Short report Archives - Implementation Science at UW

✪ Improving fever management of hospitalized children with cancer: barriers, facilitators, and proposed interventions from healthcare providers in Kenya

Abstract:

Children with cancer in lower-middle-income countries (LMICs) are at increased risk of dying from infections. Prompt treatment of fever episodes improves outcomes, yet poorly described challenges impair management. This qualitative study explored healthcare provider perspectives on barriers to and facilitators of inpatient fever management in children with cancer at a public tertiary referral children’s hospital in Kenya. Healthcare providers involved in fever management were recruited. Semi-structured interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and entered into NVivo software. Coding was informed by a theoretical fever framework and the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Thematic analysis and mind mapping identified recurrent themes and subthemes. Strategies were mapped to identified barriers. The sixteen participants included nurses (n = 2), clinicians (n = 6), pharmacists (n = 2), phlebotomists (n = 2), and microbiology laboratory staff (n = 4). We identified three overarching themes: empowerment of healthcare providers and caregivers, the importance of timely management, and teamwork/human resource availability. Healthcare provider attributes served as facilitators: motivation to improve care, eagerness to learn, willingness to change practice, and need for treatment guidance. Factors within the hospital system were barriers, with subthemes including poor communication between cadres, delays in laboratory results, and staffing shortages. Participants suggested knowledge sharing, a treatment guideline, task shifting, and hiring additional healthcare providers as potential interventions. Managing fever episodes in children with cancer is complex, requiring multiple cadres of healthcare providers and caregiver participation. The proposed interventions may overcome barriers, but future studies are needed to assess the effectiveness of these strategies in improving fever management.

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

✪ Integrating behavioral health care into a low-barrier HIV clinic using the Collaborative Care Model: a mixed methods evaluation of patient care cascade outcomes and determinants

Abstract:

Background

Low-barrier HIV care is an evidence-based intervention to improve HIV outcomes among those who have complex barriers to care, but the walk-in model poses challenges to integrating behavioral health services. We evaluated the acceptability and feasibility of a Collaborative Care Model (CoCM) for treatment of depression and opioid use disorder in a low-barrier clinic.

Methods

In a sequential explanatory mixed methods pilot study, we accessed data from patient records to generate a care cascade for the number of patients enrolled in the first six months of the program and conducted individual interviews with patients and staff to interpret the care cascade findings.

Results

Among 175 patients who visited the clinic, 36% were screened for, 24% were referred to, 15% completed an intake for, and 9% engaged in CoCM. The interviews revealed that screening was limited by a lack of clarity among staff about services offered in CoCM, staff forgetting the screening process, and limited time during patent visits. Referrals were limited by low buy-in among staff and patient complexity. Intakes were limited by time and space constraints in the care setting and competing acute patient needs. The care manager’s ability to embody the clinic’s culture facilitated engagement among patients who completed intakes.

Conclusions

Staff perceived CoCM to be acceptable and feasible to implement, but only in the context of multiple barriers to implementation and challenges to systematic screening and measurement-based care.

Trial registration

Not applicable.

Contributions to the literature

We evaluated implementation of the Collaborative Care Model, an evidence-based model for integrating behavioral healthcare into primary care settings, for treating depression and opioid-use disorder in a low-barrier HIV clinic. To our knowledge, this is the first implementation of the Collaborative Care Model in a low-barrier HIV clinic.
By specifying a multi-component implementation strategy, our evaluation provides a foundation for selecting and tailoring implementation strategies for use with integrated behavioral healthcare interventions.
Through use of a joint visual display showing a care cascade with illustrative quotes, our evaluation demonstrates a novel approach to using explanatory mixed methods in implementation science.

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

✪ Development of a method for qualitative data integration to advance implementation science within research consortia

Abstract:

Background

Methods of integrating qualitative data across diverse studies and within multi-site research consortia are less developed than those for integrating quantitative data. The development ofsuchmethods is essential to support the data exchange needed for cross-study qualitative inquiry and given the increasing emphasis on data sharing and open science. We describe methods for qualitative data integration within the National Cancer Institute’s Improving the Management of symPtoms During And following Cancer Treatment (IMPACT) Consortium funded by the Cancer MoonshotSM. Data collection and analysis were guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Our case study highlights potential solutions for unique challenges faced when integrating qualitative data across multiple settings in a research consortium.

Methods

The IMPACT consortium is comprised of three research centers (RCs) each conducting pragmatic trials examining the effectiveness of routine symptom management on patient-centered outcomes. After reaching consensus on use of CFIR as the common implementation determinant framework, RCs developed a semi-structured interview guide and tailored it to features of their healthcare setting and symptom management interventions. RCs conducted interviews/focus groups with healthcare system partners to examine contextual factors impacting implementation. RCs exchanged 1–2 transcripts (n = 5 total) for purposes of pilot testing the methodology.

Results

Given the heterogeneity of study settings and contexts, it was challenging to simultaneously assign codes at both domain and construct levels and the process was resource intensive. Recommendations include employing a common framework for data collection and analyses from the outset, coding at domain level first and then incorporating construct codes, and centralizing processes via a coordinating center (or similar entity) and combining coded transcripts using qualitative software. We also generated an iteratively refined codebook that employed the CFIR schema and incorporated CFIR 2.0 to provide detailed guidance for coders conducting cross-study qualitative inquiry.

Conclusions

Limited guidance exists on how to support qualitative data integration, data exchange, and sharing across multiple studies. This paper describes a systematic method for employing an implementation determinant framework-guided approach to foster data integration. This methodology can be adopted by other research consortia to support qualitative data integration, cross-site qualitative inquiry, and generate improved understanding of evidence-based intervention implementation.

Contributions to the literature

Few standard practices exist for integrating qualitative data across different studies to conduct cross-study qualitative inquiry. Developing data integration procedures is critical to generating insights about practice improvement across settings and achieving goals of open science.
This report describes a method for integrating qualitative data using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research illustrated within the context of NCI’s Improving the Management of symPtoms During And following Cancer Treatment (IMPACT) Consortium.
The method describedcan be applied within research consortia and across multi-site studies to support qualitative data integration, thereby producing valuable insights to improve implementation of evidence-based interventions.

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

✪ Development of learning health system competency items related to health and healthcare equity and justice for rehabilitation researchers

Authors:

Pamela M. Dunlap, Kathleen M. Poploski, Catherine A. Anderson, Thiru M. Annaswamy, Melissa A. Clark, Peter C. Coyle, Natalie F. Douglas, Ann Marie Flores, Janet K. Freburger, Brian J. Hafner, Kenneth J. Harwood, Jeanne M. Hoffman, Adam R. Kinney, Linda Resnik, Kristin Ressel, Margarite J. Whitten, and Christine M. McDonough

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

✪ Open Access

Published: January 2025

Read the full text in the open access journal Learning Health Systems

Abstract:

Introduction

In 2021, the Learning Health Systems Rehabilitation Research Network (LeaRRn) developed and administered a needs assessment survey, based on the Agency on Healthcare Research and Quality's (AHRQ's) original seven domains of learning health systems (LHS) researcher core competencies, to identify knowledge and interest in LHS research competencies among rehabilitation researchers. In 2022, the AHRQ added a new health and healthcare equity and justice (HE) domain to the existing seven domains for LHS researcher core competencies.

Methods

LeaRRn utilized methods similar to those employed in the development of their original needs assessment survey to generate and refine competency items for the HE domain. In this report, we describe the methods used to develop these HE competency items.

Results & Conclusions

Other training programs and LHS researchers may use the competency items developed for this needs assessment survey to identify training opportunities in the HE domain.

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

✪ Acceptability and feasibility of policy implementation strategies for taxes earmarked for behavioral health services

Abstract:

Background

This study's aims are to: (1) Compare the acceptability and feasibility of five types of implementation strategies that could be deployed to increase the reach of evidence-based practices (EBPs) with revenue from policies that earmark taxes for behavioral health services, and (2) Illustrate how definitions of implementation strategies and measures of acceptability and feasibility can be used in policy-focused implementation science research.

Methods

Web-based surveys of public agency and community organization professionals involved with earmarked tax policy implementation were completed in 2022–2023 (N = 211, response rate = 24.9%). Respondents rated the acceptability and feasibility of five types of implementation strategies (dissemination, implementation process, integration, capacity-building, and scale-up). Aggregate acceptability and feasibility scores were calculated for each type of strategy (scoring range 4–20). Analyses of variance compared scores across strategies and between organizational actor types.

Findings

For acceptability, capacity-building strategies had the highest rating (M = 16.3, SD = 3.0), significantly higher than each of the four other strategies, p ≤ . 004), and scale-up strategies had the lowest rating (M = 15.6). For feasibility, dissemination strategies had the highest rating (M = 15.3, significantly higher than three of the other strategies, p ≤ .002) and scale-up strategies had the lowest rating (M = 14.4).

Conclusions

Capacity-building and dissemination strategies may be well-received and readily deployed by policy implementers to support EBPs implementation with revenue from taxes earmarked for behavioral health services. Adapting definitions of implementation strategies for policy-focused topics, and applying established measures of acceptability and feasibility to these strategies, demonstrates utility as an approach to advance research on policy-focused implementation strategies.

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

✪ Raising the issue of quality in implementation science reporting in global health: Implications for health planning and practice

Abstract:

Implementation outcomes, which focus on the barriers to, and facilitators and processes of healthcare delivery, are critical to translating research evidence to health planning and practice and to improving healthcare delivery. This article summarizes key quality issues in reporting of implementation science outcomes within global health and describes the ways in which this presents a challenge for shifting health planning and practice across low-resource health systems. This article also suggests that the wider use of reporting guidelines for implementation outcomes could help address this issue.

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

✪ Healthcare worker perceived barriers and facilitators to implementing a tuberculosis preventive therapy program in rural South Africa: a content analysis using the consolidated framework for implementation research

Abstract:

Background

South African national tuberculosis (TB) guidelines, in accordance with the World Health Organization, recommend conducting routine household TB contact investigation with provision of TB preventive therapy (TPT) for those who qualify. However, implementation of TPT has been suboptimal in rural South Africa. We sought to identify barriers and facilitators to TB contact investigations and TPT management in rural Eastern Cape, South Africa, to inform the development of an implementation strategy to launch a comprehensive TB program.

Methods

We collected qualitative data through individual semi-structured interviews with 19 healthcare workers at a district hospital and four surrounding primary-care clinics referring to the hospital. The consolidated framework for implementation research (CFIR) was used to develop interview questions as well as guide deductive content analysis to determine potential drivers of implementation success or failure

Results

A total of 19 healthcare workers were interviewed. Identified common barriers included lack of provider knowledge regarding efficacy of TPT, lack of TPT documentation workflows for clinicians, and widespread community resource constraints. Facilitators identified included healthcare workers high interest to learn more about the effectiveness of TPT, interest in problem-solving logistical barriers in provision of comprehensive TB care (including TPT), and desire for clinic and nurse-led TB prevention efforts.

Conclusion

The use of the CFIR, a validated implementation determinants framework, provided a systematic approach to identify barriers and facilitators to TB household contact investigation, specifically the provision and management of TPT in this rural, high TB burden setting. Specific resources—time, trainings, and evidence—are necessary to ensure healthcare providers feel knowledgeable and competent about TPT prior to prescribing it more broadly. Tangible resources such as improved data systems coupled with political coordination and funding for TPT programming are essential for sustainability.

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

✪ Implementing point-of-care medical information systems into trauma and general surgeon practice in a middle-income country: a qualitative study utilizing the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research

Abstract:

Background

Point-of-care medical information systems (POCMIS) can provide an efficient and effective means of strengthening health systems globally through their encouragement of continued medical education. Using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) as a guide, this research provides suggestions for improved implementation of POCMIS in low- and middle-income countries informed by an intervention implemented across public and military hospitals in Lima, Peru.

Methods

Analysis is based on qualitative interviews conducted with 12 Peruvian surgeons across eight public hospitals and one military hospital who received an intervention that provided free access to UpToDate and introduced Google Translate. The post-intervention interviews were transcribed, translated, and analyzed for themes overlapping with CFIR constructs to expose barriers to implementation and suggestions for improved implementation of future interventions.

Results

Barriers included a lack of seniority buy-in and engaged leadership, an overabundance of personal preferences for multiple POCMIS, and a culture of assumption that inhibited open communication regarding access to and use of POCMIS. Suggestions for improved implementation focused on the adaptation of the intervention. Namely, surgeons discussed regionally-specific adaptations as well as adaptations specific to their surgical specialty including visual, rather than written, representation of the information available via POCMIS.

Conclusions

Results indicate necessary adaptations for implementing interventions including POCMIS in LMICs, mimicking much of the implementation science literature on intervention adaptation. In addition to explicit suggestions provided by surgeons, we also suggest actionable steps to adapt to barriers identified in our data. Rapid assessment procedures (RAP) are one established methodological technique useful for assessing organization culture prior to implementation, allowing for necessary cultural adaptations. Dynamic adaption process (DAP) is another useful and established method that breaks implementation into four phases allowing for adaptations based on the initial assessment of the intervention site.

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

✪ Identifying research practices toward achieving health equity principles within the Cancer Prevention and Control Research Network

Abstract:

Purpose

Although there is national recognition for health equity-oriented research, there is limited guidance for researchers to engage partnerships that promote health equity in cancer research. The Cancer Prevention and Control Research Network’s (CPCRN) Health Equity Work Group developed a toolkit to guide researchers in equitable collaborations.

Methods

The CPCRN’s Health Equity Work Group collectively outlined health and racial equity principles guiding research collaborations with partners that include communities, community-based organizations, implementing partners in the clinical setting including providers and health care organizations, and policy makers. Using a network-wide survey to crowdsource information around ongoing practices, we leveraged and integrated the network’s experience and collaborations.

Results

Data from the survey formed the preliminary basis for the toolkit, with a focus on sharing fiscal resources with partners, training and capacity building, collaborative decision-making, community-driven research agenda setting, and sustainability. The final toolkit provides reflection considerations for researchers and collated exemplary resources, supported by the contemporary research.

Conclusions

The toolkit provides a guide to researchers at all experience levels wanting to engage in equitable research collaborations. Future efforts are underway to evaluate whether and how researchers within and outside CPCRN are able to incorporate these principles in research collaborations.

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

✪ Mapping the organizational readiness to change assessment to the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research

Abstract:

Background

Implementation researchers recognize the influential role of organizational factors and, thus, seek to assess these factors using quantitative measurement instruments. However, researchers are hindered by instruments that measure similar constructs but rely on different nomenclature and/or definitions. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) provides a taxonomy of constructs derived from prior frameworks and empirical studies of implementation-related constructs. The CFIR includes constructs based on the original Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (PARiHS) framework which highlights the key roles of strength of evidence for a specific evidence-based intervention (EBI), favorability of organizational context for change, and capacities to facilitate implementation of the EBI. Although the CFIR is among the most frequently used implementation frameworks, it does not include quantitative measures. The Organizational Resource and Context Assessment (ORCA) is a quantitative measurement instrument that was developed based on PARiHS, assessing its three domains. Factors within these three domains are conceptually similar to constructs in the CFIR but do not match directly. The aim of this work was to map ORCA survey items to CFIR constructs to enable direct comparisons and syntheses of findings across studies using the CFIR and/or ORCA.

Methods

Two distinct, independent research teams, each used rigorous constant comparative techniques with deliberation and consensus to map individual items from the ORCA to the five domains and 39 constructs of CFIR.

Results

ORCA items were mapped primarily to three of five CFIR domains: Inner Setting, Process, and Intervention Characteristics. The two research teams agreed on 88% of mappings at the higher domain level; at the lower construct level, their mappings aligned for 62.2% of the ORCA items.

Conclusions

Mapping results reveal that the ORCA focuses measurement prominently on Inner Setting, Process, and Intervention Characteristics. This mapping guide can help improve consistency in measurement and reporting, enabling more efficient comparison and synthesis of findings that use either the ORCA instrument or the CFIR framework. The guide helps advance implementation science utilizing mixed methods by providing CFIR users with quantitative measures for selected constructs and enables ORCA users to map their findings to CFIR constructs.

^{**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 Frontiers in Oncology

Abstract:

Authors:

✪ Open Access

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

Abstract:

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Trial registration

Contributions to the literature

Authors:

✪ Open Access

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

Abstract:

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Contributions to the literature

Authors:

✪ Open Access

Read the full text in the open access journal Learning Health Systems

Abstract:

Introduction

Methods

Results & Conclusions

Authors:

✪ Open Access

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

Abstract:

Background

Methods

Findings

Conclusions

Authors:

✪ Open Access

Read the full text open access in The International Journal of Health Planning and Management

Abstract:

Authors:

✪ Open Access

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

Abstract:

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Authors:

✪ Open Access

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

Abstract:

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Authors:

✪ Open Access

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

Abstract:

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Authors:

✪ Open Access

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

Abstract:

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions