Authors:
Christian D. Helfrich & Lucy A. Savitz
University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.
Subscription Required for Full Text Access
Published: October 2020
Christian D. Helfrich & Lucy A. Savitz
University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.
Published: October 2020
Tiffany Courtnage, Nicole E. Bates, Anne A. Armstrong, M. Katherine Seitz, Tammy S. Weitzman, & Jesse R. Fann
University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.
Published: October 2020
Grace Kuo Chair, Jennifer L. Bacci, Michelle A. Chui, Joel Farley, Peter M. Gannett, Sheldon G. Holstad, Melanie Livet, and Dorothy Farrell
University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.
Published: October 2020
Katrina F. Ortblad, Peter Mogere, Elizabeth Bukusi, Kenneth Ngure, & Jared M. Baeten
University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.
Published: September 2020
Several African countries have recently integrated pre‐exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) into their national HIV prevention programmes and are in the process of scaling‐up healthcare facility‐based PrEP delivery. To maximize the public health benefit of PrEP, there is need to prioritize access, minimize the costs of delivery and reach HIV at‐risk populations. Major barriers to facility‐based PrEP delivery exist, including facility‐associated HIV stigma, long waiting times, the costs of staffing and providers’ unfamiliarity with delivering prevention interventions. In Africa, PrEP is also being added to public health infrastructures that are sometimes burdened by overcrowding and drug stock outs. Thus, the ability of African health systems to maximize PrEP access necessitates finding novel models of PrEP delivery.
In low‐resource settings, including a number of African settings, private pharmacies fill an important gap in the medical system and individuals often rely on and prefer the use of pharmacies over healthcare facilities to address their medical needs. Pharmacies can address care needs that are both urgent (e.g. evaluation and medication for sexually transmitted infections) and preventive (e.g. contraception) and have advantages over healthcare facilities, including increased convenience and provider engagement. Compared to providers at healthcare facilities, providers at pharmacies can often spend more time with clients because they do not have to focus on treating sick patients and build better rapport with clients because they are for‐profit businesses that rely on repeat services. In low‐resource settings, it is common for individuals to first go to a pharmacy to address a medical issue (e.g. symptoms of malaria), then only go to a healthcare facility later if the issue is not resolved.
Delivery of PrEP through pharmacies is one approach being utilized in the US to improve PrEP accessibility. In Seattle, the... [READ MORE]
**This abstract is posted with permission under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License**
Manasi Kumar, Keng-Yen Huang, Caleb Othieno, Dalton Wamalwa, Kimberly Hoagwood, Jurgen Unutzer, Shekhar Saxena, Inge Petersen, Simon Njuguna, Beatrice Amugune, Onesmus Gachuno, Fred Ssewamala & Mary McKay
University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.
Published: September 2020
Addressing adolescent pregnancies associated health burden demands new ways of organizing maternal and child mental health services to meet multiple needs of this group. There is a need to strengthen integration of sustainable evidence-based mental health interventions in primary health care settings for pregnant adolescents. The proposed study is guided by implementation science frameworks with key objective of implementing a pilot trial testing a full IPT-G version along with IPT-G mini version under the mhGAP/IPT-G service framework and to study feasibility of the integrated mhGAP/IPT-G adolescent peripartum depression care delivery model and estimate if a low cost and compressed version of IPT-G intervention would result in similar size of effect on mental health and family functioning as the Full IPT-G.
There are two sub- studies embedded which are: 1) To identify multi-level system implementation barriers and strategies guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to enhance perinatal mhGAP-depression care and evidence-based intervention integration (i.e., group interpersonal psychotherapy; IPT-G) for pregnant adolescents in primary care contexts; 2) To use findings from aim 1 and observational data from Maternal and Child Health (MCH) clinics that run within primary health care facilities to develop a mental health implementation workflow plan that has buy-in from key stakeholders, as well as to develop a modified protocol and implementation training manual for building health facility staff’s capacity in implementing the integrated mhGAP/IPT-G depression care.
For the primary objective of studying feasibility of the integrated mhGAP/IPT-G depression care in MCH service context for adolescent perinatal depression, we will recruit 90 pregnant adolescents to a three-arm pilot intervention (unmasked) trial study (IPT-G Full, IPT-G Mini, and wait-list control in the context of mhGAP care). Pregnant adolescents ages 13–18, in their 1st-2nd trimester with a depression score of 13 and above on EPDS would be recruited. Proctor’s implementation evaluation model will be used. Feasibility and acceptability of the intervention implementation and size of effects on mental health and family functioning will be estimated using mixed method data collection from caregivers of adolescents, adolescents, and health care providers. In the two sub-studies, stakeholders representing diverse perspectives will be recruited and focus group discussions data will be gathered.
For aim 2, to build capacity for mhGAP-approach of adolescent depression care and research, the implementation-capacity training manual will be applied to train 20 providers, 12 IPT-G implementers/health workers and 16 Kenyan researchers. Acceptability and appropriateness of the training approach will be assessed. Additional feedback related to co-located service delivery model, task-shifting and task-sharing approach of IPT-G delivery will be gathered for further manual improvement.
This intervention and service design are in line with policy priority of Government of Kenya, Kenya Vision 2030, World Health Organization, and UN Sustainable Development Goals that focus on improving capacity of mental health service systems to reduce maternal, child, adolescent health and mental health disparities in LMICs. Successfully carrying out this study in Kenya will provide an evidence-based intervention service development and implementation model for adolescents in other Sub-Saharan African (SSA) countries. The study is funded by FIC/NIH under K43 grant.
**This abstract is posted with permission under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License**
Amy Drahota, Rosemary D. Meza, Tatiana E. Bustos, Aksheya Sridhar, Jonathan I. Martinez, Brigitte Brikho, Aubyn C. Stahmer, Gregory A. Aarons
University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.
Published: September 2020
Cyrus Mugo, Irene Njuguna, Margaret Nduati, Vincent Omondi, Verlinda Otieno, Florence Nyapara, Elizabeth Mabele, Hellen Moraa, Kenneth Sherr, Irene Inwani, Elizabeth Maleche-Obimbo, Dalton Wamalwa, Grace John-Stewart, Jennifer Slyker, Anjuli D Wagner
University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.
Published: September 2020
Gloria D. Coronado, Jennifer L. Schneider, Beverly B. Green, Jennifer K. Coury, Malaika R. Schwartz, Yogini Kulkarni-Sharma & Laura Mae Baldwin
University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.
Published: September 2020
Promoting uptake of evidence-based innovations in healthcare systems requires attention to how innovations are adapted to enhance their fit with a given setting. Little is known about real-world variation in how programs are delivered over time and across multiple populations and contexts, and what motivates adaptations.
As part of the BeneFIT study of mailed fecal immunochemical tests (FIT) to increase colorectal cancer screening, we interviewed 9 leaders from two participating Medicaid/Medicare health insurance plans to examine adaptations to their health plan-initiated mailed FIT outreach programs in the second year of implementation. We applied an adaptation and modification model developed by Stirman and colleagues to document content and context modifications made to the two programs.
Both health plans made substantial changes to their programs in the second year; adaptations differed substantially across health plans. In Health Plan Oregon, adaptations generally targeted health centers and member populations, most content adaptations involved tailoring program components, and the program was expanded to four additional health centers. In contrast, Health Plan Washington’s second-year content adaptations were primarily at the level of members, and generally involved adding program components. Moreover, Health Plan Washington undertook large-scale context adaptations to the setting where the program was led (local vs. national), the personnel who administered the program (vendor and staffing), and the population selected for outreach (limiting outreach to dual-eligible members).
Both programs implemented a variety of adaptations that reflected the values and incentives of the broader health plan contexts. Financial incentives for screening allowed Health Plan Oregon to expand but led Health Plan Washington to offer more targeted outreach to a subset of eligible enrollees. The breadth of changes made by each health system reflects the necessity of evaluating programs in context and adjusting to specific challenges as they are identified. Further research is needed to understand the effects of these types of adaptations on program efficiency and enrollee and health system outcomes.
**This abstract is posted with permission under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License**
Arianna Rubin Means, Anjuli D. Wagner, Eli Kern, Laura P. Newman, and Bryan J. Weiner
University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.
Published: September 2020
The COVID-19 pandemic continues to expand globally, requiring massive public health responses from national and local governments. These bodies have taken heterogeneous approaches to their responses, including when and how to introduce and enforce evidence-based interventions—such as social distancing, hand-washing, personal protective equipment (PPE), and testing. In this commentary, we reflect on opportunities for implementation science to contribute meaningfully to the COVID-19 pandemic response. We reflect backwards on missed opportunities in emergency preparedness planning, using the example of PPE stockpiling and supply management; this planning could have been strengthened through process mapping with consensus-building, microplanning with simulation, and stakeholder engagement.
We propose current opportunities for action, focusing on enhancing the adoption, fidelity, and sustainment of hand washing and social distancing; we can combine qualitative data, policy analysis, and dissemination science to inform agile and rapid adjustment to social marketing strategies to enhance their penetration. We look to future opportunities to enhance the integration of new evidence in decision-making, focusing on serologic and virologic testing systems; we can leverage simulation and other systems engineering modeling to identify ideal system structures. Finally, we discuss the ways in which the COVID-19 pandemic challenges implementation science to become more rapid, rigorous, and nimble in its approach, and integrate with public health practice. In summary, we articulate the ways in which implementation science can inform, and be informed by, the COVID-19 pandemic, looking backwards, proposing actions for the moment, and approaches for the future.
**This abstract is posted with permission under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License**
Bryan J. Weiner, Kayne D. Mettert, Caitlin N. Dorsey, Elspeth A. Nolen, Cameo Stanick, Byron J. Powell, & Cara C. Lewis
University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.
Published: August 2020
Systematic measure reviews can facilitate advances in implementation research and practice by locating reliable, valid, pragmatic measures; identifying promising measures needing refinement and testing; and highlighting measurement gaps. This review identifies and evaluates the psychometric and pragmatic properties of measures of readiness for implementation and its sub-constructs as delineated in the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research: leadership engagement, available resources, and access to knowledge and information.
The systematic review methodology is described fully elsewhere. The review, which focused on measures used in mental or behavioral health, proceeded in three phases. Phase I, data collection, involved search string generation, title and abstract screening, full text review, construct assignment, and cited citation searches. Phase II, data extraction, involved coding relevant psychometric and pragmatic information. Phase III, data analysis, involved two trained specialists independently rating each measure using Psychometric and Pragmatic Evidence Rating Scales (PAPERS). Frequencies and central tendencies summarized information availability and PAPERS ratings.
Searches identified 9 measures of readiness for implementation, 24 measures of leadership engagement, 17 measures of available resources, and 6 measures of access to knowledge and information. Information about internal consistency was available for most measures. Information about other psychometric properties was often not available. Ratings for internal consistency were “adequate” or “good.” Ratings for other psychometric properties were less than “adequate.” Information on pragmatic properties was most often available regarding cost, language readability, and brevity. Information was less often available regarding training burden and interpretation burden. Cost and language readability generally exhibited “good” or “excellent” ratings, interpretation burden generally exhibiting “minimal” ratings, and training burden and brevity exhibiting mixed ratings across measures.
Measures of readiness for implementation and its sub-constructs used in mental health and behavioral health care are unevenly distributed, exhibit unknown or low psychometric quality, and demonstrate mixed pragmatic properties. This review identified a few promising measures, but targeted efforts are needed to systematically develop and test measures that are useful for both research and practice.
Successful implementation of effective mental health or behavioral health treatments in service delivery settings depends in part on the readiness of the service providers and administrators to implement the treatment; the engagement of organizational leaders in the implementation effort; the resources available to support implementation, such as time, money, space, and training; and the accessibility of knowledge and information among service providers about the treatment and how it works. It is important that the methods for measuring these factors are dependable, accurate, and practical; otherwise, we cannot assess their presence or strength with confidence or know whether efforts to increase their presence or strength have worked. This systematic review of published studies sought to identify and evaluate the quality of questionnaires (referred to as measures) that assess readiness for implementation, leadership engagement, available resources, and access to knowledge and information. We identified 56 measures of these factors and rated their quality in terms of how dependable, accurate, and practical they are. Our findings indicate there is much work to be done to improve the quality of available measures; we offer several recommendations for doing so.
**This abstract is posted with permission under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License**