Skip to content

✪ Implementing combined WHO mhGAP and adapted group interpersonal psychotherapy to address depression and mental health needs of pregnant adolescents in Kenyan primary health care settings (INSPIRE): a study protocol for pilot feasibility trial of the integrated intervention in LMIC settings

Authors:

Manasi Kumar, Keng-Yen Huang, Caleb Othieno, Dalton Wamalwa, Kimberly Hoagwood, Jurgen Unutzer, Shekhar Saxena, Inge Petersen, Simon Njuguna, Beatrice Amugune, Onesmus Gachuno, Fred Ssewamala & Mary McKay

University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.

✪ Open Access

Published: September 2020

Read the full text in the open access journal Pilot and Feasibility Studies

Abstract:

Background

Addressing adolescent pregnancies associated health burden demands new ways of organizing maternal and child mental health services to meet multiple needs of this group. There is a need to strengthen integration of sustainable evidence-based mental health interventions in primary health care settings for pregnant adolescents. The proposed study is guided by implementation science frameworks with key objective of implementing a pilot trial testing a full IPT-G version along with IPT-G mini version under the mhGAP/IPT-G service framework and to study feasibility of the integrated mhGAP/IPT-G adolescent peripartum depression care delivery model and estimate if a low cost and compressed version of IPT-G intervention would result in similar size of effect on mental health and family functioning as the Full IPT-G.

There are two sub- studies embedded which are: 1) To identify multi-level system implementation barriers and strategies guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to enhance perinatal mhGAP-depression care and evidence-based intervention integration (i.e., group interpersonal psychotherapy; IPT-G) for pregnant adolescents in primary care contexts; 2) To use findings from aim 1 and observational data from Maternal and Child Health (MCH) clinics that run within primary health care facilities to develop a mental health implementation workflow plan that has buy-in from key stakeholders, as well as to develop a modified protocol and implementation training manual for building health facility staff’s capacity in implementing the integrated mhGAP/IPT-G depression care.

Methods

For the primary objective of studying feasibility of the integrated mhGAP/IPT-G depression care in MCH service context for adolescent perinatal depression, we will recruit 90 pregnant adolescents to a three-arm pilot intervention (unmasked) trial study (IPT-G Full, IPT-G Mini, and wait-list control in the context of mhGAP care). Pregnant adolescents ages 13–18, in their 1st-2nd trimester with a depression score of 13 and above on EPDS would be recruited. Proctor’s implementation evaluation model will be used. Feasibility and acceptability of the intervention implementation and size of effects on mental health and family functioning will be estimated using mixed method data collection from caregivers of adolescents, adolescents, and health care providers. In the two sub-studies, stakeholders representing diverse perspectives will be recruited and focus group discussions data will be gathered.

For aim 2, to build capacity for mhGAP-approach of adolescent depression care and research, the implementation-capacity training manual will be applied to train 20 providers, 12 IPT-G implementers/health workers and 16 Kenyan researchers. Acceptability and appropriateness of the training approach will be assessed. Additional feedback related to co-located service delivery model, task-shifting and task-sharing approach of IPT-G delivery will be gathered for further manual improvement.

Discussion

This intervention and service design are in line with policy priority of Government of Kenya, Kenya Vision 2030, World Health Organization, and UN Sustainable Development Goals that focus on improving capacity of mental health service systems to reduce maternal, child, adolescent health and mental health disparities in LMICs. Successfully carrying out this study in Kenya will provide an evidence-based intervention service development and implementation model for adolescents in other Sub-Saharan African (SSA) countries. The study is funded by FIC/NIH under K43 grant.

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

Implementation-as-Usual in Community-Based Organizations Providing Specialized Services to Individuals with Autism Spectrum Disorder: A Mixed Methods Study

Authors:

Amy Drahota, Rosemary D. Meza, Tatiana E. Bustos, Aksheya Sridhar, Jonathan I. Martinez, Brigitte Brikho, Aubyn C. Stahmer, Gregory A. Aarons

University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.

Subscription Required for Full Text Access

Published: September 2020

Read the full text in the subscription access journal Administration and Policy in Mental Health

From research to international scale-up: stakeholder engagement essential in successful design, evaluation and implementation of paediatric HIV testing intervention

Authors:

Cyrus Mugo, Irene Njuguna, Margaret Nduati, Vincent Omondi, Verlinda Otieno, Florence Nyapara, Elizabeth Mabele, Hellen Moraa, Kenneth Sherr, Irene Inwani, Elizabeth Maleche-Obimbo, Dalton Wamalwa, Grace John-Stewart, Jennifer Slyker, Anjuli D Wagner

University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.

Subscription Required for Full Text Access

Published: September 2020

Read the full text in the subscription access journal Health Policy and Planning

✪ Health plan adaptations to a mailed outreach program for colorectal cancer screening among Medicaid and Medicare enrollees: the BeneFIT study

Authors:

Gloria D. Coronado, Jennifer L. Schneider, Beverly B. Green, Jennifer K. Coury, Malaika R. Schwartz, Yogini Kulkarni-Sharma & Laura Mae Baldwin

University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.

✪ Open Access

Published: September 2020

Read the full text in the open access journal Implementation Science

Abstract:

Background

Promoting uptake of evidence-based innovations in healthcare systems requires attention to how innovations are adapted to enhance their fit with a given setting. Little is known about real-world variation in how programs are delivered over time and across multiple populations and contexts, and what motivates adaptations.

Methods

As part of the BeneFIT study of mailed fecal immunochemical tests (FIT) to increase colorectal cancer screening, we interviewed 9 leaders from two participating Medicaid/Medicare health insurance plans to examine adaptations to their health plan-initiated mailed FIT outreach programs in the second year of implementation. We applied an adaptation and modification model developed by Stirman and colleagues to document content and context modifications made to the two programs.

Results

Both health plans made substantial changes to their programs in the second year; adaptations differed substantially across health plans. In Health Plan Oregon, adaptations generally targeted health centers and member populations, most content adaptations involved tailoring program components, and the program was expanded to four additional health centers. In contrast, Health Plan Washington’s second-year content adaptations were primarily at the level of members, and generally involved adding program components. Moreover, Health Plan Washington undertook large-scale context adaptations to the setting where the program was led (local vs. national), the personnel who administered the program (vendor and staffing), and the population selected for outreach (limiting outreach to dual-eligible members).

Conclusions

Both programs implemented a variety of adaptations that reflected the values and incentives of the broader health plan contexts. Financial incentives for screening allowed Health Plan Oregon to expand but led Health Plan Washington to offer more targeted outreach to a subset of eligible enrollees. The breadth of changes made by each health system reflects the necessity of evaluating programs in context and adjusting to specific challenges as they are identified. Further research is needed to understand the effects of these types of adaptations on program efficiency and enrollee and health system outcomes.

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

✪ Implementation Science to Respond to the COVID-19 Pandemic

Authors:

Arianna Rubin Means, Anjuli D. Wagner, Eli Kern, Laura P. Newman, and Bryan J. Weiner

University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.

✪ Open Access

Published: September 2020

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

Abstract:

The COVID-19 pandemic continues to expand globally, requiring massive public health responses from national and local governments. These bodies have taken heterogeneous approaches to their responses, including when and how to introduce and enforce evidence-based interventions—such as social distancing, hand-washing, personal protective equipment (PPE), and testing. In this commentary, we reflect on opportunities for implementation science to contribute meaningfully to the COVID-19 pandemic response. We reflect backwards on missed opportunities in emergency preparedness planning, using the example of PPE stockpiling and supply management; this planning could have been strengthened through process mapping with consensus-building, microplanning with simulation, and stakeholder engagement.

We propose current opportunities for action, focusing on enhancing the adoption, fidelity, and sustainment of hand washing and social distancing; we can combine qualitative data, policy analysis, and dissemination science to inform agile and rapid adjustment to social marketing strategies to enhance their penetration. We look to future opportunities to enhance the integration of new evidence in decision-making, focusing on serologic and virologic testing systems; we can leverage simulation and other systems engineering modeling to identify ideal system structures. Finally, we discuss the ways in which the COVID-19 pandemic challenges implementation science to become more rapid, rigorous, and nimble in its approach, and integrate with public health practice. In summary, we articulate the ways in which implementation science can inform, and be informed by, the COVID-19 pandemic, looking backwards, proposing actions for the moment, and approaches for the future.

Contributions to the Literature
  • The COVID-19 pandemic response has illuminated gaps in emergency preparedness planning that could be addressed by implementation scientists working in coordination with public health practitioners.
  • Classical implementation science tools and measures can be operationalized within the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, and at each stage of the pandemic. Doing so empowers implementation scientists to apply their skillsets toward optimizing uptake of evidence-based interventions such as such as social distancing, hand washing, and personal protective equipment.
  • To be more responsive to public health emergencies, implementation science as a discipline must evolve to be more rapid, nimble, and policy-oriented in its approaches.

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

✪ Measuring readiness for implementation: A systematic review of measures’ psychometric and pragmatic properties

Authors:

Bryan J. Weiner, Kayne D. Mettert, Caitlin N. Dorsey, Elspeth A. Nolen, Cameo Stanick, Byron J. Powell, & Cara C. Lewis

University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.

✪ Open Access

Published: August 2020

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

Abstract:

Background

Systematic measure reviews can facilitate advances in implementation research and practice by locating reliable, valid, pragmatic measures; identifying promising measures needing refinement and testing; and highlighting measurement gaps. This review identifies and evaluates the psychometric and pragmatic properties of measures of readiness for implementation and its sub-constructs as delineated in the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research: leadership engagement, available resources, and access to knowledge and information.

Methods

The systematic review methodology is described fully elsewhere. The review, which focused on measures used in mental or behavioral health, proceeded in three phases. Phase I, data collection, involved search string generation, title and abstract screening, full text review, construct assignment, and cited citation searches. Phase II, data extraction, involved coding relevant psychometric and pragmatic information. Phase III, data analysis, involved two trained specialists independently rating each measure using Psychometric and Pragmatic Evidence Rating Scales (PAPERS). Frequencies and central tendencies summarized information availability and PAPERS ratings.

Results

Searches identified 9 measures of readiness for implementation, 24 measures of leadership engagement, 17 measures of available resources, and 6 measures of access to knowledge and information. Information about internal consistency was available for most measures. Information about other psychometric properties was often not available. Ratings for internal consistency were “adequate” or “good.” Ratings for other psychometric properties were less than “adequate.” Information on pragmatic properties was most often available regarding cost, language readability, and brevity. Information was less often available regarding training burden and interpretation burden. Cost and language readability generally exhibited “good” or “excellent” ratings, interpretation burden generally exhibiting “minimal” ratings, and training burden and brevity exhibiting mixed ratings across measures.

Conclusion

Measures of readiness for implementation and its sub-constructs used in mental health and behavioral health care are unevenly distributed, exhibit unknown or low psychometric quality, and demonstrate mixed pragmatic properties. This review identified a few promising measures, but targeted efforts are needed to systematically develop and test measures that are useful for both research and practice.

Plain language abstract

Successful implementation of effective mental health or behavioral health treatments in service delivery settings depends in part on the readiness of the service providers and administrators to implement the treatment; the engagement of organizational leaders in the implementation effort; the resources available to support implementation, such as time, money, space, and training; and the accessibility of knowledge and information among service providers about the treatment and how it works. It is important that the methods for measuring these factors are dependable, accurate, and practical; otherwise, we cannot assess their presence or strength with confidence or know whether efforts to increase their presence or strength have worked. This systematic review of published studies sought to identify and evaluate the quality of questionnaires (referred to as measures) that assess readiness for implementation, leadership engagement, available resources, and access to knowledge and information. We identified 56 measures of these factors and rated their quality in terms of how dependable, accurate, and practical they are. Our findings indicate there is much work to be done to improve the quality of available measures; we offer several recommendations for doing so.

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

✪ Measuring implementation outcomes: An updated systematic review of measures’ psychometric properties

Authors:

Kayne Mettert, Cara C. Lewis, Caitlin Dorsey, Heather Halko, & Bryan J. Weiner

University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.

✪ Open Access

Published: August 2020

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

Abstract:

Background

Systematic reviews of measures can facilitate advances in implementation research and practice by locating reliable and valid measures and highlighting measurement gaps. Our team completed a systematic review of implementation outcome measures published in 2015 that indicated a severe measurement gap in the field. Now, we offer an update with this enhanced systematic review to identify and evaluate the psychometric properties of measures of eight implementation outcomes used in behavioral health care.

Methods

The systematic review methodology is described in detail in a previously published protocol paper and summarized here. The review proceeded in three phases. Phase I, data collection, involved search string generation, title and abstract screening, full text review, construct assignment, and measure forward searches. Phase II, data extraction, involved coding psychometric information. Phase III, data analysis, involved two trained specialists independently rating each measure using PAPERS (Psychometric And Pragmatic Evidence Rating Scales).

Results

Searches identified 150 outcomes measures of which 48 were deemed unsuitable for rating and thus excluded, leaving 102 measures for review. We identified measures of acceptability (N = 32), adoption (N = 26), appropriateness (N = 6), cost (N = 31), feasibility (N = 18), fidelity (N = 18), penetration (N = 23), and sustainability (N = 14). Information about internal consistency and norms were available for most measures (59%). Information about other psychometric properties was often not available. Ratings for internal consistency and norms ranged from “adequate” to “excellent.” Ratings for other psychometric properties ranged mostly from “poor” to “good.”

Conclusion

While measures of implementation outcomes used in behavioral health care (including mental health, substance use, and other addictive behaviors) are unevenly distributed and exhibit mostly unknown psychometric quality, the data reported in this article show an overall improvement in availability of psychometric information. This review identified a few promising measures, but targeted efforts are needed to systematically develop and test measures that are useful for both research and practice.

Plain language abstract

When implementing an evidence-based treatment into practice, it is important to assess several outcomes to gauge how effectively it is being implemented. Outcomes such as acceptability, feasibility, and appropriateness may offer insight into why providers do not adopt a new treatment. Similarly, outcomes such as fidelity and penetration may provide important context for why a new treatment did not achieve desired effects. It is important that methods to measure these outcomes are accurate and consistent. Without accurate and consistent measurement, high-quality evaluations cannot be conducted. This systematic review of published studies sought to identify questionnaires (referred to as measures) that ask staff at various levels (e.g., providers, supervisors) questions related to implementation outcomes, and to evaluate the quality of these measures. We identified 150 measures and rated the quality of their evidence with the goal of recommending the best measures for future use. Our findings suggest that a great deal of work is needed to generate evidence for existing measures or build new measures to achieve confidence in our implementation evaluations.

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

✪ Defining gaps in pre-exposure prophylaxis delivery for pregnant and post-partum women in high-burden settings using an implementation science framework

Authors:

Jillian Pintye, Dvora L. Joseph Davey, Anjuli D. Wagner, Grace John-Stewart, Rachel Baggaley, Linda-Gail Bekker, Connie Celum, Benjamin H. Chi, Thomas J. Coates, Allison K. Groves, Jessica E. Haberer, Renee Heffron, John Kinuthia, Lynn T. Matthews, James A. McIntyre, Dhayendre Moodley, Lynne M. Mofenson, Nelly Mugo, Andrew Mujugira, Landon Myer, Steven Shoptaw, Lynda Stranix-Chibanda, Jared M. Baeten, for the PrEP in Pregnancy Working Group

University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.

Subscription Required for Full Text Access

Published: August 2020

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

✪ Practice facilitation to implement alcohol-related care in Veterans Health Administration liver clinics: a study protocol

Authors:

Madeline C. Frost, George N. Ioannou, Judith I. Tsui, E. Jennifer Edelman, Bryan J. Weiner, Olivia V. Fletcher & Emily C. Williams

University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.

✪ Open Access

Published: July 2020

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

Abstract:

Background

Alcohol-related care, including screening, brief intervention, and provision of/referral to medication or behavioral treatments for alcohol use disorder, could be delivered in liver clinics to better reach patients with chronic liver conditions. However, the provision of alcohol-related care in liver clinics is currently suboptimal. Practice facilitation is an evidence-based implementation strategy that may address barriers, harness facilitators, and optimize the implementation of alcohol-related care in liver clinic settings using a clinic-centered approach. We report the protocol of a study to test a practice facilitation intervention to implement alcohol-related care in four Veterans Health Administration liver clinics.

Methods

This study will employ a Hybrid Type 3 effectiveness-implementation design, in which implementation outcomes are considered primary and clinical outcomes secondary. Intervention and evaluation design were informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Qualitative data collected from clinical stakeholders and patients were used to tailor the intervention. The intervention involves a 6-month period of external practice facilitation, including regular meetings to identify clinic goals, challenges, and solutions; engagement of clinic champions; provision of training and development of educational materials for clinic staff and patients; and performance monitoring and feedback. Ongoing formative evaluation involves the collection of quantitative facilitator tracking data and qualitative data from meeting notes and patient interviews to describe intervention acceptability, feasibility, and adoption, and adjust implementation as needed. In the summative evaluation, implementation outcomes (clinic rates of screening, brief intervention, and treatment referral/receipt) and clinical outcomes (unhealthy alcohol use, liver health) will be assessed among patients in participating clinics using secondary electronic health record data and interrupted time series analysis.

Discussion

This will be the first study to our knowledge to test practice facilitation to implement alcohol-related care in liver clinic settings. Results from formative and summative evaluation will inform a framework for the successful implementation of effective alcohol-related care through practice facilitation in liver clinics, which may ultimately lead to better health outcomes for patients with chronic liver disease.

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