation (PEDDI) to promote equitable implementation of evidence-based interventions. The current study used a human-centered design methodology to evaluate the usability of PEDDI and generate redesign solutions to address usability issues in the context of a cancer screening intervention.

METHODS

We applied the Cognitive Walkthrough for Implementation Strategies (CWIS), a pragmatic assessment method with steps that include group testing with end users to identify and prioritize usability problems. We conducted three facilitated 60-min CWIS sessions with end users (N = 7) from four CHCs that included scenarios and related tasks for implementing a colorectal cancer (CRC) screening intervention. Participants rated the likelihood of completing each task and identified usability issues and generated ideas for redesign solutions during audio-recorded CWIS sessions. Participants completed a pre-post survey of PEDDI usability. Our research team used consensus coding to synthesize usability problems and redesign solutions from transcribed CWIS sessions.

RESULTS

Usability ratings (scale 0-100: higher scores indicating higher usability) of PEDDI averaged 66.3 (SD = 12.4) prior to the CWIS sessions. Scores averaged 77.8 (SD = 9.1) following the three CWIS sessions improving usability ratings from "marginal acceptability" to "acceptable". Ten usability problems were identified across four PEDDI tasks, comprised of 2-3 types of usability problems per task. CWIS participants suggested redesign solutions that included making data fields for social determinants of health and key background variables for identifying health equity targets mandatory in the electronic health record and using asynchronous communication tools to elicit ideas from staff for adaptations.

CONCLUSIONS

Usability ratings indicated PEDDI was in the acceptable range following CWIS sessions. Staff identified usability problems and redesign solutions that provide direction for future improvements in PEDDI. In addition, this study highlights opportunities to use the CWIS methodology to address inequities in the implementation of cancer screening and other clinical innovations in resource-constrained healthcare settings.

Reported community engagement in health equity research published in high-impact medical journals: a scoping review

OBJECTIVE

To assess reported community engagement in the design and conduct of health equity-focused articles published in high-impact journals.

DESIGN

Scoping review follows guidance from the Joanna Briggs Institute and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews checklist.

DATA SOURCES

We selected the three highest-ranked journals from the 'Medicine-General and Internal' category including the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), The Lancet and The New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) along with all journals under their family of subspecialty journals (JAMA Network, The Lancet Group and the NEJM Group). Ovid MEDLINE was searched between 1 January 2021 to 22 September 2022.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

We included health equity-focused articles and assessed for the reporting of community engagement at each stage of the research process.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Two independent reviewers extracted data from articles that met the inclusionary criteria. Inter-rater reliability was assessed using Cohen's kappa to measure the agreement between two independent reviewers. Disagreements were adjudicated by a third independent reviewer.

RESULTS

7616 articles were screened, 626 (8.2%) met our inclusion criteria: 457 (3.8%) were published by the JAMA Network; 167 (2.4%) by The Lancet Group; and 2 (0.2%) by the NEJM group. Most articles were from USA (68.4%) and focused on adult populations (57.7%). The majority of the articles focused on the topic of race/ethnicity (n=176, 28.1%), socioeconomic status (n=114, 18.2%) or multiple equity topics (n=111, 17.7%). The use of community engagement approaches was reported in 97 (15.5%) articles, of which 13 articles (13.4%) reported engagement at all stages. The most common form of reported engagement was in the acknowledgement or additional contribution section (n=86, 88.7%).

CONCLUSIONS

Community engagement is infrequently reported in health equity-focused research published in high-impact medical journals.

Prioritizing research needs and opportunities at the intersection of implementation science and engagement science

BACKGROUND

There has been increased attention to the need for, and the positive impact of, engaged or participatory science in recent years. Implementation scientists have an opportunity to leverage and contribute to engagement science (ES) through the systematic integration of engagement into implementation science (IS). The purpose of this study was to gather information from researchers and others to develop a prioritized list of research needs and opportunities at the intersection of IS and ES.

METHODS

We conducted three Zoom-based focus groups with 20 researchers to generate a list of unmet needs, barriers, and to describe normative themes about use of ES and IS. Then a panel of nine experts in IS and/or engagement ranked the needs and barriers using a survey and met via a Zoom meeting to discuss and generate research opportunities and questions, with reference to the focus group outputs.

RESULTS

Respondents and experts concurred on the importance of engagement in IS. Focus group participants reported 28 needs and barriers under the themes of 1) need for best practice guidance related to engagement processes and outcomes and 2) structural barriers to integrating ES in IS. The expert panel prioritized six structural barriers and four barriers related to generating best practice guidance, with corresponding recommendations on research opportunities. Example research opportunities related to engagement processes included: define "successful" engagement in IS contexts; adapt engagement tools and best practices from other disciplines into IS. Example research opportunities related to outcomes included: assess the impact of engagement on IS outcomes; examine engagement practices that lead to optimal engaged research. Example research opportunities related to structural barriers included: leverage research evidence to create structural changes needed to expand support for engaged IS; examine factors that influence institutional buy-in of engagement in IS.

CONCLUSIONS

Research needs exist that relate to engagement processes, outcomes, and structural barriers, even for scientists who value engaged research. Expert panelists recommended sequential and reinforcing research opportunities that implementation and engagement scientists can tackle together to advance both fields and health equity. Future work should assess insights from broader invested parties, particularly patients and community members.

Using Participatory Implementation Science to Advance Health Equity

Participatory approaches to implementation science (IS) offer an inclusive, collaborative, and iterative perspective on implementing and sustaining evidence-based interventions (EBIs) to advance health equity. This review provides guidance on the principles and practice of participatory IS, which enables academic researchers, community members, implementers, and other actors to collaboratively integrate practice-, community-, and research-based evidence into public health and health care services. With a foundational focus on supporting academics in coproducing knowledge and action, participatory IS seeks to improve health, reduce inequity, and create transformational change. The three main sections of this review provide (a) a rationale for participatory approaches to research in implementation science, (b) a framework for integrating participatory approaches in research utilizing IS theory and methods, and (c) critical considerations for optimizing the practice and impact of participatory IS. Ultimately, participatory approaches can move IS activities beyond efforts to make EBIs work within harmful systems toward transformative solutions that reshape these systems to center equity.

Aligning the planning, development, and implementation of complex interventions to local contexts with an equity focus: application of the PRISM/RE-AIM Framework

For the fields of implementation science and health equity, understanding and being responsive to local contexts is of utmost importance to better inform the development, implementation, and evaluation of healthcare and public health interventions to increase their uptake and sustainment. Contexts are multi-level and include political, historical, economic, and social factors that influence health, as well as organizational characteristics, reflecting the richness of members' views, resources, values, and needs. Poor alignment between solutions and those contextual characteristics could have an impact on inequities. The PRISM (Practical Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model) is a context-based implementation science framework that incorporates RE-AIM outcomes (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, Maintenance) and offers guidance to researchers, practitioners, and their patient and community partners on how to conceptualize, assess, and address contextual domains with a focus on health equity. Drawing from systems thinking, participatory engagement, and health equity principles, this commentary expands on previous work to 1) offer a novel perspective on how to align an intervention's core functions and forms with the PRISM's contextual domains, and 2) foster an ongoing and iterative engagement process with diverse partners throughout the research and practice process using a co-creation approach. We recommend intervention-to-context alignment through iterative cycles. To that end, we present the RE-AIM Framework's 'outcomes cascade' to illustrate touch points of opportunity and gaps within and across each of the five RE-AIM outcomes to illustrate 'where things go wrong'. We present a case study to illustrate and offer recommendations for research and practice efforts to increase contextual responsiveness, and enhance alignment with context before, during, and after implementation efforts and to ensure equity is being addressed. We strive to make a conceptual contribution to advance the field of pragmatic research and implementation of evidence-based practices through the application of the contextually-based PRISM framework with a focus on health equity.

Adaptation of the brainwriting premortem technique to inform the co-creation of COVID-19 testing strategies in underserved communities in South San Diego

INTRODUCTION

Meaningful engagement of partners in co-creating and refining health-related programs can increase the initial uptake, sustained implementation, broad reach, and effectiveness of these programs. This is especially important for underserved communities where resources are limited and need to be prioritized. Brainwriting premortem is a novel qualitative approach to partner engagement that combines the strengths of individual idea generation with the concept of premortem exercise that addresses failure points prior to the implementation of new programs.

METHODS

An adapted form of brainwriting premortem was used to inform iterative refinements to a COVID-19 testing program at a Federally Qualified Health Center (FQHC) in San Diego. Patients and providers from the FQHC participated in interviews at two time points (early- and mid-implementation of the program). Interview data were transcribed, translated, and analyzed using a rapid qualitative approach. Key themes and sub-themes were identified and used to inform refinements to the program.

RESULTS

A total of 11 patients (7 Spanish- and 4 English-speaking) and 8 providers participated in the brainwriting premortem interviews. Key themes related to possible reasons for COVID-19 testing program failure: advertising/sharing information; access to testing; handling of test results; staff and patient safety; patient beliefs and views regarding the SARS-CoV-2 virus; and COVID-19 testing options offered. Proposed solutions were offered for the key failures except for patient beliefs and views regarding the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Additional solutions offered were related to education, physical operations, and recruitment strategies. Real-time changes to the program flow and components were made in response to 7 suggestions from patients and 11 from providers. Changes related to the process of returning results were the most common, and included sending results via email with distinct workflows based on the test result.

CONCLUSION

The implementation of the adapted brainwriting premortem technique allowed us to incorporate the perspective of key partners in the delivery and iterative refinement of the COVID-19 testing program. This was an effective tool in the context of an FQHC and can be a promising and approach to incorporate iterative input from patients and providers to ensure successful program implementation. Future studies, particularly those requiring rapid response to public health emergencies, should consider the use of this technique.

Lessons Learned From a Community-Based Men's Health Fair

INTRODUCTION

Strategies are needed to promote the uptake of preventive health services among Black, Hispanic, and rural men because these men underutilize health services. Previous research indicates that men prefer community-based health promotion programming, such as health fairs; however, specific guidance on how to tailor health fairs for Black, Hispanic, and rural men are lacking. The present seeks to study provides that guidance.

METHODS

A multisectoral team developed, implemented, and evaluated a men's health fair in a county of South Carolina with a sizeable Black, Hispanic, and rural-dwelling population. Although the health fair was open to all men in the county, specific outreach campaigns were implemented to attract Black and Hispanic men. The health fair occurred on Father's Day weekend in 2023 and consisted of health screenings, health information, and other resources (eg, condoms, research studies). Participants who attended the health fair were asked to complete a check-in survey (N = 103) that assessed demographic information and how they heard about the health fair, followed by a survey (N = 58) that assessed facilitators/barriers to participation in a men's health fair.

RESULTS

Results were stratified by the gender of respondent. The results highlight the facilitators/barriers experienced by men to attending health fairs and also highlight important differences in facilitators/barriers for men to attend a health fair as perceived by men and women.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings have implications for the design and implementation of future men's health fairs to promote preventive health service use among Black, Hispanic, and rural men.