Protocol Archives - Page 6 of 7 - Implementation Science at UW

✪ Addressing low-value pharmacological prescribing in primary prevention of CVD through a structured evidence-based and theory-informed process for the design and testing of de-implementation strategies: the DE-imFAR study

Abstract:

Background

De-implementation or abandonment of ineffective or low-value healthcare is becoming a priority research field globally due to the growing empirical evidence of the high prevalence of such care and its impact in terms of patient safety and social inefficiency. Little is known, however, about the factors, barriers, and facilitators involved or about interventions that are effective in promoting and accelerating the de-implementation of low-value healthcare. The De-imFAR study seeks to carry out a structured, evidence-based, and theory-informed process involving the main stakeholders (clinicians, managers, patients, and researchers) for the design, deployment, and assessment of de-implementation strategies for reducing low-value pharmacological prescribing.

Methods

A phase I formative study using a systematic and comprehensive framework based on theory and evidence for the design of implementation strategies—specifically, the Behavior Change Wheel (BCW)—will be conducted to design and model de-implementation strategies to favor reductions in low-value pharmacological prescribing of statins in primary prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD) by main stakeholders (clinicians, managers, patients, and researchers) in a collegiate way. Subsequently, a phase II comparative hybrid trial will be conducted to assess the feasibility and potential effectiveness of at least one active de-implementation strategy to reduce low-value pharmacological prescribing of statins in primary prevention of CVD compared to the usual procedures for dissemination of clinical practice guidelines (“what-not-to-do” recommendations). A mixed-methods evaluation will be used: quantitative for the results of the implementation at the professional level (e.g., adoption, reach and implementation or execution of the recommended clinical practice); and qualitative to determine the feasibility and perceived impact of the de-implementation strategies from the clinicians’ perspective, and patients’ experiences related to the clinical care received.

Discussion

The DE-imFAR study aims to generate valid scientific knowledge about the design and development of de-implementation strategies using theory- and evidence-based methodologies suggested by implementation science. It will explore the effectiveness of these strategies and their acceptability among clinicians, policymakers, and patients. Its ultimate goal is to maximize the quality and efficiency of our health system by abandoning low-value pharmacological prescribing.

Trial Registration

Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT04022850. Registered 17 July 2019

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

✪ Advancing successful implementation of task-shifted mental health care in low-resource settings (BASIC): Protocol for a stepped wedge cluster randomized trial

Abstract:

Background

The mental health treatment gap—the difference between those with mental health need and those who receive treatment—is high in low- and middle-income countries. Task-shifting has been used to address the shortage of mental health professionals, with a growing body of research demonstrating the effectiveness of mental health interventions delivered through task-shifting. However, very little research has focused on how to embed, support, and sustain task-shifting in government-funded systems with potential for scale up. The goal of the Building and Sustaining Interventions for Children (BASIC) study is to examine implementation policies and practices that predict adoption, fidelity, and sustainment of a mental health intervention in the education sector via teacher delivery and the health sector via community health volunteer delivery.

Methods

BASIC is a Hybrid Type II Implementation-Effectiveness trial. The study design is a stepped wedge, cluster randomized trial involving 7 sequences of 40 schools and 40 communities surrounding the schools. Enrollment consists of 120 teachers, 120 community health volunteers, up to 80 site leaders, and up to 1280 youth and one of their primary guardians. The evidence-based mental health intervention is a locally adapted version of Trauma-focused Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, called Pamoja Tunaweza. Lay counselors are trained and supervised in Pamoja Tunaweza by local trainers who are experienced in delivering the intervention and who participated in a Train-the-Trainer model of skills transfer. After the first sequence completes implementation, in-depth interviews are conducted with initial implementing sites’ counselors and leaders. Findings are used to inform delivery of implementation facilitation for subsequent sequences’ sites. We use a mixed methods approach including qualitative comparative analysis to identify necessary and sufficient implementation policies and practices that predict 3 implementation outcomes of interest: adoption, fidelity, and sustainment. We also examine child mental health outcomes and cost of the intervention in both the education and health sectors.

Discussion

The BASIC study will provide knowledge about how implementation of task-shifted mental health care can be supported in government systems that already serve children and adolescents. Knowledge about implementation policies and practices from BASIC can advance the science of implementation in low-resource contexts.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03243396. Registered 9th August 2017

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

✪ Use of Human-Centered Design to Improve Implementation of Evidence-Based Psychotherapies in Low-Resource Communities: Protocol for Studies Applying a Framework to Assess Usability 

Abstract:

Background

This paper presents the protocol for the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH)–funded University of Washington’s ALACRITY (Advanced Laboratories for Accelerating the Reach and Impact of Treatments for Youth and Adults with Mental Illness) Center (UWAC), which uses human-centered design (HCD) methods to improve the implementation of evidence-based psychosocial interventions (EBPIs). We propose that usability—the degree to which interventions and implementation strategies can be used with ease, efficiency, effectiveness, and satisfaction—is a fundamental, yet poorly understood determinant of implementation.

Objective

We present a novel Discover, Design/Build, and Test (DDBT) framework to study usability as an implementation determinant. DDBT will be applied across Center projects to develop scalable and efficient implementation strategies (eg, training tools), modify existing EBPIs to enhance usability, and create usable and nonburdensome decision support tools for quality delivery of EBPIs.

Methods

Stakeholder participants will be implementation practitioners/intermediaries, mental health clinicians, and patients with mental illness in nonspecialty mental health settings in underresourced communities. Three preplanned projects and 12 pilot studies will employ the DDBT model to (1) identify usability challenges in implementing EBPIs in underresourced settings; (2) iteratively design solutions to overcome these challenges; and (3) compare the solution to the original version of the EPBI or implementation strategy on usability, quality of care, and patient-reported outcomes. The final products from the center will be a streamlined modification and redesign model that will improve the usability of EBPIs and implementation strategies (eg, tools to support EBPI education and decision making); a matrix of modification targets (ie, usability issues) that are both common and unique to EBPIs, strategies, settings, and patient populations; and a compilation of redesign strategies and the relative effectiveness of the redesigned solution compared to the original EBPI or strategy.

Results

The UWAC received institutional review board approval for the three separate studies in March 2018 and was funded in May 2018.

Conclusions

The outcomes from this center will inform the implementation of EBPIs by identifying cross-cutting features of EBPIs and implementation strategies that influence the use and acceptability of these interventions, actively involving stakeholder clinicians and implementation practitioners in the design of the EBPI modification or implementation strategy solution and identifying the impact of HCD-informed modifications and solutions on intervention effectiveness and quality.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03515226 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03515226), NCT03514394 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03514394), and NCT03516513 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03516513).

International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)

DERR1-10.2196/14990

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

✪ Using implementation facilitation to implement primary care mental health integration via clinical video telehealth in rural clinics: protocol for a hybrid type 2 cluster randomized stepped-wedge design

Abstract:

Background

Integrating mental health providers into primary care clinics improves access to and outcomes of mental health care. In the Veterans Health Administration (VA) Primary Care Mental Health Integration (PCMHI) program, mental health providers are co-located in primary care clinics, but the implementation of this model is challenging outside large VA medical centers, especially for rural clinics without full mental health staffing. Long wait times for mental health care, little collaboration between mental health and primary care providers, and sub-optimal outcomes for rural veterans could result. Telehealth could be used to provide PCMHI to rural clinics; however, the clinical effectiveness of the tele-PCMHI model has not been tested. Based on evidence that implementation facilitation is an effective implementation strategy to increase uptake of PCMHI when delivered on-site at larger VA clinics, it is hypothesized that this strategy may also be effective with regard to ensuring adequate uptake of the tele-PCMHI model at rural VA clinics.

Methods

This study is a hybrid type 2 pragmatic effectiveness-implementation trial of tele-PCMHI in six sites over 24 months. Tele-PCMHI, which will be delivered by clinical staff available in routine care settings, will be compared to usual care. Fidelity to the care model will be monitored but not controlled. We will use the Reach Effectiveness Adoption Implementation Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework to evaluate the patient-level clinical effectiveness of tele-PCMHI in rural VA clinics and also to evaluate the fidelity to and outcomes of the implementation strategy, implementation facilitation. The proposed study will employ a stepped-wedge design in which study sites sequentially begin implementation in three steps at 6-month intervals. Each step will include (1) a 6-month period of implementation planning, followed by (2) a 6-month period of active implementation, and (3) a final period of stepped-down implementation facilitation.

Discussion

This study will evaluate the effectiveness of PCMHI in a novel setting and via a novel method (clinical video telehealth). We will test the feasibility of using implementation facilitation as an implementation strategy to deploy tele-PCMHI in rural VA clinics.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov registration number NCT02713217. Registered on 18 March 2016.

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

✪ Scale up of PrEP integrated in public health HIV care clinics: a protocol for a stepped-wedge cluster-randomized rollout in Kenya

Authors:

Kenneth K. Mugwanya, Elizabeth Irungu, Elizabeth Bukusi, Nelly R. Mugo, Josephine Odoyo, Elizabeth Wamoni, Kenneth Ngure, Jennifer F. Morton, Kathryn Peebles, Sarah Masyuko, Gena Barnabee, Deborah Donnell, Ruanne Barnabas, Jessica Haberer, Gabrielle O’Malley, and Jared M. Baeten, for the Partners Scale Up Team

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

✪ Open Access

Published: September 2018

Read the full text in the open access journal Implementation Science

Abstract:

Background

Antiretroviral therapy (ART) for HIV-infected persons and pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) for uninfected persons are extraordinarily effective strategies for HIV prevention. In Africa, the region which shoulders the highest HIV burden, HIV care is principally delivered through public health HIV care clinics, offering an existing platform to incorporate PrEP delivery and maximize ART and PrEP synergies. However, successfully bringing this integrated approach to scale requires an implementation science evaluation in public health settings.

Methods

The Partners Scale Up Project is a prospective, pragmatic implementation evaluation, designed as a stepped-wedge, cluster-randomized trial, operating at 24 clinics in Kenya. In collaboration with the Kenya Ministry of Health, we are catalyzing scaled implementation of PrEP delivery integrated in HIV care clinics. The intervention package includes staff training, clinic streamlined access to PrEP commodity from the Kenya Medical Supply Authority, and ongoing intensive technical assistance to rigorously assess how PrEP delivery is implemented. PrEP service delivery including retention efforts are conducted by the clinic staff with no additional resources from the project. Guided by the RE-AIM (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, Maintenance) framework and Consolidated Framework for Implementation Science Research, project progress and learning are documented through ongoing monitoring and process evaluations, including chart abstraction and individual and key informant interviews, to evaluate pragmatic rollout and understand barriers and facilitators for successful PrEP delivery in this setting. In this staged rollout design, each step provides data for both pre-implementation (baseline) and implementation periods, and we will compare time points across steps in the baseline versus implementation periods.

Discussion

Cost-effective delivery models are urgently needed to maximize the public health impact of PrEP and ART. The Partners Scale Up Project will set the stage for full-scale PrEP implementation fully run and owned by the Kenya Ministry of Health. The work combines nationally sponsored PrEP delivery with technical support and implementation science from academic partners, defining a new but sustainable paradigm for public health collaboration.

Trial registration

Registered with ClinicalTrials.gov on February 14, 2017:NCT03052010.

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

✪ Study protocol: A cluster-randomized trial implementing Sustained Patient-centered Alcohol-related Care (SPARC trial)

Abstract:

Background

Experts recommend that alcohol-related care be integrated into primary care (PC) to improve prevention and treatment of unhealthy alcohol use. However, few healthcare systems offer such integrated care. To address this gap, implementation researchers and clinical leaders at Kaiser Permanente Washington (KPWA) partnered to design a high-quality program of evidence-based care for unhealthy alcohol use: the Sustained Patient-centered Alcohol-related Care (SPARC) program. SPARC implements systems of clinical care designed to increase both prevention and treatment of unhealthy alcohol use. This clinical care for unhealthy alcohol use was implemented using three strategies: electronic health record (EHR) decision support, performance monitoring and feedback, and front-line support from external practice coaches with expertise in alcohol-related care (“SPARC implementation intervention” hereafter).

The purpose of this report is to describe the protocol of the SPARC trial, a pragmatic, cluster-randomized, stepped-wedge implementation trial to evaluate whether the SPARC implementation intervention increased alcohol screening and brief alcohol counseling (so-called brief interventions), and diagnosis and treatment of alcohol use disorders (AUDs) in 22 KPWA PC clinics.

Methods/Design

The SPARC trial sample includes all adult patients who had a visit to any of the 22 primary care sites in the trial during the study period (January 1, 2015–July 31, 2018). The 22 sites were randomized to implement the SPARC program on different dates (in seven waves, approximately every 4 months). Primary outcomes are the proportion of patients with PC visits who (1) screen positive for unhealthy alcohol use and have documented brief interventions and (2) have a newly recognized AUD and subsequently initiate and engage in alcohol-related care. Main analyses compare the rates of these primary outcomes in the pre- and post-implementation periods, following recommended approaches for analyzing stepped-wedge trials. Qualitative analyses assess barriers and facilitators to implementation and required adaptations of implementation strategies.

Discussion

The SPARC trial is the first study to our knowledge to use an experimental design to test whether practice coaches with expertise in alcohol-related care, along with EHR clinical decision support and performance monitoring and feedback to sites, increase both preventive care—alcohol screening and brief intervention—as well as diagnosis and treatment of AUDs.

Trial registration

The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.Gov: NCT02675777. Registered February 5, 2016, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02675777.

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

✪ Testing the effectiveness and implementation of a brief version of the Common Elements Treatment Approach (CETA) in Ukraine: A study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Abstract:

Background

Mental illness is a major public health concern. Despite progress understanding which treatments work, a significant treatment gap remains. An ongoing concern is treatment length. Modular, flexible, transdiagnostic approaches have been offered as one solution to scalability challenges. The Common Elements Treatment Approach (CETA) is one such approach and offers the ability to treat a wide range of common mental health problems. CETA is supported by two randomized trials from low- and middle-income countries showing strong effectiveness and implementation outcomes.

Methods/design

This trial evaluates the effectiveness and implementation of two versions of CETA using a non-inferiority design to test two primary hypotheses: (1) a brief five-session version of CETA (Brief CETA) will provide similar effectiveness for reducing the severity of common mental health problems such as depression, post-traumatic stress, impaired functioning, anxiety, and substance use problems compared with the standard 8–12-session version of CETA (Standard CETA); and (2) both Brief and Standard CETA will have superior impact on the outcomes compared to a wait-list control condition. For both hypotheses, the main effect will be assessed using longitudinal data and mixed-effects regression models over a 6-month period post baseline. A secondary aim includes exploration of implementation factors. Additional planned analyses will include exploration of: moderators of treatment impact by disorder severity and comorbidity; the impact of individual therapeutic components; and trends in symptom change between end of treatment and 6-month assessment for all participants.

Discussion

This trial is the first rigorous study comparing a standard-length (8–12 sessions) modular, flexible, transdiagnostic, cognitive-behavioral approach to a shortened version of the approach (five sessions). Brief CETA entails “front-loading” with elements that research suggests are strong mechanisms of change. The study design will allow us to draw conclusions about the effects of both Brief and Standard CETA as well as which elements are integral to their mechanisms of action, informing future implementation and fidelity efforts. The results from this trial will inform future dissemination, implementation and scale-up of CETA in Ukraine and contribute to our understanding of the effects of modular, flexible, transdiagnostic approaches in similar contexts.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, ID: NCT03058302 (U.S. National Library of Medicine). Registered on 20 February 2017.

✪ An updated protocol for a systematic review of implementation-related measures

Abstract:

Background

Implementation science is the study of strategies used to integrate evidence-based practices into real-world settings (Eccles and Mittman, Implement Sci. 1(1):1, 2006). Central to the identification of replicable, feasible, and effective implementation strategies is the ability to assess the impact of contextual constructs and intervention characteristics that may influence implementation, but several measurement issues make this work quite difficult. For instance, it is unclear which constructs have no measures and which measures have any evidence of psychometric properties like reliability and validity. As part of a larger set of studies to advance implementation science measurement (Lewis et al., Implement Sci. 10:102, 2015), we will complete systematic reviews of measures that map onto the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (Damschroder et al., Implement Sci. 4:50, 2009) and the Implementation Outcomes Framework (Proctor et al., Adm Policy Ment Health. 38(2):65-76, 2011), the protocol for which is described in this manuscript.

Methods

Our primary databases will be PubMed and Embase. Our search strings will be comprised of five levels: (1) the outcome or construct term; (2) terms for measure; (3) terms for evidence-based practice; (4) terms for implementation; and (5) terms for mental health. Two trained research specialists will independently review all titles and abstracts followed by full-text review for inclusion. The research specialists will then conduct measure-forward searches using the “cited by” function to identify all published empirical studies using each measure. The measure and associated publications will be compiled in a packet for data extraction. Data relevant to our Psychometric and Pragmatic Evidence Rating Scale (PAPERS) will be independently extracted and then rated using a worst score counts methodology reflecting “poor” to “excellent” evidence.

Discussion

We will build a centralized, accessible, searchable repository through which researchers, practitioners, and other stakeholders can identify psychometrically and pragmatically strong measures of implementation contexts, processes, and outcomes. By facilitating the employment of psychometrically and pragmatically strong measures identified through this systematic review, the repository would enhance the cumulativeness, reproducibility, and applicability of research findings in the rapidly growing field of implementation science.

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

✪ An integrated community health worker intervention in rural Nepal: A type 2 hybrid effectiveness-implementation study protocol

Abstract:

Background

Evidence-based medicines, technologies, and protocols exist to prevent many of the annual 300,000 maternal, 2.7 million neonatal, and 9 million child deaths, but they are not being effectively implemented and utilized in rural areas. Nepal, one of South Asia’s poorest countries with over 80% of its population living in rural areas, exemplifies this challenge.
Community health workers are an important cadre in low-income countries where human resources for health and health care infrastructure are limited. As local women, they are uniquely positioned to understand and successfully navigate barriers to health care access. Recent case studies of large community health worker programs have highlighted the
importance of training, both initial and ongoing, and accountability through structured management, salaries, and ongoing monitoring and evaluation. A gap in the evidence regarding whether such community health worker systems can change health outcomes, as well as be sustainably adopted at scale, remains. In this study, we plan to evaluate a community
health worker system delivering an evidence-based integrated reproductive, maternal, newborn, and child health intervention as it is scaled up in rural Nepal.

Methods

We will conduct a type 2 hybrid effectiveness-implementation study to test both the effect of an integrated reproductive, maternal, newborn, and child health intervention and the implementation process via a professional community health worker system. The intervention integrates five evidence-based approaches: (1) home-based antenatal care and post-natal
care counseling and care coordination; (2) continuous surveillance of all reproductive age women, pregnancies, and children under age 2 years via a mobile application; (3) Community-Based Integrated Management of Newborn and Childhood Illness; (4) group antenatal and postnatal care; and 5) the Balanced Counseling Strategy to post-partum
contraception. We will evaluate effectiveness using a pre-post quasi-experimental design with stepped implementation and implementation using the RE-AIM framework.

Discussion

This is the first hybrid effectiveness-implementation study of an integrated reproductive, maternal, newborn, and child health intervention in rural Nepal that we are aware of. As Nepal takes steps towards achieving the Sustainable Development Goals, the data from this three-year study will be useful in the detailed planning of a professionalized
community health worker cadre delivering evidence-based reproductive, maternal, newborn, and child health interventions to the country’s rural population.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03371186, registered 04 December 2017, retrospectively registered.

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

✪ The impact of inter-organizational alignment (IOA) on implementation outcomes: evaluating unique and shared organizational influences in education sector mental health

Abstract:

Background

Integrated healthcare delivered by work groups in nontraditional service settings is increasingly common, yet contemporary implementation frameworks typically assume a single organization—or organizational unit—within which system-level processes influence service quality and implementation success. Recent implementation frameworks predict that inter-organizational alignment (i.e., similarity in values, characteristics, activities related to implementation across organizations) may facilitate the implementation of evidence-based practices (EBP), but few studies have evaluated this premise. This study’s aims examine the impact of overlapping organizational contexts by evaluating the implementation contexts of externally employed mental health clinicians working in schools—the most common integrated service delivery setting for children and adolescents. Aim 1 is to estimate the effects of unique intra-organizational implementation contexts and combined inter-organizational alignment on implementation outcomes. Aim 2 is to examine the underlying mechanisms through which inter-organizational alignment facilitates or hinders EBP implementation.

Methods/design

This study will conduct sequential, exploratory mixed-methods research to evaluate the intra- and inter-organizational implementation contexts of schools and the external community-based organizations that most often employ school-based mental health clinicians, as they relate to mental health EBP implementation. Aim 1 will involve quantitative surveys with school-based, externally-employed mental health clinicians, their supervisors, and proximal school-employed staff (total n = 120 participants) to estimate the effects of each organization’s general and implementation-specific organizational factors (e.g., climate, leadership) on implementation outcomes (fidelity, acceptability, appropriateness) and assess the moderating role of the degree of clinician embeddedness in the school setting. Aim 2 will explore the mechanisms through which inter-organizational alignment influences implementation outcomes by presenting the results of Aim 1 surveys to school-based clinicians (n = 30) and conducting semi-structured qualitative interviews. Qualitative data will be evaluated using an integrative inductive and deductive approach.

Discussion

The study aims are expected to identify intra- and inter-organizational constructs that are most instrumental to EBP implementation success in school-based integrated care settings and illuminate mechanisms that may account for the influence of inter-organizational alignment. In addition to improving school-based mental health, these findings will spur future implementation science that considers the relationships across organizations and optimize the capacity of implementation science to guide practice in increasingly complex systems of care.

^{**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

Authors:

✪ Open Access

Read the full text in the open access journal BMC Psychiatry

Abstract:

Background

Methods

Discussion

Trial registration

Authors:

✪ Open Access

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

Abstract:

Background

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Trial Registration

International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)

Authors:

✪ Open Access

Read the full text in the open access journal Implementation Science

Abstract:

Background

Methods

Discussion

Trial registration

Authors:

✪ Open Access

Read the full text in the open access journal Implementation Science

Abstract:

Background

Methods

Discussion

Trial registration

Authors:

✪ Open Access

Abstract:

Background

Methods/Design

Discussion

Trial registration

Authors:

✪ Open Access

Read the full text in the open access journal Trials

Abstract:

Background

Methods/design

Discussion

Trial registration

Authors:

✪ Open Access

Read the full text in the open access journal Systematic Reviews

Abstract:

Background

Methods

Discussion

Authors:

✪ Open Access

Read the full text in the open access journal Implementation Science

Abstract:

Background

Methods

Discussion

Trial registration

Authors:

✪ Open Access

Read the full text in the open access journal Implementation Science

Abstract:

Background

Methods/design

Discussion