Health Systems Research Archives - Implementation Science at UW

✪ Characterizing screening champions in the Center for Disease Control and Prevention’s Colorectal Cancer Control Program (CRCCP)

Abstract:

Background

CDC’s Colorectal Cancer Control Program (CRCCP) aims to increase colorectal cancer (CRC) screening prevalence by implementing evidence-based interventions (EBIs) in health system clinics partnering with the program. Program champions, as one of the key program components, are expected to facilitate the implementation of EBIs and support desired changes in many ways. Given limited information about the champions in clinical systems, this study investigated champion types, roles, and sustainability within the CRCCP.

Methods

This mixed methods, cross-sectional study included a survey of 205 respondents (health system and clinic staff) representing 303 clinics and 12 qualitative interviews of CRCCP award recipients and partnering clinics. The survey assessed clinic characteristics, EBI implementation, information about program champions, and sustainability. Interview topics included champion roles, benefits, turnover, and maintenance.

Findings

Champions worked at either the health system or clinic level. Among health systems, champions were quality improvement (QI) managers (48.5%), physicians (36.4%), or high-level administrators (27.3%). In clinics, champions were physicians (37.0%), QI managers (26.1%) or medical assistants (23.9%). Champions in both health systems and clinics were most often assigned the role (45.5% and 45.7%, respectively); yet clinic champions were more likely to naturally emerge than health system champions (26.1% vs. 15.2%). Among naturally emerging champions, 64.3% experienced zero turnover, more than for assigned champions. While champions in both groups received training, more champions in health systems reported being trained than those in clinics (75.8% vs 52.2%). No significant differences in EBIs implemented were observed between those clinics with and without a champion. Zero champion turnover was associated with great or very great leadership support (68.9%), program adaptation (60.7%) and organizational capacity (54.1%). Interviews found that champions’ roles included advocating for CRC screening, providing technical assistance for EBI implementation, creating organizational policies for CRC screening, and overseeing QI. Interviewees reported a desire to address champion sustainability.

Conclusion

These findings inform the use of program champions for clinic-based public health programs. Naturally emerging champions were more stable than those assigned the role.

Contributions to the literature

Research has demonstrated that program champions can assist in the implementation of evidence-based interventions; however, there is limited understanding of the types of champions, their roles, and turnover.
These findings contribute to this gap by describing the types of program champions, their training and major roles in implementing evidence-based interventions for colorectal cancer screening.
Common roles for champions were implementers, advocates, connectors, motivators, changemakers, data wranglers, educators, and sustainability resource.

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

✪ Creating research-ready partnerships: the initial development of seven implementation laboratories to advance cancer control

Abstract:

Background

In 2019–2020, with National Cancer Institute funding, seven implementation laboratory (I-Lab) partnerships between scientists and stakeholders in ‘real-world’ settings working to implement evidence-based interventions were developed within the Implementation Science Centers in Cancer Control (ISC3) consortium. This paper describes and compares approaches to the initial development of seven I-Labs in order to gain an understanding of the development of research partnerships representing various implementation science designs.

Methods

In April-June 2021, members of the ISC3 Implementation Laboratories workgroup interviewed research teams involved in I-Lab development in each center. This cross-sectional study used semi-structured interviews and case-study-based methods to collect and analyze data about I-Lab designs and activities. Interview notes were analyzed to identify a set of comparable domains across sites. These domains served as the framework for seven case descriptions summarizing design decisions and partnership elements across sites.

Results

Domains identified from interviews as comparable across sites included engagement of community and clinical I-Lab members in research activities, data sources, engagement methods, dissemination strategies, and health equity. The I-Labs use a variety of research partnership designs to support engagement including participatory research, community-engaged research, and learning health systems of embedded research. Regarding data, I-Labs in which members use common electronic health records (EHRs) leverage these both as a data source and a digital implementation strategy. I-Labs without a shared EHR among partners also leverage other sources for research or surveillance, most commonly qualitative data, surveys, and public health data systems. All seven I-Labs use advisory boards or partnership meetings to engage with members; six use stakeholder interviews and regular communications. Most (70%) tools or methods used to engage I-Lab members such as advisory groups, coalitions, or regular communications, were pre-existing. Think tanks, which two I-Labs developed, represented novel engagement approaches. To disseminate research results, all centers developed web-based products, and most (n = 6) use publications, learning collaboratives, and community forums. Important variations emerged in approaches to health equity, ranging from partnering with members serving historically marginalized populations to the development of novel methods.

Conclusions

The development of the ISC3 implementation laboratories, which represented a variety of research partnership designs, offers the opportunity to advance understanding of how researchers developed and built partnerships to effectively engage stakeholders throughout the cancer control research lifecycle. In future years, we will be able to share lessons learned for the development and sustainment of implementation laboratories.

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

✪ Perceived consequences of healthcare service decentralization on access, affordability and quality of care in Khartoum locality, Sudan

Abstract:

Background

Decentralization of healthcare services has been widely utilized, especially in developing countries, to improve the performance of healthcare systems by increasing the access and efficiency of service delivery. Experiences have been variable secondary to disparities in financial and human resources, system capacity and community engagement. Sudan is no exception and understanding the perceived effect of decentralization on access, affordability, and quality of care among stakeholders is crucial.

Methods

This was a mixed method, cross-sectional, explorative study that involved 418 household members among catchment areas and 40 healthcare providers of Ibrahim Malik Hospital (IBMH) and Khartoum Teaching Hospital (KTH). Data was collected through a structured survey and in-depth interviews from July-December 2015.

Results

Access, affordability and quality of healthcare services were all perceived as worse, compared to before decentralization was implemented. Reported affordability was found to be 53 and 55% before decentralization compared to 24 to 16% after decentralization, within KTH and IBMH catchment areas respectively, (p = 0.01). The quality of healthcare services was reported to have declined from 47 and 38% before decentralization to 38 and 28% after, in KTH and IBMH respectively (p = 0.02). Accessibility was found to be more limited, with services being accessible before decentralization approximately 59 and 52% of the time, compared to 41 and 30% after, in KTH and IBMH catchment areas respectively, (p = 0.01). Accessibility to healthcare was reported to have decreased secondary to facility closures, reverse transference of services, and low capacity of devolved facilities. Lastly, privatized services were reported as strengthened in response to this decentralization of healthcare.

Conclusions

The deterioration of access, affordability and quality of health services was experienced as the predominant perception among stakeholders after decentralization implementation. Our study results suggest there is an urgent need for a review of the current healthcare policies, structure and management within Sudan in order to provide evidence and insights regarding the impact of decentralization.

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

✪ An implementation evaluation of “Zero Suicide” using normalization process theory to support high-quality care for patients at risk of suicide

Abstract:

Background

Suicide rates continue to rise across the United States, galvanizing the need for increased suicide prevention and intervention efforts. The Zero Suicide (ZS) model was developed in response to this need and highlights four key clinical functions of high-quality health care for patients at risk of suicide. The goal of this quality improvement study was to understand how six large health care systems operationalized practices to support these functions—identification, engagement, treatment and care transitions.

Methods

Using a key informant interview guide and data collection template, researchers who were embedded in each health care system cataloged and summarized current and future practices supporting ZS, including, (1) the function addressed; (2) a description of practice intent and mechanism of intervention; (3) the target patient population and service setting; (4) when/how the practice was (or will be) implemented; and (5) whether/how the practice was documented and/or measured. Normalization process theory (NPT), an implementation evaluation framework, was applied to help understand how ZS had been operationalized in routine clinical practices and, specifically, what ZS practices were described by key informants (coherence), the current state of norms/conventions supporting these practices (cognitive participation), how health care teams performed these practices (collective action), and whether/how practices were measured when they occurred (reflexive monitoring).

Results

The most well-defined and consistently measured ZS practices (current and future) focused on the identification of patients at high risk of suicide. Stakeholders also described numerous engagement and treatment practices, and some practices intended to support care transitions. However, few engagement and transition practices were systematically measured, and few treatment practices were designed specifically for patients at risk of suicide.

Conclusions

The findings from this study will support large-scale evaluation of the effectiveness of ZS implementation and inform recommendations for implementation of high-quality suicide-related care in health care systems nationwide.

