Coaching Archives - Implementation Science at UW

✪ Study protocol for a hybrid type 3 effectiveness-implementation trial of a team-based implementation strategy to support educators’ use of a social engagement intervention

Abstract:

Background

Remaking Recess (RR) is a school-based evidence-based peer social engagement intervention for autistic students. RR involves direct training and coaching with educators; however, educators face several barriers to implementation at both the individual- and organizational-levels. This protocol paper describes a multi-site study that will test whether an educator-level implementation strategy, coaching, with or without a school-level implementation strategy, school-based teams, will maximize educators’ use (fidelity and sustainment) of RR for autistic students and their peers who are socially-isolated, rejected, or peripheral and may need additional support during recess.

Methods

This study will employ a hybrid type-3 effectiveness-implementation trial. Fifty-five elementary schools will be recruited as well as 121 educators (e.g., classroom assistants, aides), 55 general and special educator teachers, and 83–138 other school personnel (e.g., administrators). Additionally, at least 118 autistic students and allistic or non-autistic classmates will be recruited as RR recipients. Participants will complete baseline assessments at the beginning of the year, and all schools will be provided RR training. Schools will be randomized to coaching with or without school-based teams. This study will measure RR fidelity (primary outcome), RR sustainment, as well as peer engagement, social network inclusion, and social skills (secondary outcomes). It is expected that coaching with school-based teams will improve both RR fidelity and social network inclusion, while coaching with and without school-based teams will result in improved peer engagement and social skills.

Discussion

Previous research has documented barriers to RR implementation at both the individual- (provider) and organization-level (school). Using multi-level implementation strategies such as coaching with school-based teams may address these barriers and support RR implementation in schools. Findings from this study may guide future efforts to scale up tailored implementation strategies for use in public school districts, with the ultimate goal of increasing intervention access and improving student outcomes.

Trial registration

Name of the Registry: clinicaltrials.gov.
Trial Registration: Clinical Trials ID: NCT06559267.
Date of Registration: August 15, 2024. Prospectively registered.

Contributions to the literature

Remaking Recess (RR) is an intervention that improves peer engagement and classroom inclusion in autistic students. Educators, who play an important role in supporting autistic youth and their peers who are socially-isolated, rejected, or peripheral during the school day and at recess, can deliver RR.
Schools face many challenges, at both the individual- (i.e., educator) and organizational-levels (i.e., school), when implementing new interventions.
This study will evaluate the impact of two implementation strategies on the fidelity and sustainment of RR: (a) individual direct coaching for educators (coaching), and (b) supporting a team of school personnel (school-based teams) in addition to coaching.

^{**This abstract is posted with permission under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License**}

✪ A Team Coaching Intervention for Dementia Care: Acceptability and Feasibility Study in Care Communities

Abstract:

Objectives

In 2018, the Alzheimer's Association published the Dementia Care Practice Recommendations (DCPR) to provide guidance on quality care for professionals. This study aimed to examine the feasibility and acceptability of a consultative coaching program to increase adoption of the DCPR.

Design

A single-group pre-post design was employed. A 6-month team coaching intervention was implemented to make organization-wide and measurable changes in the areas of (1) policies and procedures, (2) education and training, or (3) care practices to increase person-centered care practices.

Setting and Participants

A total of 36 care communities in Washington and Montana states were enrolled in this program.

Methods

Focus groups were conducted with participants to explore the acceptability and feasibility of the program. A 35-item employees satisfaction survey was administered both before and after the program.

Results

The findings offer preliminary evidence that implementing a coaching program is desired by care community staff and has a positive impact on staff job satisfaction and the use of person-centered care. The coaching model was received by staff as a supportive and affirming program.

Conclusions and Implications

The team coaching intervention, designed to improve person-centered care and employee satisfaction, is acceptable. However, its efficacy needs to be tested with a larger sample using a randomized controlled design.

^{**This abstract is posted with permission under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License**}

✪ Formative evaluation of the implementation of digital therapeutics for opioids and other substance use disorders in primary care (DIGITS trial)

Abstract:

Background

Substance use disorders (SUDs) result in individual and societal burden. However, most individuals with SUD receive no treatment. Implementing SUD interventions in primary care could address this population's treatment needs. In the USA, reSET® and reSET-O® were the first prescription digital therapeutics (PDTs) for SUDs and opioid use disorder (OUD), respectively. The Digital Treatments for Substance Use Disorder (DIGITS) study tested the effectiveness of practice facilitation and health coaching strategies to support reSET and reSET-O implementation into primary care. A formative evaluation was conducted to monitor implementation, inform adaptations, and learn what promotes PDT sustainment.

Method

The Dynamic Sustainability Framework and the Framework for Reporting Adaptations and Modifications to Evidence-based Implementation Strategies guided the evaluation. Using rapid qualitative methods, we collected and analyzed observational fieldnotes, key informant interviews, and document sources (e.g., meeting minutes) for synthesis and dissemination to clinical partners and the study team via formative reports. We analyzed the reports to generate evaluation results.

Results

Twenty-four primary care clinics participated. Evaluation data included 98 observational fieldnotes, 16 interviews, and 253 document sources. We produced nine formative reports. The study encountered barriers and facilitators in each DSF domain (ecological system, practice setting, and intervention). In the ecological system, the PDT vendor enabled the study, but the COVID-19 pandemic, laws, regulations, and contracting delayed implementation. In the practice setting, staff shortages and low clinic capacity were implementation challenges, while electronic health record capabilities were both barriers and facilitators. At the intervention level, non-routine workflows, clinician burden, and low patient engagement were barriers despite clinicians’ efforts.

Conclusions

Digital therapeutics are promising SUD and OUD treatments, but integration into primary care requires conducive laws and regulations, organizational capacity, and patient and clinician engagement. Formative evaluation identified important lessons for future PDT implementation.

Plain Language Summary

Evaluation of the integration of digital treatments for opioid and other substance use disorders in primary care

Most people with substance use disorders (SUDs) receive no treatment. In the USA, two smartphone app-based digital treatments for SUD and opioid use disorders (OUDs) became available by prescription. The Digital Treatments for Substance Use Disorder (DIGITS) study, a randomized implementation trial, tested how best to integrate these digital treatments for SUD and OUD into primary care. Throughout the study, we conducted a formative evaluation to observe progress, recommend implementation improvements, and understand how digital treatments could be offered to patients after the study ended. For this evaluation, we collected qualitative data through observing study meetings and interviewing primary care leaders, clinicians, and clinical and study staff. The data were regularly summarized and reported to our clinical partners and the study team. We used two implementation frameworks to interpret the data: the Dynamic Sustainability Framework and the Framework for Reporting Adaptations and Modifications to Evidence-based Implementation Strategies. The evaluation revealed factors that helped and hindered implementation. Obstacles from outside the health care system included the COVID-19 pandemic, laws, regulations, and delays in setting up contractual agreements, whereas a partnership with the digital treatment vendor proved helpful. Clinics had difficulties with clinician burden, staff shortages, lack of time and available appointments, and performing new and unfamiliar tasks. The electronic health record system both supported and impended implementation. Last, few patients accepted the offered digital treatment, or used it persistently. Formative evaluation results suggest that digital treatments for SUD and OUD in primary care are promising, however their successful use requires supportive laws and regulations, health system resources, and increased patient and clinician engagement.

^{**This abstract is posted with permission under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License**}

✪ Integrating causal pathway diagrams into practice facilitation to address colorectal cancer screening disparities in primary care

Abstract:

Background

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second leading cause of cancer death and the second most common cancer diagnosis among the Hispanic population in the United States. However, CRC screening prevalence remains lower among Hispanic adults than among non-Hispanic white adults. To reduce CRC screening disparities, efforts to implement CRC screening evidence-based interventions in primary care organizations (PCOs) must consider their potential effect on existing screening disparities. More research is needed to understand how to leverage existing implementation science methodologies to improve health disparities. The Coaching to Improve Colorectal Cancer Screening Equity (CoachIQ) pilot study explores whether integrating two implementation science tools, Causal Pathway Diagrams and practice facilitation, is a feasible and effective way to address CRC screening disparities among Hispanic patients.

Methods

We used a quasi-experimental, mixed methods design to evaluate feasibility and assess initial signals of effectiveness of the CoachIQ approach. Three PCOs received coaching from CoachIQ practice facilitators over a 12-month period. Three non-equivalent comparison group PCOs received coaching during the same period as participants in a state quality improvement program. We conducted descriptive analyses of screening rates and coaching activities.

Results

The CoachIQ practice facilitators discussed equity, facilitated prioritization of QI activities, and reviewed CRC screening disparities during a higher proportion of coaching encounters than the comparison group practice facilitator. While the mean overall CRC screening rate in the comparison PCOs increased from 34 to 41%, the mean CRC screening rate for Hispanic patients did not increase from 30%. In contrast, the mean overall CRC screening rate at the CoachIQ PCOs increased from 41 to 44%, and the mean CRC screening rate for Hispanic patients increased from 35 to 39%.

Conclusions

The CoachIQ program merges two implementation science methodologies, practice facilitation and causal pathway diagrams, to help PCOs focus quality improvement efforts on improving CRC screening while also reducing screening disparities. Results from this pilot study demonstrate key differences between CoachIQ facilitation and standard facilitation, and point to the potential of the CoachIQ approach to decrease disparities in CRC screening.

^{**This abstract is posted with permission under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License**}

✪ Implementing evidence-based practices to improve primary care for high-risk patients: study protocol for the VA high-RIsk VETerans (RIVET) type III effectiveness-implementation trial

Abstract:

Background

Patients with significant multimorbidity and other factors that make healthcare challenging to access and coordinate are at high risk for poor health outcomes. Although most (93%) of Veterans’ Health Administration (VHA) patients at high risk for hospitalization or death (“high-risk Veterans”) are primarily managed by primary care teams, few of these teams have implemented evidence-based practices (EBPs) known to improve outcomes for the high-risk patient population’s complex healthcare issues. Effective implementation strategies could increase adoption of these EBPs in primary care; however, the most effective implementation strategies to increase evidence-based care for high-risk patients are unknown.

The high-RIsk VETerans (RIVET) Quality Enhancement Research Initiative (QUERI) will compare two variants of Evidence-Based Quality Improvement (EBQI) strategies to implement two distinct EBPs for high-risk Veterans: individual coaching (EBQI-IC; tailored training with individual implementation sites to meet site-specific needs) versus learning collaborative (EBQI-LC; implementation sites trained in groups to encourage collaboration among sites). One EBP, Comprehensive Assessment and Care Planning (CACP), guides teams in addressing patients’ cognitive, functional, and social needs through a comprehensive care plan. The other EBP, Medication Adherence Assessment (MAA), addresses common challenges to medication adherence using a patient-centered approach.

Methods

We will recruit and randomize 16 sites to either EBQI-IC or EBQI-LC to implement one of the EBPs, chosen by the site. Each site will have a site champion (front-line staff) who will participate in 18 months of EBQI facilitation.

Analysis

We will use a mixed-methods type 3 hybrid Effectiveness-Implementation trial to test EBQI-IC versus EBQI-LC versus usual care using a Concurrent Stepped Wedge design. We will use the Practical, Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model (PRISM) framework to compare and evaluate Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and costs. We will then assess the maintenance/sustainment and spread of both EBPs in primary care after the 18-month implementation period. Our primary outcome will be Reach, measured by the percentage of eligible high-risk patients who received the EBP.

Discussion

Our study will identify which implementation strategy is most effective overall, and under various contexts, accounting for unique barriers, facilitators, EBP characteristics, and adaptations. Ultimately this study will identify ways for primary care clinics and teams to choose implementation strategies that can improve care and outcomes for patients with complex healthcare needs.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05050643. Registered September 9th, 2021, https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05050643

Protocol version

This protocol is Version 1.0 which was created on 6/3/2020.

Contributions to the literature

The first study to compare the effectiveness of Evidence-Based Quality Improvement (EBQI) conducted individually with one site or conducted with a group of sites.
Implementation of evidence-based practices to improve care for high-risk patients in primary care.

^{**This abstract is posted with permission under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License**}

✪ “Veteran to Veteran, there’s automatically a trust”: A qualitative study of Veterans’ experiences in a peer health coaching program for hypertension

✪ Improving safety and preventing falls using an evidence-based, front-line staff huddling practice: protocol for a pragmatic trial to increase quality of care in State Veterans Homes, Katherine Ritchey

Abstract:

Introduction

Falls in nursing homes are a major cause for decreases in residents’ quality of life and overall health. This study aims to reduce resident falls by implementing the LOCK Falls Programme, an evidence-based quality improvement intervention. The LOCK Falls Programme involves the entire front-line care team in (1) focusing on evidence of positive change, (2) collecting data through systematic observation and (3) facilitating communication and coordination of care through the practice of front-line staff huddles.

Methods and analysis

The study protocol describes a mixed-methods, 4-year hybrid (type 2) effectiveness-implementation study in State Veterans Homes in the USA. The study uses a pragmatic stepped-wedge randomised trial design and employs relational coordination theory and the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation and Maintenance framework to guide implementation and evaluation. A total of eight State Veterans Homes will participate and data will be collected over an 18-month period. Administrative data inclusive of all clinical assessments and Minimum Data Set assessments for Veterans with a State Veterans Home admission or stay during the study period will be collected (8480 residents total). The primary outcome is a resident having any fall. The primary analysis will be a partial intention-to-treat analysis using the rate of participants experiencing any fall. A staff survey (n=1200) and qualitative interviews with residents (n=80) and staff (n=400) will also be conducted. This research seeks to systematically address known barriers to nursing home quality improvement efforts associated with reducing falls.

^{**This abstract is posted with permission under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License**}

✪ “We are the sun for our community:” Partnering with community health workers/promotores to adapt, deliver and evaluate a home-based collaborative care model to improve equity in access to quality depression care for older U.S. Latino adults who are underserved

Abstract:

Background:

While depression is a leading cause of poor health, less than half of older adults receive adequate care. Inequities in both access and outcomes are even more pronounced for socially disadvantaged older adults. The collaborative care model (CCM) has potential to reduce this burden through community-based organizations (CBOs) who serve these populations. However, CCM has been understudied in diverse cultural and resource-constrained contexts. We evaluated the implementation and effectiveness of PEARLS, a home-based CCM adapted with and for community health workers/promotores (CHWs/Ps).

Methods:

We used an instrumental case study design. Our case definition is a community-academic partnership to build CHW/P capacity for evidence-based depression care for older U.S. Latino adults in the Inland Empire region of California (2017–2020). We aimed to understand adaptations to fit local context; acceptability, feasibility, and fidelity; clinical effectiveness; and contextual determinants of implementation success or failure. Data sources included quantitative and qualitative administrative and evaluation data from participants and providers. We used descriptive statistics and paired t-tests to characterize care delivery and evaluate effectiveness post-intervention, and deductive thematic analysis to answer other aims.

Findings:

This case study included 152 PEARLS participants and nine data sources (N = 67 documents). The CBO including their CHWs/Ps partnered with the external implementation team made adaptations to PEARLS content, context, and implementation strategies to support CHWs/Ps and older adults. PEARLS was acceptable, feasible and delivered with fidelity. Participants showed significant reductions in depression severity at 5 months (98% clinical response rate [mean (SD), 13.7 (3.9) drop in pre/post PHQ-9; p < 0.001] and received support for 2.6 social needs on average. PEARLS delivery was facilitated by its relative advantage, adaptability, and trialability; the team's collective efficacy, buy-in, alignment with organization mission, and ongoing reflection and evaluation during implementation. Delivery was challenged by weak partnerships with clinics for participant referral, engagement, reimbursement, and sustainability post-grant funding.

Discussion:

This case study used existing data to learn how home-based CCM was adapted by and for CHWs/Ps to reduce health inequities in late-life depression and depression care among older Latino immigrants. The CBOs and CHWs/Ps strong trust and rapport, addressing social and health needs alongside depression care, and regular internal and external coaching and consultation, appeared to drive successful implementation and effectiveness.

^{**This abstract is posted with permission under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License**}

✪ Longitudinal Remote Coaching for Implementation of Perinatal Collaborative Care: A Mixed-Methods Analysis

Abstract:

The collaborative care model (CoCM) is a multicomponent, team-based integrated behavioral health framework. Its effectiveness in the treatment of perinatal depression is established, but implementation has been limited. The authors used longitudinal remote coaching (LRC) as a novel implementation strategy to support systematic case review in a multistate cluster-randomized trial of CoCM for perinatal depression. They describe LRC for perinatal CoCM in three clinics and use of a mixed-methods analysis of data from LRC feedback forms and interviews with participants. LRC is a scalable implementation strategy with potential to support complex models of integrated behavioral health, such as perinatal CoCM.

^{**This abstract is posted with permission under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License**}

✪ The role of psychological safety and learning behavior in the development of effective quality improvement teams in Ghana: an observational study

Abstract:

Background

As lower-income countries look to develop a mature healthcare workforce and to improve quality and reduce costs, they are increasingly turning to quality improvement (QI), a widely-used strategy in higher-income countries. Although QI is an effective strategy for promoting evidence-based practices, QI interventions often fail to deliver desired results. This failure may reflect a problem with implementation. As the key implementing unit of QI, teams are critical for the success or failure of QI efforts. Thus, we used the model of work-team learning to identify factors related to the effectiveness of newly-formed hospital-based QI teams in Ghana.

Methods

This was a cross-sectional, observational study. We used structural equation modeling to estimate relationships between coaching-oriented team leadership, perceived support for teamwork, team psychological safety, team learning behavior, and QI implementation. We used an observer-rated measure of QI implementation, our outcome of interest. Team-level factors were measured using aggregated survey data from 490 QI team members, resulting in a sample size of 122 teams. We assessed model fit and tested significance of standardized parameters, including direct and indirect effects.

Results

Learning behavior mediated a positive relationship between psychological safety and QI implementation (β = 0.171, p = 0.001). Psychological safety mediated a positive relationship between team leadership and learning behavior (β = 0.384, p = 0.068). Perceived support for teamwork did not have a significant effect on psychological safety or learning behavior.

Conclusion

Psychological safety and learning behavior are key for the success of newly formed QI teams working in lower-income countries. Organizational leaders and implementation facilitators should consider these leverage points as they work to establish an environment where QI and other team-based activities are supported and encouraged.

^{**This abstract is posted with permission under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License**}

Authors:

✪ Open Access

Read the full text in the open access journal Implementation Science

Abstract:

Background

Methods

Discussion

Trial registration

Contributions to the literature

Authors:

✪ Open Access

Read the full text open access in the Journal of the American Medical Directors Association

Abstract:

Objectives

Design

Setting and Participants

Methods

Results

Conclusions and Implications

Authors:

✪ Open Access

Read the full text in the open access journal Implementation Research and Practice

Abstract:

Background

Method

Results

Conclusions

Plain Language Summary

Evaluation of the integration of digital treatments for opioid and other substance use disorders in primary care

Authors:

✪ Open Access

Read the full text in the open access journal BMC Health Services Research

Abstract:

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Authors:

✪ Open Access

Read the full text in the open access journal Implementation Science Communications

Abstract:

Background

Methods

Analysis

Discussion

Trial registration

Protocol version

Contributions to the literature

Authors:

✪ Open Access

Read the full text open access in the journal AJPM Focus

Authors:

✪ Open Access

Read the full text in the open access journal BMJ Open

Abstract:

Introduction

Methods and analysis

Authors:

✪ Open Access

Read the full text in the open access journal Frontiers in Public Health

Abstract:

Background:

Methods:

Findings:

Discussion:

Authors:

✪ Open Access

Read the full text in the open access journal Psychiatric Services

Abstract:

Authors:

Read the full text in the open access journal BMC Health Services Research

Abstract:

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion