Authors:
Robin E. McGee, Archna Patel, Emily M. Drzymalla, Molly Anderson, Erica K. Johnson, Nancy J. Thompson, Cam Escoffery
University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.
✪ Open Access
Published: January 2023
Robin E. McGee, Archna Patel, Emily M. Drzymalla, Molly Anderson, Erica K. Johnson, Nancy J. Thompson, Cam Escoffery
University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.
Published: January 2023
Sara J. Becker, Tim Janssen, Tim Souza, Bryan Hartzler, Carla J. Rash, Kira DiClemente-Bosco & Bryan R. Garner
University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.
Published: December 2025
Contingency management (CM), a behavioral treatment that incentivizes patients for attaining treatment goals, is a highly effective adjunct to medication for opioid use disorder. However, CM is rarely offered in opioid treatment programs in the United States. In a prior pilot trial, the implementation strategy (didactic workshop + feedback + consultation) delivered by the Addiction Technology Transfer Centers (ATTC strategy) promoted CM adoption more effectively than didactic training, but the speed and duration of implementation were sub-optimal. This 28-site type 3 hybrid trial tested the comparative effectiveness of the ATTC strategy versus an Enhanced-ATTC (E-ATTC) strategy that contained two theory-driven techniques targeting implementation climate to improve acceleration and sustainment, respectively: a provider-focused incentivization strategy and a team-focused facilitation strategy. We hypothesized that the E-ATTC strategy would be associated with superior implementation and patient outcomes.
Twenty-eight opioid treatment programs, 186 providers, and 592 patients were cluster-randomized to receive either the ATTC or E-ATTC strategy. Providers logged their CM sessions in an online CM Tracker and submitted audio-recorded CM sessions, and patients completed surveys about their opioid use at three timepoints. Intention-to-treat analyses examined impacts of the two multi-level strategies on implementation outcomes (CM Exposure, CM Competence, CM Sustainment) and patient outcomes (Opioid Abstinence, Opioid Related Problems).
The pattern of results was identical across unadjusted, propensity score-adjusted, and covariate-adjusted general linear mixed models, though significance varied slightly. Relative to providers receiving the ATTC strategy, those receiving the E-ATTC strategy had significantly higher odds of CM Exposure (covariate adjusted OR = 3.21, p < 0.05) and of attaining the Excellent CM Competence benchmark (propensity-adjusted OR = 4.07, p < 0.05). Patients at the E-ATTC sites had significantly greater likelihood of Opioid Abstinence over time (OR = 2.04, p < 0.05). There were no significant conditional differences in CM Sustainment, though data were measured at the program-level, which limited power to detect differences.
The theory-driven E-ATTC strategy, which targeted implementation climate via facilitation and incentivization, had superior implementation and patient outcomes relative to the ATTC strategy. Results of this study can help inform ongoing CM implementation efforts across the United States.
**This abstract is posted with permission under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License**
Ruben G. Martinez, Bryan J. Weiner, Rosemary D. Meza, Shannon Dorsey, Lorella G. Palazzo, Abigail Matson, Carolyn Bain, Kayne D. Mettert, Michael D. Pullmann & Cara C. Lewis
University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.
Published: November 2024
For youth receiving care in community mental health centers, comorbidities are the rule rather than the exception. Using measurement-based care (MBC), or the routine evaluation of symptoms to inform care decisions, as the foundation of treatment for youth with comorbid problems significantly improves the impact of psychotherapy by focusing care and building engagement and alliance. MBC increases the rate of symptom improvement, detects clients who would otherwise deteriorate, and alerts clinicians to non-responders. Despite its demonstrated utility, MBC is rarely implemented with fidelity; less than 15% of providers report using MBC per recommendations. Previous efforts to support MBC implementation have yielded suboptimal outcomes, in part, due to organizations’ challenges with identifying and prioritizing barriers and selecting and developing strategies to overcome them. New methods are needed for identifying and prioritizing barriers, and matching strategies to barriers to optimize MBC implementation and treatment quality to improve youth mental health outcomes in community settings.
Pragmatic implementation methods will be piloted in four diverse community mental health centers. Methods include (a) rapid evidence synthesis; (b) rapid ethnography; (c) design kits (e.g., kits with disposable cameras, journals, maps); (d) barrier prioritization, and (e) causal pathway diagramming. These activities will generate actionable barriers; subsequently, we will use facilitated group processes to prioritize barriers and develop causal pathway diagrams to match strategies to barriers to create implementation plans that optimize MBC fidelity (Aim 1). We will track strategy deployment for 6 months, then compare MBC fidelity for another 6 months post-implementation with data from 2 years of historical controls (Aim 2). Finally, we will co-design a toolkit for design kit methods with youth and the practice and scientific communities (Aim 3).
Optimizing MBC implementation in community mental health centers could transform youth mental health care by ensuring the most pressing symptoms are targeted early in treatment. The discussion section highlights expected challenges and limits to using the five methods, including recruitment and engagement given the high pressure on community mental health settings.
**This abstract is posted with permission under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License**
Zhenyu Zhang & Ken-Yu Lin
University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.
Published: November 2023
Christopher G. Kemp, Kristen Danforth, Luke Aldridge, Laura K. Murray, and Emily E. Haroz
University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.
Published: October 2023
Limited guidance exists to support investigators in the choice, adaptation, validation and use of implementation measures for global mental health implementation research. Our objectives were to develop consensus on best practices for implementation measurement and identify strengths and opportunities in current practice. We convened seven expert panelists. Participants rated approaches to measure adaptation and validation according to appropriateness and feasibility. Follow-up interviews were conducted and a group discussion was held. We then surveyed investigators who have used quantitative implementation measures in global mental health implementation research. Participants described their use of implementation measures, including approaches to adaptation and validation, alongside challenges and opportunities. Panelists agreed that investigators could rely on evidence of a measure’s validity, reliability and dimensionality from similar contexts. Panelists did not reach consensus on whether to establish the pragmatic qualities of measures in novel settings. Survey respondents (n = 28) most commonly reported using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research Inner Setting Measures (n = 9) and the Program Assessment Sustainability Tool (n = 5). All reported adapting measures to their settings; only two reported validating their measures. These results will support guidance for implementation measurement in support of mental health services in diverse global settings.
**This abstract is posted with permission under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License**
Carol E. Levin, Justin Tauscher, Suzanne Meller, Rachel M. Brian, Benjamin E. Buck, and Dror Ben-Zeev
University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.
Published: October 2023
Cathryn Booth-LaForce, Monica L Oxford, Rae O’Leary, Jennifer Rees, Anthippy Petras, and Dedra S Buchwald
University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.
Published: October 2023
Bo Kim, Gracelyn Cruden, Erika L. Crable, Andrew Quanbeck, Brian S. Mittman, & Anjuli D. Wagner
University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.
Published: October 2023
It is challenging to identify and understand the specific mechanisms through which an implementation strategy affects implementation outcomes, as implementation happens in the context of complex, multi-level systems. These systems and the mechanisms within each level have their own dynamic environments that change frequently. For instance, sequencing may matter in that a mechanism may only be activated indirectly by a strategy through another mechanism. The dosage or strength of a mechanism may vary over time or across different health care system levels. To elucidate the mechanisms relevant to successful implementation amidst this complexity, systems analysis methods are needed to model and manage complexity.
The fields of systems engineering and systems science offer methods—which we refer to as systems analysis methods—to help explain the interdependent relationships between and within systems, as well as dynamic changes to systems over time. When applied to studying implementation mechanisms, systems analysis methods can help (i) better identify and manage unknown conditions that may or may not activate mechanisms (both expected mechanisms targeted by a strategy and unexpected mechanisms that the methods help detect) and (ii) flexibly guide strategy adaptations to address contextual influences that emerge after the strategy is selected and used.
In this paper, we delineate a structured approach to applying systems analysis methods for examining implementation mechanisms. The approach includes explicit steps for selecting, tailoring, and evaluating an implementation strategy regarding the mechanisms that the strategy is initially hypothesized to activate, as well as additional mechanisms that are identified through the steps. We illustrate the approach using a case example. We then discuss the strengths and limitations of this approach, as well as when these steps might be most appropriate, and suggest work to further the contributions of systems analysis methods to implementation mechanisms research.
Our approach to applying systems analysis methods can encourage more mechanisms research efforts to consider these methods and in turn fuel both (i) rigorous comparisons of these methods to alternative mechanisms research approaches and (ii) an active discourse across the field to better delineate when these methods are appropriate for advancing mechanisms-related knowledge.
**This abstract is posted with permission under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License**
Allison J Ober, Alex R Dopp, Sarah E Clingan, Megan E Curtis, Chunqing Lin, Stacy Calhoun, Sherry Larkins, Megan Black, Maria Hanano, Katie P Osterhage, Laura-Mae Baldwin, Andrew J Saxon, Emily G Hichborn, Lisa A Marsch, Larissa J Mooney, and Yih-Ing Hser
University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.
Published:October 2023
Opioid overdose deaths are increasing rapidly in the United States. Medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) are effective and can be delivered in primary care, but uptake has been limited in rural communities. Referral to and coordination with an external telemedicine (TM) vendor by rural primary care clinics for MOUD (TM-MOUD) may increase MOUD access for rural patients, but we know little about perspectives on this model among key stakeholders. As part of a TM-MOUD feasibility study, we explored TM-MOUD acceptability and feasibility among personnel and patients from seven rural primary care clinics and a TM-MOUD vendor.
We conducted virtual interviews or focus groups with clinic administrators (n = 7 interviews), clinic primary care and behavioral health providers (8 groups, n = 30), other clinic staff (9 groups, n = 37), patients receiving MOUD (n = 16 interviews), TM-MOUD vendor staff (n = 4 interviews), and vendor-affiliated behavioral health and prescribing providers (n = 17 interviews). We asked about experiences with and acceptability of MOUD (primarily buprenorphine) and telemedicine (TM) and a TM-MOUD referral and coordination model. We conducted content analysis to identify themes and participants quantitatively rated acceptability of TM-MOUD elements on a 4-item scale.
Perceived benefits of vendor-based TM-MOUD included reduced logistical barriers, more privacy and less stigma, and access to services not available locally (e.g., counseling, pain management). Barriers included lack of internet or poor connectivity in patients' homes, limited communication and trust between TM-MOUD and clinic providers, and questions about the value to the clinic of TM-MOUD referral to external vendor. Acceptability ratings for TM-MOUD were generally high; they were lowest among frontline staff.
Rural primary care clinic personnel, TM-MOUD vendor personnel, and patients generally perceived referral from primary care to a TM-MOUD vendor to hold potential for increasing access to MOUD in rural communities. Increasing TM-MOUD uptake requires buy-in and understanding among staff of the TM-MOUD workflow, TM services offered, requirements for patients, advantages over clinic-based or TM services from clinic providers, and identification of appropriate patients. Poverty, along with patient hesitation to initiate treatment, creates substantial barriers to MOUD treatment generally; insufficient internet availability creates a substantial barrier to TM-MOUD.
**This abstract is posted with permission under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License**
Nathaniel J. Williams, Joan Russo, Melinda Vredevoogd, Tess Grover, Phillip Green, Enola Proctor, Amritha Bhat, Jürgen Unützer & Ian M. Bennett
University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.
Published: October 2023
Organizational factors may help explain variation in the effectiveness of evidence-based clinical innovations through implementation and sustainment. This study tested the relationship between organizational culture and climate and variation in clinical outcomes of the Collaborative Care Model (CoCM) for treatment of maternal depression implemented in community health centers.
Organizational cultures and climates of 10 community health centers providing CoCM for depression among low-income women pregnant or parenting were assessed using the organizational social context (OSC) measure. Three-level hierarchical linear models tested whether variation in culture and climate predicted variation in improvement in depression symptoms from baseline to 6.5-month post-baseline for N = 468 women with care ±1 year of OSC assessment. Depression symptomology was measured using the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9).
After controlling for patient characteristics, case mix, center size, and implementation support, patients served by centers with more proficient cultures improved significantly more from baseline to 6.5-month post-baseline than patients in centers with less proficient cultures (mean improvement = 5.08 vs. 0.14, respectively, p = .020), resulting in a large adjusted effect size of dadj = 0.78. A similar effect was observed for patients served by centers with more functional climates (mean improvement = 5.25 vs. 1.12, p < .044, dadj = 0.65). Growth models indicated that patients from all centers recovered on average after 4 months of care. However, those with more proficient cultures remained stabilized whereas patients served by centers with less proficient cultures deteriorated by 6.5-month post-baseline. A similar pattern was observed for functional climate.
Variation in clinical outcomes for women from historically underserved populations receiving Collaborative Care for maternal depression was associated with the organizational cultures and climates of community health centers. Implementation strategies targeting culture and climate may improve the implementation and effectiveness of integrated behavioral health care for depression.
**This abstract is posted with permission under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License**