Plain Language Summary

Many individuals see a health care provider prior to death by suicide, therefore health care organizations have an important role to play in suicide prevention. The Zero Suicide model is designed to address four key functions of high-quality care for patients at risk of suicide: (1) identification of suicide risk via routine screening/assessment practices, (2) engagement of patients at risk in care, (3) effective treatment, and (4) care transition support, particularly after hospitalizations for suicide attempts. Researchers embedded in six large health care systems, together caring for nearly 11.5 million patients, are evaluating the effectiveness of the Zero Suicide model for suicide prevention. This evaluation focused on understanding how these systems had implemented clinical practices supporting Zero Suicide. Researchers collected qualitative data from providers, administrators, and support staff in each system who were responsible for implementation of practices supporting Zero Suicide. Normalization process theory, an implementation evaluation framework, was applied following data collection to: (A) help researchers catalog all Zero Suicide practices described, (B) describe the norms/conventions supporting these practices, (C) describe how health care teams were performing these practices, and (D) describe how practices were being measured. The findings from this evaluation will be vital for measuring the effectiveness of different Zero Suicide practices. This work will also provide a blueprint to help health care leaders, providers, and other stakeholders “normalize” new and existing suicide prevention practices in their own organizations.

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

✪ Situational analysis of breast health care systems: Why context matters

Abstract:

Background

Implementation of evidence‐based, resource‐appropriate guidelines for breast cancer control should be preceded by a baseline assessment or situational analysis to assess breast health infrastructure, workforce capacity, patient pathways, existing practices, accessibility, and costs.

Methods

To support the assessment of breast health care systems within the broader context in which they exist, the Breast Health Global Initiative (BHGI) developed, tested, and refined a set of situational analysis tools with which to guide the assessment of breast health care capacity, identify the relative strengths and weaknesses of the health system, and support stakeholders in prioritizing actionable items to advance breast cancer care using evidence‐based strategies tailored to their setting. The tools address 6 domains of breast health care delivery: 1) breast cancer early detection practices; 2) breast cancer awareness programs; 3) the availability of breast cancer surgery; 4) the availability of pathology; 5) the availability of radiotherapy, and 6) the availability of systemic therapy services. The current study also describes the more comprehensive International Atomic Energy Agency Programme of Action for Cancer Therapy (PACT) integrated missions for PACT (imPACT) review.

Results

As of 2020, 5 formal BHGI situational analyses have been performed in India, Brazil, Panama, Tanzania, and Uganda. As of August 2019, a total of 100 imPACT reviews have been conducted in 91 countries. These assessments can contribute to more informed policymaking.

Conclusions

Situational analyses are a prerequisite for the development of resource‐appropriate strategies with which to advance breast cancer control in any setting and should assess services across the entire breast health care continuum as well as the broader structural, sociocultural, personal, and financial contexts within which they operate.

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

✪ Breast cancer early detection: A phased approach to implementation

Authors:

Ophira Ginsburg, Cheng‐Har Yip, Ari Brooks, Anna Cabanes, Maira Caleffi, Jorge Antonio, Dunstan Yataco, Bishal Gyawali, Valerie McCormack, Myrna McLaughlin de Anderson, Ravi Mehrotra, Alejandro Mohar, Raul Murillo, Lydia E. Pace, Electra D. Paskett, Anya Romanoff, Anne F. Rositch, John R. Scheel, Miriam Schneidman, Karla Unger‐Saldaña, Verna Vanderpuye, Tsu‐Yin Wu, Safina Yuma, Allison Dvaladze, Catherine Duggan, and Benjamin O. Anderson

^{University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.}

✪ Open Access

Published: April 2020

Read the full text in the open access journal Cancer

Abstract:

When breast cancer is detected and treated early, the chances of survival are very high. However, women in many settings face complex barriers to early detection, including social, economic, geographic, and other interrelated factors, which can limit their access to timely, affordable, and effective breast health care services. Previously, the Breast Health Global Initiative (BHGI) developed resource‐stratified guidelines for the early detection and diagnosis of breast cancer.

