Network-Based Delivery and Sustainment of Evidence-Based Prevention in Community-Clinical Partnerships Addressing Health Equity: A Qualitative Exploration

Making the connection between health equity and sustainability

Sustainability and health inequities are key challenges in public health and healthcare. Research suggests that only about half of evidence-based interventions (EBIs) are sustained over time, and settings and populations experiencing systemic and structural barriers to health (e.g., poverty, racism, stigma, and discrimination) experience even greater challenges to sustainability. In this article, we argue that an enhanced focus on sustainability in the field of implementation science is critical in order to maximize the long-term health benefits and broader societal impacts of EBIs for all populations and settings. From an equity perspective, a focus on sustainability is particularly critical to prioritize among population sub-groups that have not historically received the benefits of health-related EBIs. We discuss how a health equity framing is essential to sustaining EBIs in under-resourced communities, and requires moving away from a deficit mindset that focuses on why EBIs are challenging to sustain, to one that focuses more on identifying and nurturing existing assets within individuals and communities to increase the likelihood that EBIs are sustained. We conclude with a discussion of future directions as well as recommendations and resources (e.g., frameworks, tools) to advance and make progress toward sustainability from a health equity mindset, including: (1) Actively planning early for sustainability alongside key partners; (2) Tracking progress toward enhancing sustainability and being accountable in doing so equitably for all settings and populations; and (3) Focusing on both equity and engagement early and often throughout the research process and all implementation phases.

Implementation of evidence-based primary cancer prevention interventions in MA community health centers: an explanatory sequential mixed methods study

BACKGROUND

More than half of cancers could be prevented by employing evidence-based interventions (EBIs), including prevention interventions targeting nutrition, physical activity, and tobacco. Federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) are the primary source of patient care for over 30 million Americans - making them an optimal setting for ensuring evidence-based prevention that advances health equity. The aims of this study are to (1) determine the degree to which primary cancer prevention EBIs are being implemented within Massachusetts FQHCs and (2) describe how these EBIs are implemented internally and via community partnerships.

METHODS

We used an explanatory sequential mixed methods design to assess the implementation of cancer prevention EBIs. First, we collected 34 quantitative surveys from staff at 16 FQHCs across Massachusetts to determine the frequency of EBI implementation. We followed up with 12 qualitative one-on-one interviews among a sample of staff to understand how the EBIs selected on the survey were implemented. Exploration of contextual influences on implementation and use of partnerships was guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Quantitative data were summarized descriptively, and qualitative analyses used reflexive, thematic approaches, beginning deductively with codes from CFIR, then inductively coding additional categories.

RESULTS

All FQHCs indicated they offered clinic-based tobacco interventions, such as clinician-delivered screening practices and prescription of tobacco cessation medications. Quitline interventions and some diet/physical activity EBIs were available at all FQHCs, but staff perceptions of penetration were low. Only 38% of FQHCs offered group tobacco cessation counseling and 63% referred patients to mobile phone-based cessation interventions. We found multilevel factors influenced implementation across intervention types - including the complexity of intervention trainings, available time and staffing, motivation of clinicians, funding, and external policies and incentives. While partnerships were described as valuable, only one FQHC reported using clinical-community linkages for primary cancer prevention EBIs.

CONCLUSIONS

Adoption of primary prevention EBIs in Massachusetts FQHCs is relatively high, but stable staffing and funding are required to successfully reach all eligible patients. FQHC staff are enthusiastic about the potential of community partnerships to foster improved implementation-providing training and support to build these relationships will be key to fulfilling that promise.

Similar skills, different frames: a thematic analysis exploring conceptualizations held by community-based organization practitioners and academics regarding skills to use evidence-based interventions to address cancer inequities

BACKGROUND

Community-based organizations (CBOs) are critical partners in delivering evidence-based interventions (EBIs) to address cancer inequities. However, CBO practitioners do not typically have access to opportunities to build the necessary capacity (skills, knowledge, motivation, and resources) for using EBIs. Although capacity-building interventions can offer a solution, inconsistent definitions and measurements of capacity limit the ability to develop and evaluate such efforts. We explored how and why conceptualizations of core skills for EBI use differ between practitioners and academics addressing cancer and other health inequities. We anchored the inquiry with a commonly used set of target skills for EBI capacity-building efforts.

METHODS

The study was conducted by an interdisciplinary team of academic researchers and CBO practitioners. We gathered data through semi-structured, hour-long interviews with practitioners and academics working to address cancer and other health inequities (n = 19). After hearing a brief vignette about a CBO addressing cervical cancer inequities, participants considered a widely accepted list of skills for EBI use that included assessing needs, engaging stakeholders, and selecting, adapting, implementing, evaluating, and sustaining the EBI. We used a team-based, reflexive thematic analysis approach grounded in critical and constructivist perspectives.

RESULTS

Overall, the original list resonated with practitioners and academics and they added new skills to the list (cultural humility and systems change). Practitioners' responses described skills from the reference point of addressing broader community needs and context and achieving change over the long term, emphasizing aspects of health promotion in their descriptions. Academics offered a mix of perspectives, with some focused on addressing community needs (and related flexibility regarding EBIs) but more emphasized skills needed to deliver a specific EBI to achieve a focused set of health and equity outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a significant opportunity to leverage complementary expertise and perspectives held by practitioners and academics addressing cancer inequities. However, the different frames utilized suggest proactive efforts will be required to find alignment across groups, particularly in valuing diverse contributions and identifying relevant outcomes of interest for each group. Such alignment is critical to designing effective capacity-building interventions and supporting the routine utilization of EBIs to address cancer inequities.

Effective leaders(hip) in community-academic health partnership projects: An inductive, qualitative study

To deepen our understanding of how project leaders can lead effectively in different community-academic health partnerships (CAHPs), we conducted an inductive, qualitative study through semi-structured interviews (N = 32) and analyzed the data with Grounded Theory approaches. By presenting a process model illustrating the cycle of effective leaders(hip) in CAHP projects, we contribute to the literature on CAHP, leadership development, and complexity leadership theory in three ways. Firstly, the model depicts the strategies enabling leaders to navigate typical project challenges and perform leadership tasks effectively. Secondly, we distill four beneficial qualities (i.e., adopting a proactive attitude, having an open and adaptive mindset, relying on peer learning and support, and emphasizing self-growth and reflexivity) which CAHP project leaders require to develop themselves into effective leaders. Thirdly, we illustrate leaders' dynamic developmental logics and processes of effective leadership and their contributions to better project functioning in diverse CAHPs.

Development and Feasibility Testing of the Clinical-Community Linkage Self-Assessment Survey for Community Organizations

Introduction

Clinical-community linkages (CCLs) can improve health, but few instruments exist to evaluate these partnerships. To address this gap, we develop and test the Clinical-Community Linkage Self-Assessment Survey (CCL Self-Assessment).

Materials and Methods

We built on an existing framework and conducted a literature review to guide the design of our survey, and obtained feedback from academic, clinical, and community-based experts. To pretest the instrument, we conducted 10 think-aloud interviews with community-based health-promotion organizations. We performed feasibility testing with 38 staff from 20 community organizations, followed by criterion-validity testing.

Results

The 15-item final instrument includes five domains: Nature of the Relationship, Communication, Referral Process, Feedback Loop, and Timeliness. Expert feedback included keeping the CCL Self-Assessment brief and actionable. Think-aloud interviews produced a range of revisions related to item wording, instructions, brevity, and formatting. Feasibility testing showed high response rate and ease of administration. Sites scoring high on the CCL Self-Assessment also scored high on the criterion measure.

Discussion

We demonstrate feasibility, as well as face, content, construct, and criterion validity. Initial results suggest the CCL Self-Assessment survey may be used by community organizations to identify strengths and weaknesses of their linkages. Next steps include additional statistical validation and testing to determine how the CCL Self-Assessment survey works in the field as well as providing specific tools to improve linkages.

Implementation of Evidence-Based Disease Self-Management Programs in a Rural Region: Leveraging and Linking Community and Health Care System Assets

CONTEXT

Rural populations experience both a higher prevalence of and risk for premature death from chronic conditions than do their urban counterparts. Yet barriers to implement community-based chronic disease self-management programs persist.

PROGRAM

The Living Well program, a multi-sector collaboration between a rural health care system and a network of community-based organizations, has offered the 6-week evidence-based Chronic Disease Self-Management and Diabetes Self-Management workshops since 2017. The program was a response to a quality improvement initiative to improve hypertension and diabetes outcomes throughout the health care system.

IMPLEMENTATION

Using the rapid cycling quality improvement process, Living Well developed a self-management program recruitment, referral, and coordinating office for a six-county region. Through continuous capacity-building efforts with community partners, as well as leveraging key health care system assets such as the electronic health record and provider detailing, program reach and adoption was increased.

EVALUATION

The Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance framework was used for the process evaluation. During 3 years, more than 750 individuals engaged with the program, with nearly 600 completing a workshop. The region saw increased engagement by primary care clinicians to refer, and structural changes were embedded into the health care system to facilitate clinic-community partnerships.

DISCUSSION

A coordinated, multi-sector approach is necessary to develop solutions to complex, chronic health problems. A regional coordinating hub is an effective strategy for implementing community-based programs in rural areas. However, low health care system engagement and fragmented funding remain as barriers to optimal implementation.

Evaluation of a Peer Led Chronic Pain Self-Management Program in a Rural Population

BACKGROUND

The Chronic Pain Self-Management Program is an evidence-based intervention that has been shown to be efficacious in reducing symptoms of chronic pain. However, there is a paucity of research examining CPSMP in a predominantly rural population. The purpose was to evaluate patient-reported outcomes of in-person peer-led CPSMP workshops offered in a rural region in 2018 and 2019.

METHODS

Participants were surveyed at baseline and 6 months post-workshop. Descriptive statistics were used to describe characteristics of CPSMP completers. Paired t-tests were used to analyze change in depression score (PHQ-8), disability (modified Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire), self-efficacy, and patient activation (PAM-10). Analysis of variance was used to detect differences over time by age group, education, insurance type, self-rated health, and comorbidities.

RESULTS

Among the 327 adults who enrolled in a workshop, 73.1% completed. Of completers, 74.9% were female, average age was 65. Significant improvements were observed in pain disability (P = .0008), patient activation (P = .0362), depression (P < .0001), and self-efficacy (P < .0001), at 6 weeks; and pain disability (P = .0030), depression (P = .0015), and self-efficacy (P = .0064) at 6 months post-program. Individuals who rated their health as fair/poor at baseline reported greater improvements in depression scores than individuals who rated their health as good or better (P < .0002). There were also distinct patterns of change in pain disability among the different age groups. No other differences between groups were noted.

CONCLUSIONS

The CPSMP appears to improve pain self-efficacy, disability, and depression regardless of age, gender, insurance status, education, or comorbidities. Healthcare and community organizations should consider investing in and offering chronic pain workshops in rural areas in order to promote health and wellness.

Sustainable Technologies for Older Adults

The exponential evolution of technology and the growth of the elderly population are two phenomena that will inevitably interact with increasing frequency in the future. This paper analyses scientific literature as a means of furthering progress in sustainable technology for senior living. We carried out a bibliometric analysis of papers published in this area and compiled by the Web of Science (WOS) and Scopus, examining the main participants and advances in the field from 2000 to the first quarter of 2021. The study describes some interesting research projects addressing three different aspects of older adults’ daily lives—health, daily activities and wellbeing—and policies to promote healthy aging and improve the sustainability of the healthcare system. It also looks at lines of research into transversal characteristics of technology. Our analysis showed that publications mentioning sustainability technologies for older adults have been growing progressively since the 2000s, but that the big increase in the number of research works in this area took place during the period 2016–2021. These more recent works show a tendency to study those factors that improve healthy aging, ensure the social inclusion of the elderly through technology and prolong the time in which they can live independent lives thanks to smart environments. Current research gaps in the literature are also discussed.

Pragmatic approaches to analyzing qualitative data for implementation science: an introduction

Qualitative methods are critical for implementation science as they generate opportunities to examine complexity and include a diversity of perspectives. However, it can be a challenge to identify the approach that will provide the best fit for achieving a given set of practice-driven research needs. After all, implementation scientists must find a balance between speed and rigor, reliance on existing frameworks and new discoveries, and inclusion of insider and outsider perspectives. This paper offers guidance on taking a pragmatic approach to analysis, which entails strategically combining and borrowing from established qualitative approaches to meet a study's needs, typically with guidance from an existing framework and with explicit research and practice change goals.Section 1 offers a series of practical questions to guide the development of a pragmatic analytic approach. These include examining the balance of inductive and deductive procedures, the extent to which insider or outsider perspectives are privileged, study requirements related to data and products that support scientific advancement and practice change, and strategic resource allocation. This is followed by an introduction to three approaches commonly considered for implementation science projects: grounded theory, framework analysis, and interpretive phenomenological analysis, highlighting core analytic procedures that may be borrowed for a pragmatic approach. Section 2 addresses opportunities to ensure and communicate rigor of pragmatic analytic approaches. Section 3 provides an illustrative example from the team's work, highlighting how a pragmatic analytic approach was designed and executed and the diversity of research and practice products generated.As qualitative inquiry gains prominence in implementation science, it is critical to take advantage of qualitative methods' diversity and flexibility. This paper furthers the conversation regarding how to strategically mix and match components of established qualitative approaches to meet the analytic needs of implementation science projects, thereby supporting high-impact research and improved opportunities to create practice change.