Mixed-Methods Archives - Page 3 of 8 - Implementation Science at UW

✪ Acceptability of single-dose HPV vaccination schedule among health-care professionals in Kenya: a mixed-methods study

Abstract:

Background

The World Health Organization recommends a single-dose human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination schedule for girls and boys to accelerate progress toward cervical cancer elimination. We applied the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability (TFA) within the context of HPV vaccination to assess the acceptability of a single-dose schedule among health-care professionals in Kenya.

Methods

A REDCap survey was developed using relevant Theoretical Framework of Acceptability domains and validated with health-care professionals. Descriptive analyses and multivariate Poisson regression were conducted to assess factors associated with increased acceptability. Free-text responses were analyzed using a rapid qualitative approach, and findings were presented using a joint display.

Results

Among 385 responses, 74.2% of health-care professionals were female and 48.6% were nurses. On average, respondents had been in their position for 60 months, and one-third (33.2%) were based at level-4 facilities. The majority (75.84%) thought that giving a single-dose of the HPV vaccine to adolescent girls and young women was either acceptable or very acceptable. Qualitative findings highlighted that lack of information was the underlying reason for health-care professionals who were resistant, and most clinicians thought that a singled-dose schedule was less burdensome to clinicians and patients. Hospital directors had a non–statistically significantly lower acceptability likelihood than nurses (incident rate ratio = 0.93, 95% confidence interval = 0.45 to 1.71) and health-care professionals at urban facilities had a non–statistically significantly lower acceptability likelihood than clinicians in rural facilities (incident rate ratio = 0.97, 95% confidence interval = 0.83 to 1.13).

Conclusion

Although not statistically significant, predictors of increased acceptability provide information to tailor strategies to increase HPV vaccination coverage and accelerate progress toward cervical cancer elimination.

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

✪ Usability of a Web-Based App for Increasing Adolescent Vaccination in Primary Care Settings: Think-Aloud and Survey Assessment

Abstract:

Background

In the United States, only 58% of teens receive the recommended 2 doses of the human papillomavirus vaccine by 15 years of age. Overcoming vaccine hesitancy often requires effective communication between clinicians and parents to address specific concerns. To support this, we developed ProtectMe4, a multilevel, theory-informed web-based intervention designed to address parents’ vaccine-related questions and assist clinicians in discussing vaccine concerns for 4 adolescent vaccines.

Objective

This study aims to evaluate the usability of ProtectMe4 in routine care settings across 3 pediatric primary care clinics. Specifically, the study aims to (1) observe the proposed workflow in practice, (2) identify usability issues experienced by parents and clinicians, and (3) assess the perceptions of both parents and clinicians regarding the app’s usability.

Methods

On designated days in 2020 and 2021, the study team recruited parents of 11- to 12-year-old patients attending appointments with participating clinicians. We conducted think-aloud assessments during routine care visits and administered a usability survey after participants used the app. For parents, we simultaneously video-recorded the app screens and audio-recorded their commentary. For clinicians, observational notes were taken regarding their actions and comments. Timings recorded within the app provided data on the length of use. We reviewed the recordings and notes to compile a list of identified issues and calculated the frequencies of survey responses.

Results

Out of 12 parents invited to use the app, 9 (75%) participated. Two parents who were invited outside of the planned workflow, after seeing the clinician, refused to participate. For the parents whose child’s vaccination record was identified by the app, the median time spent using the app was 9 (range 6-28) minutes. Think-aloud assessment results for parents were categorized into 2 themes: (1) troubleshooting vaccine record identification and (2) clarifying the app content and purpose. Among the 8 parents who completed the survey, at least 75% (6/8) agreed with each acceptability measure related to user satisfaction, perceived usefulness, and acceptance. These parents’ children were patients of 4 of the 7 participating clinicians. Consistent with the planned workflow, clinicians viewed the app before seeing the patient in 4 of 9 (44%) instances. The median time spent on the app per patient was 95 (range 5-240) seconds. Think-aloud assessment results for clinicians were grouped into 2 themes: (1) trust of app vaccine results and (2) clarifying the app content. On the survey, clinicians were unanimously positive about the app, with an average System Usability Scale score of 87.5 (SE 2.5).

Conclusion

This mixed methods evaluation demonstrated that ProtectMe4 was usable and acceptable to both parents and clinicians in real-world pediatric primary care. Improved coordination among clinic staff is needed to ensure the app is consistently offered to patients and reviewed by clinicians before seeing the patient.

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

✪ Increasing goals of care conversations in primary care: Study protocol for a cluster randomized, pragmatic, sequential multiple assignment randomized trial

Abstract:

Background

Goals of care conversations explore seriously ill patients' values to guide medical decision making and often inform decisions about life sustaining treatments. Ideally, conversations occur before a health crisis between patients and clinicians in the outpatient setting. In the United States Veterans Affairs (VA) healthcare system, most conversations still occur in the inpatient setting. Strategies are needed to improve implementation of outpatient, primary care goals of care conversations.

Methods

We plan a cluster randomized (clinician-level) sequential, multiple assignment randomized trial to evaluate the effectiveness of patient implementation strategies on the outcome of goals of care conversation documentation when delivered in combination with clinician implementation strategies. Across three VA healthcare system sites, we will enroll primary care clinicians with low rates of goals of care conversations and their patients with serious medical illness in the top 10th percentile of risk of hospitalization or death. We will compare the effectiveness of sequences of implementation strategies and explore how patient and site factors modify implementation strategy effects. Finally, we will conduct a mixed-methods evaluation to understand implementation strategy success or failure. The design includes two key innovations: (1) strategies that target both clinicians and patients and (2) sequential strategies with increased intensity for non-responders.

Conclusion

This study aims to determine the effect of different sequences and combinations of implementation strategies on primary care documentation of goals of care conversations. Study partners, including the VA National Center for Ethics in Health Care and Office of Primary Care, can consider policies based on study findings.

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

✪ Using FRAME to characterize provider-identified adaptations to a stepped care intervention for adolescents and youth living with HIV in Kenya: a mixed methods approach

Abstract:

Introduction

The Data-informed Stepped Care (DiSC) study is a cluster-randomized trial implemented in 24 HIV care clinics in Kenya, aimed at improving retention in care for adolescents and youth living with HIV (AYLHIV). DiSC is a multi-component intervention that assigns AYLHIV to different intensity (steps) of services according to risk. We used the Framework for Reporting Adaptations and Modifications-Expanded (FRAME) to characterize provider-identified adaptations to the implementation of DiSC to optimize uptake and delivery, and determine the influence on implementation outcomes.

Methods

Between May and December 2022, we conducted continuous quality improvement (CQI) meetings with providers to optimize DiSC implementation at 12 intervention sites. The meetings were guided by plan-do-study-act processes to identify challenges during early phase implementation and propose targeted adaptations. Meetings were audio-recorded and analysed using FRAME to categorize the level, context and content of planned adaptations and determine if adaptations were fidelity consistent. Providers completed surveys to quantify perceptions of DiSC acceptability, appropriateness and feasibility. Mixed effects linear regression models were used to evaluate these implementation outcomes over time.

Results

Providers participated in eight CQI meetings per facility over a 6-month period. A total of 65 adaptations were included in the analysis. The majority focused on optimizing the integration of DiSC within the clinic (83%, n = 54), and consisted of improving documentation, addressing scheduling challenges and improving clinic workflow. Primary reasons for adaptation were to align delivery with AYLHIV needs and preferences and to increase reach among AYLHIV: with reminder calls to AYLHIV, collaborating with schools to ensure AYLHIV attended clinic appointments and addressing transportation challenges. All adaptations to optimize DiSC implementation were fidelity-consistent. Provider perceptions of implementation were consistently high throughout the process, and on average, slightly improved each month for intervention acceptability (β = 0.011, 95% CI: 0.002, 0.020, p = 0.016), appropriateness (β = 0.012, 95% CI: 0.007, 0.027, p<0.001) and feasibility (β = 0.013, 95% CI: 0.004, 0.022, p = 0.005).

Conclusions

Provider-identified adaptations targeted improved integration into routine clinic practices and aimed to reduce barriers to service access unique to AYLHIV. Characterizing types of adaptations and adaptation rationale may enrich our understanding of the implementation context and improve abilities to tailor implementation strategies when scaling to new settings.

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

✪ A Community-Partnered Research Process for Implementation Strategy Design: Developing Resources to Support Behavioral Classroom Interventions

Abstract:

Schools need effective, sustainable implementation strategies to support teachers in using effective Tier 1 (i.e., whole class) and Tier 2 (i.e., targeted) behavioral interventions in the classroom. This paper describes an iterative, community-partnered process of developing implementation resources to support teachers in using Tier 1 and 2 positive behavior management interventions; we call these resources the Positive Behavior Management Toolkit (PBMT). There were two key aspects to the iterative development process: 1) working with a Program Development Team of district—and school-employed partners to identify priorities, interpret data, provide feedback on resources, and plan for sustainment; and 2) conducting a series of tryouts in which teachers used a version of the PBMT in their classrooms and provided quantitative and qualitative feedback on acceptability, appropriateness, feasibility, and recommendations for improvement. In partnership with the Program Development Team, we used data from the tryouts to inform revisions to the PBMT. This paper presents quantitative and qualitative data from the tryouts and describes how these data informed revisions to the PBMT. We also describe the processes by which we engaged the team, considerations related to contextual appropriateness, and lessons learned related to community-engaged intervention development research.

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

✪ Development of a method for Making Optimal Decisions for Intervention Flexibility during Implementation (MODIFI): a modified Delphi study

Abstract:

Background

Intervention adaptation is often necessary to improve the fit between evidence-based practices/programs and implementation contexts. Existing frameworks describe intervention adaptation processes but do not provide detailed steps for prospectively designing adaptations, are designed for researchers, and require substantial time and resources to complete. A pragmatic approach to guide implementers through developing and assessing adaptations in local contexts is needed. The goal of this project was to develop Making Optimal Decisions for Intervention Flexibility during Implementation (MODIFI), a method for intervention adaptation that leverages human centered design methods and is tailored to the needs of intervention implementers working in applied settings with limited time and resources.

Method

MODIFI was iteratively developed via a mixed-methods modified Delphi process. Feedback was collected from 43 implementation research and practice experts. Two rounds of data collection gathered quantitative ratings of acceptability and inclusion (Round 1) and feasibility (Round 2), as well as qualitative feedback regarding MODIFI revisions analyzed using conventional content analysis.

Results

In Round 1, most participants rated all proposed components as essential but identified important avenues for revision which were incorporated into MODIFI prior to Round 2. Round 2 emphasized feasibility, where ratings were generally high and fewer substantive revisions were recommended. Round 2 changes largely surrounded operationalization of terms/processes and sequencing of content. Results include a detailed presentation of the final version of the three-step MODIFI method (Step 1: Learn about the users, local context, and intervention; Step 2: Adapt the intervention; Step 3: Evaluate the adaptation) along with a case example of its application.

Discussion

MODIFI is a pragmatic method that was developed to extend the contributions of other research-based adaptation theories, models, and frameworks while integrating methods that are tailored to the needs of intervention implementers. Guiding teams to tailor evidence-based interventions to their local context may extend for whom, where, and under what conditions an intervention can be effective.

Contributions to the literature

Adaptation of evidence-based practices, programs, and treatments is often needed to ensure successful implementation. However, existing theories/models/frameworks do not outline concrete adaptation steps that are feasible for real-world settings.
We created a resource-efficient method (MODIFI) for developing and assessing intervention adaptations in local settings. This method was iteratively developed through a mixed-methods modified Delphi process, which resulted in consensus among experts in implementation science and practice.
MODIFI leverages human centered design techniques and is tailored to the needs of intervention implementers in applied settings, filling a crucial gap in the research to practice pipeline.

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

✪ Development of a method for Making Optimal Decisions for Intervention Flexibility during Implementation (MODIFI): a modified Delphi study

Abstract:

Background

Method

Results

Discussion

Contributions to the literature

Adaptation of evidence-based practices, programs, and treatments is often needed to ensure successful implementation. However, existing theories/models/frameworks do not outline concrete adaptation steps that are feasible for real-world settings.
We created a resource-efficient method (MODIFI) for developing and assessing intervention adaptations in local settings. This method was iteratively developed through a mixed-methods modified Delphi process, which resulted in consensus among experts in implementation science and practice.
MODIFI leverages human centered design techniques and is tailored to the needs of intervention implementers in applied settings, filling a crucial gap in the research to practice pipeline.

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

✪ Identifying Major Barriers to Home Dialysis (The IM-HOME Study): Findings From a National Survey of Patients, Care Partners, and Providers

Abstract:

Rationale & Objective

Developing strategies to improve home dialysis use requires a comprehensive understanding of barriers. We sought to identify the most important barriers to home dialysis use from the perspective of patients, care partners, and providers.

Study Design

This is a convergent parallel mixed-methods study.

Setting and Participants

We convened a 7-member advisory board of patients, care partners, and providers who collectively developed lists of major patient/care partner-perceived barriers and provider-perceived barriers to home dialysis. We used these lists to develop a survey that was distributed to patients, care partners, and providers—through the American Association of Kidney Patients and the National Kidney Foundation. The surveys asked participants to (1) rank their top 3 major barriers (quantitative) and (2) describe barriers to home dialysis (qualitative).

Analytic Approach

We compiled a list of the top 3 patient/care partner-perceived and top 3 provider-perceived barriers (quantitative). We also conducted a directed content analysis of open-ended survey responses (qualitative).

Results

There were 522 complete responses (233 providers; 289 patients/care partners). The top 3 patient/care partner-perceived barriers were fear of performing home dialysis; lack of space; and the need for home-based support. The top 3 provider-perceived barriers were poor patient education; limited mechanisms for home-based support staff, mental health, and education; and lack of experienced staff. We identified 9 themes through qualitative analysis: limited education; financial disincentives; limited resources; high burden of care; built environment/structure of care delivery that favors in-center hemodialysis; fear and isolation; perceptions of inequities in access to home dialysis; provider perspectives about patients; and patient/provider resiliency.

Limitation

This was an online survey that is subject to nonresponse bias.

Conclusions

The top 3 barriers to home dialysis for patient/care partners and providers incompletely overlap, suggesting the need for diverse strategies that simultaneously address patient-perceived barriers at home and provider-perceived barriers in the clinic.

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

✪ Inter-organizational alignment and implementation outcomes in integrated mental healthcare for children and adolescents: a cross-sectional observational study

Abstract:

Background

Integrated care involves care provided by a team of professionals, often in non-traditional settings. A common example worldwide is integrated school-based mental health (SBMH), which involves externally employed clinicians providing care at schools. Integrated mental healthcare can improve the accessibility and efficiency of evidence-based practices (EBPs) for vulnerable populations suffering from fragmented traditional care. However, integration can complicate EBP implementation due to overlapping organizational contexts, diminishing the public health impact. Emerging literature suggests that EBP implementation may benefit from the similarities in the implementation context factors between the different organizations in integrated care, which we termed inter-organizational alignment (IOA). This study quantitatively explored whether and how IOA in general and implementation context factors are associated with implementation outcomes in integrated SBMH.

Methods

SBMH clinicians from community-based organizations (CBOs; nclinician = 27) and their proximal student-support school staff (nschool = 99) rated their schools and CBOs (clinician only) regarding general (organizational culture and molar climate) and implementation context factors (Implementation Climate and Leadership), and nine common implementation outcomes (e.g., treatment integrity, service access, acceptability). The levels of IOA were estimated by intra-class correlations (ICCs). We fitted multilevel models to estimate the standalone effects of context factors from CBOs and schools on implementation outcomes. We also estimated the 2-way interaction effects between CBO and school context factors (i.e., between-setting interdependence) on implementation outcomes.

Results

The IOA in general context factors exceeded those of implementation context factors. The standalone effects of implementation context factors on most implementation outcomes were larger than those of general context factors. Similarly, implementation context factors between CBOs and schools showed larger 2-way interaction effects on implementation outcomes than general context factors.

Conclusions

This study preliminarily supported the importance of IOA in context factors for integrated SBMH. The findings shed light on how IOA in implementation and general context factors may be differentially associated with implementation outcomes across a broad array of integrated mental healthcare settings.

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

✪ A formative mixed methods evaluation of a new Ross program: Why context matters

Abstract:

Background

The Ross procedure is a technically complex operation to address the pathology of the aortic valve. Prior attempts at widespread implementation have been plagued with variations in effectiveness. We report our initial programmatic outcomes using dissemination and implementation (D&I) science frameworks, with an aim to define both programmatic efficacy and effectiveness. The study design was a single center, explanatory sequential mixed methods evaluation of a Ross surgery program from June 2020 to April 2023. Quantitative measures for baseline patient characteristics and postoperative outcomes were summarized. Qualitative measures were obtained using semi-structured interviews and characterized using implementation science frameworks.

Results

A total of 71 patients underwent the Ross procedure at a single academic center. Mean age was 40 years (± 13). There were no perioperative deaths or valve-related reinterventions (0%). During the follow-up period, 2 (2.8%) patients required re-operation and 2 (2.8%) required balloon dilation of the pulmonary homograft. Qualitative measures noted communication and prospective self-audit facilitated measures of effectiveness, as dichotomy within expected vs. observed outcomes led to program modifications. Collaboration across hospital systems promoted adoption and implementation, which led to the incorporation of the Ross procedure into accepted organizational practice.

Conclusions

In this formative evaluation, limited-efficacy outcomes demonstrated similar programmatic success to data from other established centers. With the prerequisite center volume and case selection, the Ross procedure is a safe and efficacious treatment for aortic valvular disease. Implementation science can be used both in real-time and retrospectively to guide organizational efforts to improve outcomes and to improve the translation of results across centers.

^{**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 JNCI Monographs

Abstract:

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Authors:

✪ Open Access

Read the full text in the open access journal JMIR Formative Research

Abstract:

Background

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Authors:

✪ Open Access

Read the full text in the open access journal Contemporary Clinical Trials

Abstract:

Background

Methods

Conclusion

Authors:

✪ Open Access

Read the full text in the open access journal Journal of the International AIDS Society

Abstract:

Introduction

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Authors:

✪ Open Access

Read the full text in the open access journal School Mental Health

Abstract:

Authors:

✪ Open Access

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

Abstract:

Background

Method

Results

Discussion

Contributions to the literature

Authors:

✪ Open Access

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

Abstract:

Background

Method

Results

Discussion

Contributions to the literature

Authors:

✪ Open Access

Read the full text in the open access journal American Journal of Kidney Disease

Abstract:

Rationale & Objective

Study Design

Setting and Participants

Analytic Approach

Results

Limitation

Conclusions

Authors:

✪ Open Access

Read the full text in the open access journal Implementaion Science

Abstract:

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Authors:

✪ Open Access

Read the full text in the open access journal The Cardiothoracic Surgeon

Abstract:

Background

Results

Conclusions