In this consensus article from the sixth BHGI Global Summit held in October 2018, the authors describe phases of early detection program development, beginning with management strategies required for the diagnosis of clinically detectable disease based on awareness education and technical training, history and physical examination, and accurate tissue diagnosis. The core issues address include finance and governance, which pertain to successful planning, implementation, and the iterative process of program improvement and are needed for a breast cancer early detection program to succeed in any resource setting.

Examples are presented of implementation, process, and clinical outcome metrics that assist in program implementation monitoring. Country case examples are presented to highlight the challenges and opportunities of implementing successful breast cancer early detection programs, and the complex interplay of barriers and facilitators to achieving early detection for breast cancer in real‐world settings are considered.

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

✪ Evaluating the implementation of cervical cancer screening programs in low-resource settings globally: a systematized review

Abstract:

Purpose

Cervical cancer disproportionately burdens low-resource populations where access to quality screening services is limited. A greater understanding of sustainable approaches to implement cervical cancer screening services is needed.

Methods

We conducted a systematized literature review of evaluations from cervical cancer screening programs implemented in resource-limited settings globally that included a formal evaluation and intention of program sustainment over time. We categorized the included studies using the continuum of implementation research framework which categorizes studies progressively from “implementation light” to more implementation intensive.

Results

Fifty-one of 13,330 initially identified papers were reviewed with most study sites in low-resource settings of middle-income countries (94.1%) ,while 9.8% were in low-income countries. Across all studies, visual inspection of the cervix with acetic acid (58.8%) was the most prevalent screening method followed by cytology testing (39.2%). Demand-side (client and community) considerations were reported in 86.3% of the articles, while 68.6% focused scientific inquiry on the supply side (health service). Eighteen articles (35.3%) were categorized as “Informing Scale-up” along the continuum of implementation research.

Conclusions

The number of cervical cancer screening implementation reports is limited globally, especially in low-income countries. The 18 papers we classified as Informing Scale-up provide critical insights for developing programs relevant to implementation outcomes. We recommend that program managers report lessons learnt to build collective implementation knowledge for cervical cancer screening services, globally.

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

✪ Evaluating and optimizing the consolidated framework for implementation research (CFIR) for use in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review

Abstract:

Background

The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) is a determinants framework that may require adaptation or contextualization to fit the needs of implementation scientists in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). The purpose of this review is to characterize how the CFIR has been applied in LMIC contexts, to evaluate the utility of specific constructs to global implementation science research, and to identify opportunities to refine the CFIR to optimize utility in LMIC settings.

Methods

A systematic literature review was performed to evaluate the use of the CFIR in LMICs. Citation searches were conducted in Medline, CINAHL, PsycINFO, CINAHL, SCOPUS, and Web of Science. Data abstraction included study location, study design, phase of implementation, manner of implementation (ex., data analysis), domains and constructs used, and justifications for use, among other variables. A standardized questionnaire was sent to the corresponding authors of included studies to determine which CFIR domains and constructs authors found to be compatible with use in LMICs and to solicit feedback regarding ways in which CFIR performance could be improved for use in LMICs.

Results

Our database search yielded 504 articles, of which 34 met final inclusion criteria. The studies took place across 21 countries and focused on 18 different health topics. The studies primarily used qualitative study designs (68%). Over half (59%) of the studies applied the CFIR at study endline, primarily to guide data analysis or to contextualize study findings. Nineteen (59%) of the contacted authors participated in the survey. Authors unanimously identified culture and engaging as compatible with use in global implementation research. Only two constructs, patient needs and resources and individual stages of change were commonly identified as incompatible with use. Author feedback centered on team level influences on implementation, as well as systems characteristics, such as health system architecture. We propose a “Characteristics of Systems” domain and eleven novel constructs be added to the CFIR to increase its compatibility for use in LMICs.

Conclusions

These additions provide global implementation science practitioners opportunities to account for systems-level determinants operating independently of the implementing organization. Newly proposed constructs require further reliability and validity assessments.

Trial registration

PROSPERO, CRD42018095762

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

✪ Health system strengthening: a qualitative evaluation of implementation experience and lessons learned across five African countries

Abstract:

Background

Achieving the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals in sub-Saharan Africa will require substantial improvements in the coverage and performance of primary health care delivery systems. Projects supported by the Doris Duke Charitable Foundation’s (DDCF) African Health Initiative (AHI) created public-private-academic and community partnerships in five African countries to implement and evaluate district-level health system strengthening interventions. In this study, we captured common implementation experiences and lessons learned to understand core elements of successful health systems interventions.

Methods

We used qualitative data from key informant interviews and annual progress reports from the five Population Health Implementation and Training (PHIT) partnership projects funded through AHI in Ghana, Mozambique, Rwanda, Tanzania, and Zambia.

Results

Four major overarching lessons were highlighted. First, variety and inclusiveness of concerned key players (public, academic and private) are necessary to address complex health system issues at all levels. Second, a learning culture that promotes evidence creation and ability to efficiently adapt were key in order to meet changing contextual needs. Third, inclusion of strong implementation science tools and strategies allowed informed and measured learning processes and efficient dissemination of best practices. Fourth, five to seven years was the minimum time frame necessary to effectively implement complex health system strengthening interventions and generate the evidence base needed to advocate for sustainable change for the PHIT partnership projects.

Conclusion

The AHI experience has raised remaining, if not overlooked, challenges and potential solutions to address complex health systems strengthening intervention designs and implementation issues, while aiming to measurably accomplish sustainable positive change in dynamic, learning, and varied contexts.

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

Measuring health systems strength and its impact: experiences from the African Health Initiative

Abstract:

Background

Health systems are essential platforms for accessible, quality health services, and population health improvements. Global health initiatives have dramatically increased health resources; however, funding to strengthen health systems has not increased commensurately, partially due to concerns about health system complexity and evidence gaps demonstrating health outcome improvements. In 2009, the African Health Initiative of the Doris Duke Charitable Foundation began supporting Population Health Implementation and Training Partnership projects in five sub-Saharan African countries (Ghana, Mozambique, Rwanda, Tanzania, and Zambia) to catalyze significant advances in strengthening health systems. This manuscript reflects on the experience of establishing an evaluation framework to measure health systems strength, and associate measures with health outcomes, as part of this Initiative.

Methods

Using the World Health Organization’s health systems building block framework, the Partnerships present novel approaches to measure health systems building blocks and summarize data across and within building blocks to facilitate analytic procedures. Three Partnerships developed summary measures spanning the building blocks using principal component analysis (Ghana and Tanzania) or the balanced scorecard (Zambia). Other Partnerships developed summary measures to simplify multiple indicators within individual building blocks, including health information systems (Mozambique), and service delivery (Rwanda). At the end of the project intervention period, one to two key informants from each Partnership’s leadership team were asked to list – in rank order – the importance of the six building blocks in relation to their intervention.

Results

Though there were differences across Partnerships, service delivery and information systems were reported to be the most common focus of interventions, followed by health workforce and leadership and governance. Medical products, vaccines and technologies, and health financing, were the building blocks reported to be of lower focus.

Conclusion

The African Health Initiative experience furthers the science of evaluation for health systems strengthening, highlighting areas for further methodological development – including the development of valid, feasible measures sensitive to interventions in multiple contexts (particularly in leadership and governance) and describing interactions across building blocks; in developing summary statistics to facilitate testing intervention effects on health systems and associations with health status; and designing appropriate analytic models for complex, multi-level open health systems.

^{**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 Communications

Abstract:

Background

Methods

Findings

Conclusion

Contributions to the literature

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 BMC Health Services Research

Abstract:

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Authors:

✪ Open Access

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

Abstract:

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Plain Language Summary

Authors:

✪ Open Access

Read the full text in the open access journal Cancer

Abstract:

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Authors:

✪ Open Access

Read the full text in the open access journal Cancer

Abstract:

Authors:

✪ Open Access

Read the full text in the open access journal Cancer Causes & Control

Abstract:

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Authors:

✪ Open Access

Read the full text in the open access journal Implementation Science

Abstract:

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Trial registration

Authors:

✪ Open Access

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

Abstract:

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Authors:

✪ Open Access

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

Abstract:

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion