Skip to content

✪ Team-focused implementation strategies to improve implementation of mental health screening and referral in rural Children’s Advocacy Centers: study protocol for a pilot cluster randomized hybrid type 2 trial

Authors:

Elizabeth A. McGuier, Gregory A. Aarons, Jaely D. Wright, John C. Fortney, Byron J. Powell, Scott D. Rothenberger, Laurie R. Weingart, Elizabeth Miller & David J. Kolko

University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.

✪ Open Access

Published: May 2023

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

Abstract:

Background

Children’s Advocacy Centers (CACs) use multidisciplinary teams to investigate and respond to maltreatment allegations. CACs play a critical role in connecting children with mental health needs to evidence-based mental health treatment, especially in low-resourced rural areas. Standardized mental health screening and referral protocols can improve CACs’ capacity to identify children with mental health needs and encourage treatment engagement. In the team-based context of CACs, teamwork quality is likely to influence implementation processes and outcomes. Implementation strategies that target teams and apply the science of team effectiveness may enhance implementation outcomes in team-based settings.

Methods

We will use Implementation Mapping to develop team-focused implementation strategies to support the implementation of the Care Process Model for Pediatric Traumatic Stress (CPM-PTS), a standardized screening and referral protocol. Team-focused strategies will integrate activities from effective team development interventions. We will pilot team-focused implementation in a cluster-randomized hybrid type 2 effectiveness-implementation trial. Four rural CACs will implement the CPM-PTS after being randomized to either team-focused implementation (n = 2 CACs) or standard implementation (n = 2 CACs). We will assess the feasibility of team-focused implementation and explore between-group differences in hypothesized team-level mechanisms of change and implementation outcomes (implementation aim). We will use a within-group pre-post design to test the effectiveness of the CPM-PTS in increasing caregivers’ understanding of their child’s mental health needs and caregivers’ intentions to initiate mental health services (effectiveness aim).

Conclusions

Targeting multidisciplinary teams is an innovative approach to improving implementation outcomes. This study will be one of the first to test team-focused implementation strategies that integrate effective team development interventions. Results will inform efforts to implement evidence-based practices in team-based service settings.

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

✪ Risk-based versus universal PrEP delivery during pregnancy: a cluster randomized trial in Western Kenya from 2018 to 2019

Authors:

John Kinuthia, Julia C. Dettinger, Joshua Stern, Nancy Ngumbau, Ben Ochieng, Laurén Gómez, Felix Abuna, Salphine Watoyi, Mary Marwa, Daniel Odinga, Anjuli D. Wagner, Barbra A. Richardson, Jillian Pintye, Jared M. Baeten & Grace John-Stewart

University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.

✪ Open Access

Published: February 2023

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

Abstract:

Introduction

Integrating pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) delivery for pregnant and postpartum women within maternal and child health (MCH) clinics is feasible and acceptable. It is unknown whether a risk-guided model would facilitate appropriate PrEP use among MCH attendees better than universally offering PrEP.

Methods

The PrEP Implementation for Mothers in Antenatal Care (PrIMA) study was a cluster randomized trial to assess two models for PrEP delivery among pregnant women seeking routine MCH care at 20 public clinics in Kenya between January 2018 and July 2019 (NCT03070600). In the Universal arm, all participants received PrEP counselling and self-selected whether to initiate PrEP. In the Targeted arm, participants underwent an HIV risk assessment, including an objective risk-scoring tool and an offer of HIV self-tests for at-home partner testing; those determined to be at high risk received a PrEP offer. Participants were followed through 9 months postpartum. Primary outcomes included incident HIV and appropriate PrEP use (defined as PrEP uptake among those at high risk and no PrEP uptake for those not at risk). Outcomes were compared using intention-to-treat analyses, adjusting for baseline HIV risk and marital status.

Results

Among 4447 women enrolled, the median age was 24.0 years (interquartile range [IQR]: 20.9, 28.3), and most were married (84.8%). The median gestational age at enrolment was 24 weeks (IQR: 20, 30). Women in the Targeted arm were more likely to be at high risk for HIV acquisition at baseline (51.6% vs. 33.3%). During 4638 person-years (p-yr) of follow-up, there were 16 maternal HIV infections with no difference in maternal HIV incidence between arms: 0.31/100 p-yr (95% CI: 0.15, 0.65) Targeted and 0.38/100p-yr (95% CI: 0.20, 0.73) Universal (adjusted relative risk [aRR]: 0.85 [CI: 0.28, 2.55]). There was no significant difference in the frequency of appropriate PrEP use between the arms (68.2% vs. 59.1% in Targeted vs. Universal, respectively) (aRR: 1.03 [CI: 0.96, 1.10]).

Conclusions

Given comparable maternal HIV incidence and PrEP uptake in Universal and Targeted approaches, and the simplicity that universal PrEP offers, our findings suggest that universal PrEP counselling is optimal for integrating PrEP in MCH systems.

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

✪ Is telemedicine the answer to rural expansion of medication treatment for opioid use disorder? Early experiences in the feasibility study phase of a National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network Trial

Authors:

Yih-Ing Hser, Allison J. Ober, Alex R. Dopp, Chunqing Lin, Katie P. Osterhage, Sarah E. Clingan, Larissa J. Mooney, Megan E. Curtis, Lisa A. Marsch, Bethany McLeman, Emily Hichborn, Laurie S. Lester, Laura-Mae Baldwin, Yanping Liu, Petra Jacobs, & Andrew J. Saxon

University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.

✪ Open Access

Published: April 2021

Read the full text in the open access journal Addiction Science & Clinical Practice

Abstract:

Telemedicine (TM) enabled by digital health technologies to provide medical services has been considered a key solution to increasing health care access in rural communities. With the immediate need for remote care due to the COVID-19 pandemic, many health care systems have rapidly incorporated digital technologies to support the delivery of remote care options, including medication treatment for individuals with opioid use disorder (OUD). In responding to the opioid crisis and the COVID-19 pandemic, public health officials and scientific communities strongly support and advocate for greater use of TM-based medication treatment for opioid use disorder (MOUD) to improve access to care and have suggested that broad use of TM during the pandemic should be sustained.

Nevertheless, research on the implementation and effectiveness of TM-based MOUD has been limited. To address this knowledge gap, the National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network (CTN) funded (via the NIH HEAL Initiative) a study on Rural Expansion of Medication Treatment for Opioid Use Disorder (Rural MOUD; CTN-0102) to investigate the implementation and effectiveness of adding TM-based MOUD to rural primary care for expanding access to MOUD. In preparation for this large-scale, randomized controlled trial incorporating TM in rural primary care, a feasibility study is being conducted to develop and pilot test implementation procedures.

In this commentary, we share some of our experiences, which include several challenges, during the initial two-month period of the feasibility study phase. While these challenges could be due, at least in part, to adjusting to the COVID-19 pandemic and new workflows to accommodate the study, they are notable and could have a substantial impact on the larger, planned pragmatic trial and on TM-based MOUD more broadly. Challenges include low rates of identification of risk for OUD from screening, low rates of referral to TM, digital device and internet access issues, workflow and capacity barriers, and insurance coverage. These challenges also highlight the lack of empirical guidance for best TM practice and quality remote care models.

With TM expanding rapidly, understanding implementation and demonstrating what TM approaches are effective are critical for ensuring the best care for persons with OUD.

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

✪ Protocol for a hybrid type 2 cluster randomized trial of trauma-focused cognitive behavioral therapy and a pragmatic individual-level implementation strategy

Authors:

Aaron R. Lyon, Michael D. Pullmann, Shannon Dorsey, Carol Levin, Larissa M. Gaias, Stephanie K. Brewer, Madeline Larson, Catherine M. Corbin, Chayna Davis, Ian Muse, Mahima Joshi, Rosemary Reyes, Nathaniel J. Jungbluth, Rachel Barrett, David Hong, Michael D. Gomez & Clayton R. Cook

University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.

✪ Open Access

Published: January 2021

Read the full text in the open access journal Implementation Science

Abstract:

Background

More than two-thirds of youth experience trauma during childhood, and up to 1 in 5 of these youth develops posttraumatic stress symptoms that significantly impair their functioning. Although trauma-focused cognitive behavior therapy (TF-CBT) has a strong evidence base, it is rarely adopted, delivered with adequate fidelity, or evaluated in the most common setting where youth access mental health services—schools. Given that individual behavior change is ultimately required for successful implementation, even when organizational factors are firmly in place, focusing on individual-level processes represents a potentially parsimonious approach. Beliefs and Attitudes for Successful Implementation in Schools (BASIS) is a pragmatic, motivationally focused multifaceted strategy that augments training and consultation and is designed to target precise mechanisms of behavior change to produce enhanced implementation and youth clinical outcomes. This study protocol describes a hybrid type 2 effectiveness-implementation trial designed to concurrently evaluate the main effects, mediators, and moderators of both the BASIS implementation strategy on implementation outcomes and TF-CBT on youth mental health outcomes.

Methods

Using a cluster randomized controlled design, this trial will assign school-based mental health (SMH) clinicians and schools to one of three study arms: (a) enhanced treatment-as-usual (TAU), (b) attention control plus TF-CBT, or (c) BASIS+TF-CBT. With a proposed sample of 120 SMH clinicians who will each recruit 4–6 youth with a history of trauma (480 children), this project will gather data across 12 different time points to address two project aims. Aim 1 will evaluate, relative to an enhanced TAU condition, the effects of TF-CBT on identified mechanisms of change, youth mental health outcomes, and intervention costs and cost-effectiveness. Aim 2 will compare the effects of BASIS against an attention control plus TF-CBT condition on theoretical mechanisms of clinician behavior change and implementation outcomes, as well as examine costs and cost-effectiveness.

Discussion

This study will generate critical knowledge about the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of BASIS—a pragmatic, theory-driven, and generalizable implementation strategy designed to enhance motivation—to increase the yield of evidence-based practice training and consultation, as well as the effectiveness of TF-CBT in a novel service setting.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov registration number NCT04451161. Registered on June 30, 2020.

**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

Authors:

Richard R. Owen, Eva N. Woodward, Karen L. Drummond, Tisha L. Deen, Karen Anderson Oliver, Nancy J. Petersen, Scott S. Meit, John C. Fortney, & JoAnn E. Kirchner

University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.

✪ Open Access

Published: March 2019

Read the full text in the open access journal Implementation Science

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**

✪ 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

Authors:

Laura K. Murray, Emily E. Haroz, S. Benjamin Doty, Namrita S. Singh, Sergey Bogdanov, Judith Bass, Shannon Dorsey and Paul Bolton

University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.

✪ Open Access

Published: August 2018

Read the full text in the open access journal Trials

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.

✪ Readiness to Change Over Time: Change Commitment and Change Efficacy in a Workplace Health-Promotion Trial

Authors:

Christian D. Helfrich, Marlana J. Kohn, Austin Stapleton, Claire L. Allen, Kristen Elizabeth Hammerback, K. C. Gary Chan, Amanda T. Parrish, Daron E. Ryan, Bryan J. Weiner, Jeffrey R. Harris, & Peggy A. Hannon

University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.

✪ Open Access

Published: April 2018

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

Abstract:

Introduction

Organizational readiness to change may be a key determinant of implementation success and a mediator of the effectiveness of implementation interventions. If organizational readiness can be reliably and validly assessed at the outset of a change initiative, it could be used to assess the effectiveness of implementation-support activities by measuring changes in readiness factors over time.

Methods

We analyzed two waves of readiness-to-change survey data collected as part of a three-arm, randomized controlled trial to implement evidence-based health promotion practices in small worksites in low-wage industries. We measured five readiness factors: context (favorable broader conditions); change valence (valuing health promotion); information assessment (demands and resources to implement health promotion); change commitment (an intention to implement health promotion); and change efficacy (a belief in shared ability to implement health promotion). We expected commitment and efficacy to increase at intervention sites along with their self-reported effort to implement health promotion practices, termed wellness-program effort. We compared means between baseline and 15 months, and between intervention and control sites. We used linear regression to test whether intervention and control sites differed in their change-readiness scores over time.

Results

Only context and change commitment met reliability thresholds. Change commitment declined significantly for both control (−0.39) and interventions sites (−0.29) from baseline to 15 months, while context did not change for either. Only wellness program effort at 15 months, but not at baseline, differed significantly between control and intervention sites (1.20 controls, 2.02 intervention). Regression analyses resulted in two significant differences between intervention and control sites in changes from baseline to 15 months: (1) intervention sites exhibited significantly smaller change in context scores relative to control sites over time and (2) intervention sites exhibited significantly higher changes in wellness program effort relative to control sites.

Discussion

Contrary to our hypothesis, change commitment declined significantly at both Healthlinks and control sites, even as wellness-program effort increased significantly at HealthLinks sites. Regression to the mean may explain the decline in change commitment. Future research needs to assess whether baseline commitment is an independent predictor of wellness-program effort or an effect modifier of the HealthLinks intervention.

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

✪ Evaluation of a Systems Analysis and Improvement Approach to Optimize Prevention of Mother-To-Child Transmission of HIV Using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research

Authors:

Sarah Gimbel, Alison S. Rustagi, Julia Robinson, Seydou Kouyate, Joana Coutinho, Ruth Nduati, James Pfeiffer, Stephen Gloyd, Kenneth Sherr, with input from the SAIA study team (S. Adam Granato, Ahoua Kone, Emilia Cruz, Joao Luis Manuel, Justina Zucule, Manuel Napua, Grace Mbatia, Grace Wariua, and Martin Maina)

University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.

✪ Open Access

Published: August 2016

Read the full text open access in the subscription journal JAIDS