Skip to content

✪ A structured approach to applying systems analysis methods for examining implementation mechanisms

Authors:

Bo Kim, Gracelyn Cruden, Erika L. Crable, Andrew Quanbeck, Brian S. Mittman, & Anjuli D. Wagner

University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.

✪ Open Access

Published: October 2023

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

Abstract:

Background

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.

Methods

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.

Results

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.

Conclusions

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**

✪ Stakeholder perspectives on a telemedicine referral and coordination model to expand medication treatment for opioid use disorder in rural primary care clinics

Authors:

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.

✪ Open Access

Published:October 2023

Read the full text in the open access journal Journal of Substance Use and Addiction Treatment

Abstract:

Introduction

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.

Methods

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.

Results

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.

Conclusions

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**

✪ Association of organizational culture and climate with variation in the clinical outcomes of collaborative care for maternal depression in community health centers

Authors:

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.

✪ Open Access

Published: October 2023

Read the full text in the open access journal Implementation Research and Practice

Abstract:

Background

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.

Method

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).

Results

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.

Conclusions

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**

✪ Formative Evaluation of a Comprehensive Self-Management Intervention for Irritable Bowel Syndrome, Comorbid Anxiety, and Depression: Mixed Methods Study

Authors:

Kendra Kamp, Pei-Lin Yang, Emily Friedman, Alejandra Lopez, Sarah Iribarren, Pamela Barney, Sean Munson, Margaret Heitkemper, & Rona Levy

University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.

✪ Open Access

Published: October 2023

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

Abstract:

Background

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a disorder of the gut-brain interaction that is associated with abdominal pain, altered bowel patterns, and reduced quality of life. Up to 50% of patients with IBS also report anxiety or depressive symptoms. Although effective self-management interventions exist for individuals with IBS, few have been effectively implemented, and most do not consider the unique needs of patients with comorbid IBS and anxiety or depression.

Objective

This study aimed to determine the anticipated acceptability, appropriateness, feasibility, and usability of a comprehensive self-management intervention using an implementation science and human-centered design approach among individuals with comorbid IBS and anxiety or depression and health care providers.

Methods

A convergent mixed methods design was used to elicit feedback on the comprehensive self-management intervention outline and content to identify refinement needs before testing. Patients with IBS and moderate to severe anxiety or depression and health care providers were purposefully sampled from primary care and gastroenterology settings. Participants completed semistructured interviews and surveys on anticipated acceptability, appropriateness, feasibility, and usability.

Results

Patient participants (n=12) were on average 36.8 (SD 12.2) years of age, and 42% (5/12) were currently receiving psychological therapy. Health care providers (n=14) were from primary care (n=7) and gastroenterology (n=7) settings. The mean usability scores (out of 100) were 52.5 (SD 14.5) for patients and 45.6 (SD 11.6) for providers. For patients and providers, qualitative data expanded the quantitative findings for acceptability and appropriateness. Acceptability findings were the comprehensive nature of the intervention and discussion of the gut-brain interaction. For appropriateness, participants reported that the intervention provided structure, accountability, and support. Feasibility was confirmed for patients, but there was a divergence of findings between quantitative and qualitative measures for providers. Patients focused on intervention feasibility, while providers focused on implementation feasibility in the clinic. Identified usability issues to address before implementation included the intervention delivery format, length, and lack of integration into health care settings that, if not addressed, may limit the reach of the intervention

Conclusions

Patients and health care providers found the intervention acceptable and appropriate. Several feasibility and usability issues were identified, including intervention delivery methods, length of intervention, and the best methods to implement in the clinic setting. The next steps are to refine the intervention to address the identified issues and test in a pilot study whether addressing usability issues leads to the anticipated improvements in implementation and uptake.

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

Lung Cancer Screening in People With HIV: A Mixed-Methods Study of Patient and Provider Perspectives

Authors:

Matthew Triplette, Meagan C. Brown, Madison Snidarich, Jehan Z. Budak, Nicholas Giustini, Nicholas Murphy, Perrin E. Romine, Bryan J. Weiner, & Kristina Crothers

University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.

Subscription Required for Full Text Access

Published: October 2023

Read the full text in the subscription access journal American Journal of Preventive Medicine

Impact of differentiated service delivery models on 12-month retention in HIV treatment in Mozambique: an interrupted time-series analysis

Authors:

Dorlim A Moiana Uetela, Orvalho Augusto, James P Hughes, Onei A Uetela, Eduardo Samo Gudo, Sérgio A Chicumbe, Aleny M Couto, Irénio A Gaspar, Diogo L Chavana, Sandra E Gaveta, Marita R Zimmermann, Sarah Gimbel & Kenneth Sherr

University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.

Subscription Required for Full Text Access

Published: October 2023

Read the full text in the subscription access journal The Lancet HIV

✪ Assessment of implementation methods in sepsis: study protocol for a cluster-randomized hybrid type 2 trial

Authors:

Hannah E. Frank, Laura Evans, Gary Phillips, R Phillip Dellinger, Jessyca Goldstein, Lori Harmon, David Portelli, Nima Sarani, Christa Schorr, Kathleen M. Terry, Sean R. Townsend, & Mitchell M. Levy

University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.

✪ Open Access

Published:September 2023

Read the full text in the open access journal Trials

Abstract:

Abstract:

Background

Sepsis is the leading cause of intensive care unit (ICU) admission and ICU death. In recognition of the burden of sepsis, the Surviving Sepsis Campaign (SSC) and the Institute for Healthcare Improvement developed sepsis “bundles” (goals to accomplish over a specific time period) to facilitate SSC guideline implementation in clinical practice. Using the SSC 3-h bundle as a base, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services developed a 3-h sepsis bundle that has become the national standard for early management of sepsis. Emerging observational data, from an analysis conducted for the AIMS grant application, suggest there may be additional mortality benefit from even earlier implementation of the 3-h bundle, i.e., the 1-h bundle.

Method

The primary aims of this randomized controlled trial are to: (1) examine the effect on clinical outcomes of Emergency Department initiation of the elements of the 3-h bundle within the traditional 3 h versus initiating within 1 h of sepsis recognition and (2) examine the extent to which a rigorous implementation strategy will improve implementation and compliance with both the 1-h bundle and the 3-h bundle. This study will be entirely conducted in the Emergency Department at 18 sites. A secondary aim is to identify clinical sepsis phenotypes and their impact on treatment outcomes.

Discussion

This cluster-randomized trial, employing implementation science methodology, is timely and important to the field. The hybrid effectiveness-implementation design is likely to have an impact on clinical practice in sepsis management by providing a rigorous evaluation of the 1- and 3-h bundles.

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

✪ Integrating a focus on health equity in implementation science: Case examples from the national cancer institute’s implementation science in cancer control centers (ISC3) network

Authors:

Kelly A. Aschbrenner, April Y. Oh, Rachel G. Tabak, Peggy A. Hannon, Heather E. Angier, W. Todd Moore, Sonja Likumahuwa-Ackman, Jennifer K. Carroll, Ana A. Baumann, Rinad S. Beidas, Stephanie Mazzucca-Ragan, Erika A. Waters, Rajani S. Sadasivam, and Rachel C. Shelton

University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.

✪ Open Access

Published:September 2023

Read the full text in the open access Journal of Clinical and Translational Science

Abstract:

Background

A Health Equity Task Force (HETF) of members from seven Centers funded by the National Cancer Institute’s (NCI) Implementation Science in Cancer Control Centers (ISC3) network sought to identify case examples of how Centers were applying a focus on health equity in implementation science to inform future research and capacity-building efforts.

Methods

HETF members at each ISC3 collected information on how health equity was conceptualized, operationalized, and addressed in initial research and capacity-building efforts across the seven ISC3 Centers funded in 2019–2020. Each Center completed a questionnaire assessing five health equity domains central to implementation science (e.g., community engagement; implementation science theories, models, and frameworks (TMFs); and engaging underrepresented scholars). Data generated illustrative examples from these five domains.

Results

Centers reported a range of approaches focusing on health equity in implementation research and capacity-building efforts, including (1) engaging diverse community partners/settings in making decisions about research priorities and projects; (2) applying health equity within a single TMF applied across projects or various TMFs used in specific projects; (3) evaluating health equity in operationalizing and measuring health and implementation outcomes; (4) building capacity for health equity-focused implementation science among trainees, early career scholars, and partnering organizations; and (5) leveraging varying levels of institutional resources and efforts to engage, include, and support underrepresented scholars.

Conclusions

Examples of approaches to integrating health equity across the ISC3 network can inform other investigators and centers’ efforts to build capacity and infrastructure to support growth and expansion of health equity-focused implementation science.

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