Consolidated Framework For Implementation Research Research Articles

Connecting unstably housed veterans living in rural areas to health care: Perspectives from Health Care Navigators.

To understand existing care practices and policies, and potential enhancements, to improve the effectiveness of the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Supportive Services for Veteran Families (SSVF) Health Care Navigators (HCN) in linking Veterans experiencing housing instability in rural areas with health care services. We used primary data collected during semistructured interviews with HCNs (n = 21) serving rural areas across the United States during Spring 2022. We applied the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) 2009 and the Social Ecological Model (SEM) to the collection and analysis of qualitative data to understand how HCNs administer services within SSVF and the larger community. We used rapid qualitative methods to summarize and analyze data. Templated matrix summaries identified facilitators and barriers to linking Veterans with health care services and policy and practice implications. Using CFIR 2009, we identified contextual factors affecting successful implementation of HCN services within SSVF; we offer a crosswalk between CFIR 2009 and the version updated in 2022. Framing facilitators and barriers within the SEM provided insight into whether implementation strategies should be addressed at a community, interpersonal, or intrapersonal level within the SEM. Facilitators included sufficient knowledge, training, and mentorship opportunities for HCNs and their capacity to collaborate within their organization and with other community-based organizations. Barriers included lack of local technology and housing resources, inadequate understanding of Veterans' service eligibilities and pathways to access those services, and deficient collaboration with the VA. Understanding facilitators and barriers experienced by HCN when linking unstably housed Veterans in rural areas with health care services can inform future strategies, including policy changes such as increased training to support HCNs' understanding of eligibility, benefits, and entitlements as well as improving communication and collaboration between VA and community partners.

A systematic review of telemedicine for neuromuscular diseases: components and determinants of practice

IntroductionNeuromuscular diseases (NMDs) entail a group of mostly inherited genetic disorders with heterogeneous phenotypes impacting muscles, the central or peripheral nervous system. They can lead to severe disabilities and shortened lifespans. Despite their severity, NMDs often lack in public awareness and appropriate medical and social support. Telemedicine can improve patients’ and caregivers’ lives by enhancing continuity of and access to care. The first aim of this systematic review was to summarise the status quo of telemedicine services for patients with NMDs. Secondly, barriers and facilitators of the respective implementation processes should be analysed.MethodsThe databases PubMed, Web of Science and CENTRAL by Cochrane were searched in May 2022. To be truly explorative, any original evidence from any setting was included. Two independent researchers completed the screening process. Data was extracted and analysed using the taxonomy of Bashshur et al. (2011) and the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR).ResultsFifty-seven original papers were included in the systematic review. The results showed a high representation of teleconsultations and remote monitoring studies. Teleconsultations replaced in person appointments and telemonitoring mostly focused on ventilation. Physical therapy, pulmonology, neurology, and psychology were the most represented medical specialties. We found barriers and facilitators relating to implementation mainly referred to the intervention and the individuals involved. Technical errors and inaccessibility due to a lack of technical devices or the patient’s disability were stated as hindrances. A positive mindset of users as well as patient empowerment were necessary for the adoption of new technology. Technophobia or uncertainty around technology negatively impacted the implementation process.DiscussionThis systematic review provides an overview of the current use of telemedicine in patients with NMDs. The distribution of telemedicine interventions between the defined domains was very heterogenous. Previous research has neglected to fully describe the implementation process of telemedicine for NMDs.ConclusionThe evidence shows that telemedicine can benefit patients with NMDs in a multitude of ways. Therefore, health policies should endorse and incentivise the uptake of telemedicine by institutions and health care workers. Further research needs to be conducted to confirm the current evidence and close existing research gaps.

Quality improvement lessons learned from National Implementation of the "Patient Safety Events in Community Care: Reporting, Investigation, and Improvement Guidebook".

To evaluate nationwide implementation of a Guidebook designed to standardize safety practices across VA-delivered and VA-purchased care (i.e., Community Care) and identify lessons learned and strategies to improve them. Qualitative data collected from key informants at 18 geographically diverse VA facilities across 17 Veterans Integrated Services Networks (VISNs). We conducted semi-structured interviews from 2019 to 2022 with VISN Patient Safety Officers (PSOs) and VA facility patient safety and quality managers (PSMs and QMs) and VA Facility Community Care (CC) staff to assess lessons learned by examining organizational contextual factors affecting Guidebook implementation based on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Interviews were conducted virtually with 45 facility staff and 10 VISN PSOs. Using directed content analysis, we identified CFIR factors affecting implementation. These factors were mapped to the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) strategy compilation to identify lessons learned that could be useful to our operational partners in improving implementation processes. We met frequently with our partners to discuss findings and plan next steps. Six CFIR constructs were identified as both facilitators and barriers to Guidebook implementation: (1) planning for implementation; (2) engaging key knowledge holders; (3) available resources; (4) networks and communications; (5) culture; and (6) external policies. The two CFIR constructs that were only barriers included: (1) cosmopolitanism and (2) executing implementation. Our findings suggest several important lessons: (1) engage all collaborators involved in implementation; (2) ensure end-users have opportunities to provide feedback; (3) describe collaborators' purpose and roles/responsibilities clearly at the start; (4) communicate information widely and repeatedly; and (5) identify how multiple high priorities can be synergistic. This evaluation will help our partners and key VA leadership to determine next steps and future strategies for improving Guidebook implementation through collaboration with VA staff.

Applying the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research to investigate factors of implementing alcohol screening and brief intervention among primary care physicians and nurses in Hong Kong, China: an exploratory sequential mixed-method study

BackgroundAlcohol screening and brief intervention (SBI) is an evidence-based intervention recommended by the World Health Organization. This study applied the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to understand facilitators and barriers of SBI implementation in primary care settings in Hong Kong, China.MethodsThis was a sequential mixed-method study. In-depth interviews of 21 physicians and 20 nurses working in the primary care settings from the public and private sectors were first conducted to identify CFIR constructs that were relevant to SBI implementation in the Chinese context and potential factors not covered by the CFIR. A questionnaire was then developed based on the qualitative findings to investigate factors associated with SBI implementation among 282 physicians and 295 nurses.ResultsThe in-depth interviews identified 22 CFIR constructs that were facilitators or barriers of SBI implementation in Hong Kong. In addition, the stigmatization of alcohol dependence was a barrier and the belief that it was important for people to control the amount of alcohol intake in any situation was mentioned as a facilitator to implement SBI. In the survey, 22% of the participants implemented SBI in the past year. Factors associated with the SBI implementation echoed most of the qualitative findings. Among physicians and nurses in both sectors, they were more likely to implement SBI when perceiving stronger evidence supporting SBI, better knowledge and self-efficacy to implement SBI, more available resources, and clearer planning for SBI implementation in the clinics but less likely to do so when perceiving SBI implementation to be complicated and of higher cost, and drinking approved by the Chinese culture. Participants were more likely to implement SBI when perceiving SBI fit better with the existing practice and better leadership engagement in the public sector, but not in the private sector. Perceiving a stronger need and greater importance to implement SBI were associated with higher likelihood of SBI implementation among physicians, but not among nurses. Perceiving better organizational culture supporting SBI was positively associated with SBI implementation among nurses, but not among physicians.ConclusionsThere was a significant gap between SBI evidence and its implementation. Some strategies to improve SBI implementation may be different between physicians and nurses and between those in the public and private sectors. The CFIR is a useful framework for understanding facilitators and barriers of SBI implementation in primary care settings.

Implementation of the strengths model of case management for people with a traumatic brain injury: a qualitative pre-implementation study

ABSTRACT Introduction People who sustain a traumatic brain injury (TBI) may have to live with permanent sequelae such as mental health problems, cognitive impairments, and poor social participation. The strengths-based approach (SBA) of case management has a number of positive impacts such as greater community integration but it has never been implemented for persons with TBI. To support its successful implementation with this population, it is essential to gain understanding of how the key components of the intervention are perceived within the organization applying the approach. Objectives Documenting the barriers and facilitators in the implementation of the SBA as perceived by potential adopters. Methods A qualitative pre-implementation study was conducted using semi-structured interviews with community workers and managers of the community organization where the SBA is to be implemented. Data were analyzed using a deductive approach based on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Results The major barriers are associated with the intervention (e.g. adaptability of the intervention) and the external context (e.g. the impact of the pandemic). Perceived facilitators are mainly associated with the internal context (e.g. compatibility with current values). Conclusion The barriers and facilitators identified will inform the research team’s actions to maximize the likelihood of successful implementation.

A survey on the implementation of clinical medication reviews in community pharmacies within a multidisciplinary setting

BackgroundPolypharmacy is common in chronic medication users, which increases the risk of drug related problems. A suitable intervention is the clinical medication review (CMR) that was introduced in the Netherlands in 2012, but the effectiveness might be hindered by limited implementation in community pharmacies. Therefore our aim was to describe the current implementation of CMRs in Dutch community pharmacies and to identify barriers to the implementation.MethodsAn online questionnaire was developed based on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) and consisted of 58 questions with open ended, multiple choice or Likert-scale answering options. It was sent out to all Dutch community pharmacies (n = 1,953) in January 2021. Descriptive statistics were used.ResultsA total of 289 (14.8%) community pharmacies filled out the questionnaire. Most of the pharmacists agreed that a CMR has a positive effect on the quality of pharmacotherapy (91.3%) and on medication adherence (64.3%). Pharmacists structured CMRs according to available selection criteria or guidelines (92%). Pharmacists (90%) believed that jointly conducting a CMR with a general practitioner (GP) improved their mutual relationship, whereas 21% believed it improved the relationship with a medical specialist. Lack of time was reported by 43% of pharmacists and 80% (fully) agreed conducting CMRs with a medical specialist was complicated. Most pharmacists indicated that pharmacy technicians can assist in performing CMRs, but they rarely do in practice.ConclusionsLack of time and suboptimal collaboration with medical specialists are the most important barriers to the implementation of CMRs.

Barriers and facilitators to implementing a Canadian shared-care ADHD program in pediatric settings in Shanghai: a consolidated framework for implementation research approach

ObjectivesThe vast majority of children with Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) do not have access to proper diagnosis and treatment in China. The goal of this project is to identify the challenges and facilitators in implementing a Canadian ADHD Shared Care Pathways program in pediatric settings in Shanghai region.MethodsPurposive semi-structured focus groups were conducted on a total of 13 healthcare practitioners from the Shanghai Xinuha, Ninghai and Chongming hospitals. Two independent researchers conducted a thematic analysis of the data with themes emerging based on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR).ResultsNotable barriers identified by participants included: (1) lack of knowledge in the management of ADHD, primarily among general practitioners; (2) lack of resources such as lack of staff, time, and medication for ADHD; (3) challenges in implementing an international multicentre intervention (such as communication difficulties between teams and integration of resources available in different hospitals); and (4) mental health stigma, difficulties in identifying ADHD patients, and logistical problems related to medication procurement rules put in place by provincial governments. Notable facilitators included: (1) the strong motivation of stakeholders and their confidence in their ability to learn and subsequently execute action plans to achieve the implementation goal; (2) the compatibility between the values and goals of the stakeholders and those of the program despite some cultural tension, a positive learning climate, strong tensions for change, and the high interest of organization leaders in engaging in the program (3) the perceived benefits of the program, such as standardization of the diagnostic and treatment process, and engaging primary care providers in ADHD management; and (4) the strong relationship between participating institutions and schools as well as provincial health initiatives available to support collaborative models of care. Mixed factors to implementation were also explored.ConclusionsAppropriate training of health care providers, cultural adaptation of the program, increase public awareness about ADHD to decrease stigma, as well as strong project management and guidelines that clearly describe the role and expectations of each team member appeared essential to successful implementation.

Using the consolidated framework for implementation research to identify challenges and opportunities for implementing a reproductive health education program into sickle cell disease care.

As survival rates for individuals with sickle cell disease (SCD) increase, calls have been made to improve their reproductive healthcare and outcomes. The research team created a web-based program entitled Fertility edUcaTion to Understand ReproductivE health in Sickle cell disease (FUTURES). The study aim was to use the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) during pre-implementation to identify challenges and opportunities from the individual to systems level of implementation to ultimately optimize the integration of FUTURES into clinical practice. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with clinicians, research team members, and adolescent and young adult (AYA) males with SCD and their caregivers who participated in pilot testing. Interviews (N = 31) were coded inductively and then mapped onto CFIR domains (i.e., outer setting, inner setting, characteristics of individuals, and intervention characteristics). Research team interviews indicated the lack of universal guidelines for reproductive care in this population and gaps in reproductive health knowledge as key reasons for developing FUTURES, also highlighting the importance of collaboration with community members during development. Clinicians reported intraorganizational communication as essential to implementing FUTURES and discussed challenges in addressing reproductive health due to competing priorities. Clinicians, AYAs, and caregivers reported positive views of FUTURES regarding length, engagement, accessibility, and content. Suggestions for the best setting and timing for implementation varied. Using CFIR during the pre-implementation phase highlighted challenges and opportunities regarding integrating this program into SCD care. These findings will inform adaptation and further testing of FUTURES to ensure effective implementation of this novel education program.

Primary care barriers and facilitators to nonpharmacologic treatments for low back pain: A qualitative pilot study.

Clinical practice guidelines encourage primary care providers (PCPs) to recommend nonpharmacologic treatment as first-line therapy for low back pain (LBP). However, the determinants of nonpharmacologic treatment use for LBP in primary care remain unclear, particularly in low-income settings. To pilot a framework-informed interview guide and codebook to explore determinants of nonpharmacologic treatment use in primary care. In this qualitative interview study, we enrolled PCPs and community health workers (CHWs) from four primary care clinics at a safety net hospital. A semistructured interview guide informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) guided inquiry on barriers/facilitators to nonpharmacologic treatments for LBP (eg, acupuncture, chiropractic care, physical therapy). We included questions on whether current CHW roles may address barriers to nonpharmacologic treatment use. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and independently coded by four investigators. An a priori codebook composed of CFIR determinants and known CHW roles guided deductive content analysis to identify major themes. Eight individuals (six PCPs, two CHWs; age range: 32-51 years, five female) participated in hour-long interviews. Half had worked at the hospital for ≥15 years and all reported seeing patients with LBP (range: 2-20 patients per week). All participants identified the following CFIR factors as barriers/facilitators: nonpharmacologic treatment characteristics (perceived cost, relative advantage compared to other treatments); outer setting (patient needs/resources, limited connections with community-based nonpharmacologic treatment) and PCP characteristics (attitudes/beliefs about nonpharmacologic treatments). Although participants indicated several CHW roles could be adapted to address barriers (eg, care coordination, resource linking, case management), other roles seemed less feasible (eg, targeted health education) in our health care system. Preliminary insight on key determinants of nonpharmacologic treatments for LBP should be further examined in large multisite studies. Future studies may also determine whether a CHW-led strategy can improve nonpharmacologic treatment access and clinical outcomes in primary care.

“Hypertension is such a difficult disease to manage”: federally qualified health center staff- and leadership-perceived readiness to implement a technology-facilitated team-based hypertension model

BackgroundDespite decades of evidence demonstrating the efficacy of hypertension care delivery in reducing morbidity and mortality, a majority of hypertension cases remain uncontrolled. There is an urgent need to elucidate and address multilevel facilitators and barriers clinical staff face in delivering evidence-based hypertension care, patients face in accessing it, and clinical systems face in sustaining it. Through a rigorous pre-implementation evaluation, we aimed to identify facilitators and barriers bearing the potential to affect the planned implementation of a multilevel technology-facilitated hypertension management trial across six primary care sites in a large federally qualified health center (FQHC) in New York City.MethodsDuring a dedicated pre-implementation period (3–9 months/site, 2021–2022), a capacity assessment was conducted by trained practice facilitators, including (1) online anonymous surveys (n = 124; 70.5% of eligible), (2) hypertension training analytics (n = 69; 94.5% of assigned), and (3) audio-recorded semi-structured interviews (n = 67; 48.6% of eligible) with FQHC leadership and staff. Surveys measured staff sociodemographic characteristics, adaptive reserve, evidence-based practice attitudes, and implementation leadership scores via validated scales. Training analytics, derived from end-of-course quizzes, included mean score and number attempts needed to pass. Interviews assessed staff-reported facilitators and barriers to current hypertension care delivery and uptake; following audio transcription, trained qualitative researchers employed a deductive coding approach, informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR).ResultsMost survey respondents reported moderate adaptive reserve (mean = 0.7, range = 0–1), evidence-based practice attitudes (mean = 2.7, range = 0–4), and implementation leadership (mean = 2.5, range = 0–4). Most staff passed training courses on first attempt and demonstrated high scores (means > 80%). Findings from interviews identified potential facilitators and barriers to implementation; specifically, staff reported that complex barriers to hypertension care, control, and clinical communication exist; there is a recognized need to improve hypertension care; in-clinic challenges with digital tool access imposes workflow delays; and despite high patient loads, staff are motivated to provide high-quality cares.ConclusionsThis study serves as one of the first to apply the CFIR to a rigorous pre-implementation evaluation within the understudied context of a FQHC and can serve as a model for similar trials seeking to identify and address contextual factors known to impact implementation success.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT03713515, date of registration: October 19, 2018.

[Factors in the implementation of expert standards in nursing: A qualitative study].

Factors in the implementation of expert standards in nursing: A qualitative study Abstract: Background: Many German health and long-term care facilities face the challenge of implementing expert standards in practice. Implementation models, such as the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), support the implementation process by identifying the relevant influencing factors that can determine the success of an implementation. Aim: The aim was to identify the factors influencing the implementation of expert standards in nursing care and their interactions. Method: The data were collected by means of guided interviews with ten facilitators of the model implementation units for the implementation of the expert standard on promotion of oral health in nursing and from the project progress records. The data were evaluated by content analysis. Results: In addition to the influencing factors according to the CFIR, two other factors were identified that can determine the success of the implementation of expert standards - local presence and knowledge of implementation theories and models. The various and complex interrelationships between the factors in the implementation of expert standards became particularly clear. Conclusion: Knowledge of the fundamentals of implementation science is helpful for the successful and sustainable implementation of expert standards and for general knowledge transfer in nursing.

Process evaluation of a complex, multilevel, multicomponent scheme for the prevention and control of non-communicable diseases in Tamil Nadu, India: A mixed-methods protocol

BackgroundNon-communicable diseases (NCDs) are the leading cause of morbidity and mortality in India, necessitating development of multilevel and multicomponent interventions. Makkalai Thedi Maruthuvam (MTM) is a complex multilevel, multicomponent intervention developed and implemented by the south Indian State of Tamil Nadu. The scheme aims to deliver services for preventing and controlling diabetes, and hypertension at doorstep. This paper describes the protocol for planning and conducting the process evaluation of the MTM scheme. Methods and analysisThe process evaluation uses mixed methods (secondary data analysis, key informant interviews, in-depth interviews, conceptual content analysis of documents, facility-based survey and non-participant observation) to evaluate the implementation of the MTM scheme. The broad evaluation questions addressed the fidelity, contexts, mechanisms of impact and challenges encountered by the scheme using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) framework. The specific evaluation questions addressed selected inputs and processes identified as critical to implementation by the stakeholders. The CFIR framework will guide the thematic analysis of the qualitative interviews to explore the adaptations and deviations introduced during implementation in various contexts. The quantitative data on the indicators developed for the specific evaluation questions will be cleaned and descriptively analysed.

Development and Implementation of an Evidence-Based Biofield Therapy Standardized Documentation Tool

IntroductionBiofield therapy (BT) is a complementary health practice involving the use of subtle energy to promote healing; however, monitoring the quality of care after implementing a BT program can be particularly challenging. The aim of this project was to strategically design, implement, and evaluate an evidence-based BT documentation tool to capture relevant data elements to display in a quality metric dashboard while also being satisfactory to the practitioners who use it. MethodsUtilizing the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) method, key stakeholders at a government healthcare facility were gathered to design and use a structured documentation tool. After the tool's deployment, the stakeholders were routinely assessed over a three-month period to evaluate its effectiveness and identify areas for improvement. At the end of the period a practitioner satisfaction questionnaire was deployed and a quality metric dashboard was launched. ResultsSeven of the eleven BT-trained practitioners (64%) used the template during the evaluation period and 255 sessions were documented. Forty-five percent of the staff responded to the Likert scored satisfaction questionnaire with 100% indicating the template improved documentation, fit into the workflow, and facilitated interdisciplinary communication. The dashboard presented nine data elements, such as session indication and patient symptom scores, which can be filtered by date and location. DiscussionThe satisfaction scores validated findings from the literature relative to structured documentation, quality review, and program evaluation. These outcomes support the expansion of BT into different clinical settings, foster future BT research endeavors, and allow for BT to be included in broader medical data analytic efforts. ConclusionA structured documentation tool designed with findings from the evidence and input from key stakeholders can be an effective and satisfactory means of capturing quality metrics for evaluating the implementation of BT.

Guidance for a deprescribing approach that can be implemented in care homes: STOPPING study findings and lessons

Abstract Introduction Care home residents often have multiple long-term conditions and experience polypharmacy. Deprescribing is the reduction or stopping of prescription medicines that may no longer be providing benefit. Deprescribing is generally safe but it is unknown how to make it work well in practice, like care homes. Current tools and approaches often overlook the specific contextual factors and various stakeholder views within care homes. Aim To inform the development of a deprescribing approach that can be implemented in care homes. Methods The findings from two qualitative work packages of the STOPPING project[1,2] were synthesised to develop a better deprescribing practice approach within care homes, considering different views and environments, and recommendations for designing a deprescribing approach for care homes. In total, 42 interviews were conducted with 36 participants (residents and their family members/friends, care home staff, and healthcare professionals) from 15 different care homes. A framework analysis approach, informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), was used to analyse data from both work packages. Similar and divergent determinants spanning all CFIR domains were aggregated. Then how and why key these factors operated were considered from generating relationships using conceptual mapping. Researchers and a family carer representative met regularly to discuss discrepancies and refine the themes. Results Key considerations for a deprescribing approach for care homes are: engaging multiple individuals and organisations; recognising their various roles, responsibilities, expertise, and beliefs; information access and sharing; and active monitoring of the impact of deprescribing. The guidance is presented as a cycle to illustrate deprescribing as a process, which then works through four implementation aspects: (1) Plan and coordinate, (2) Communicate and collaborate, (3) Access and share information, and (4) Monitor and evaluate. They are a guide rather than a rigid set of steps, as some activities overlap and feed into each other, and demonstrate how deprescribing for residents should be ongoing and iterative. Proposed actions to encourage deprescribing in care homes are provided for each implementation aspect and presented as questions for consideration. For example, in Plan and coordinate, one of the questions is ‘Are the goals of care with respect to medicine optimisation and deprescribing for residents established?’. The key factor influencing this guidance is the quality of local working relationships between care homes and primary care, which was more crucial than the type of care home organisation management structure. Conclusion Communication and collaboration between care homes and healthcare professionals (such as GPs, nurses, and pharmacists) are essential to ensure deprescribing is done well. A strength of the work is the use of a comprehensive, well-recognised implementation science framework; however, a limitation is that most participants were care home staff, so the findings reflect their perspectives and experiences. Further work is needed to develop tools and approaches that address how this can be achieved within current structures and limited resources of health and social care. The guidance, developed from the STOPPING project findings, suggests several courses of action for how to improve future deprescribing in care homes.

Community Health workers United to Reduce Colorectal cancer and cardiovascular disease among people at Higher risk (CHURCH): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BackgroundColorectal cancer (CRC) is the second most lethal cancer in the United States (U.S.) with the highest incidence and mortality rates among African Americans (AAs) compared to other racial groups. Despite these disparities, AAs are the least likely to undergo CRC screening, have precancerous colorectal polyps removed, and have CRC detected at stages early enough for curative excision. In addition, compelling evidence links inflammatory dietary patterns to increased CRC and cardiovascular disease risk. Studies show that AA churches can successfully engage in health promotion activities including those related to cancer control. The current study seeks to leverage church-placed Community Health Workers (CHWs) to increase CRC screening and reduce CRC risk.Design and methodsWe aim to (1) increase guideline concordant CRC screening uptake using church-placed CHWs trained in screening with a validated instrument, Brief Intervention using Motivational Interviewing, and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT); and (2) reduce dietary risk factors (inflammatory dietary patterns) linked to CRC. The latter will be addressed by culturally adapting an existing, web-based lifestyle program called Alive!. Using a Hybrid Type 1 Implementation-Effectiveness cluster randomized design, we will randomize 22 AA churches into either the dual intervention arm (CHW-led SBIRT intervention plus Alive!) or a usual care arm comprised of CRC prevention educational pamphlets and a list of CRC screening sites. We will recruit 440 subjects and evaluate the effects of both arms on screening uptake (colonoscopy, fecal DNA) (primary outcome) and dietary inflammation score (secondary outcome) at 6-month follow-up, and Life Simple7 (LS7)—a cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk score—at 6 months and 1 year (secondary outcome). Finally, guided by a racism-conscious adaptation of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), we will conduct a mixed-methods process evaluation with key stakeholders to understand multi-level influences on CRC screening and CVD risk behaviors.DiscussionChurch-placed CHWs are trusted influential connectors between communities and health systems. Studies have shown that these CHWs can successfully implement health prevention protocols in churches, including those related to cancer control, making them potentially important community mediators of CRC screening uptake and CRC/CVD risk reduction.Trial registrationNCT05174286; clinicaltrials.gov; August 31st, 2023

Framework proposal for Role-Playing Games as mental health intervention: the Critical Skills methodology.

Gamified interventions are an emerging approach in mental health treatment and prevention. Their positive effects on managing various clinical conditions stem from enhancing social skills. However, cost-effective options like Table-top Role-Playing Games (TTRPGs), which offer similar benefits to other game-based interventions, lack standardized methods for ensuring replicability. In this regard, the method outlined in this study endeavors, in a structured and guided manner drawing from the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), to establish a six-step protocol for developing an intervention method utilizing TTRPGs. In all Steps, we aim to anchor ourselves in robust literature concerning social skills training (SST), cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), and gamification comprehensively. Thus, the method presented encompasses the objectives of SST, the strategies of CBT, and the dynamics of gamification via TTRPGs. Furthermore, we demonstrate a possible application of the method to illustrate its feasibility. Ultimately, the final method is structured, evidence-based, easily applicable, cost-effective, and thus viable. Mental health professionals seeking a structured and instructional tool for protocol development will find support in the method proposed here.

Communities organizing to promote equity: engaging local communities in public health responses to health inequities exacerbated by COVID-19–protocol paper

BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has disproportionately impacted rural and under-resourced urban communities in Kansas. The state’s response to COVID-19 has relied on a highly decentralized and underfunded public health system, with 100 local health departments in the state, few of which had prior experience engaging local community coalitions in a coordinated response to a public health crisis.MethodsTo improve the capacity for local community-driven responses to COVID-19 and other public health needs, the University of Kansas Medical Center, in partnership with the Kansas Department of Health and Environment, will launch Communities Organizing to Promote Equity (COPE) in 20 counties across Kansas. COPE will establish Local Health Equity Action Teams (LHEATs), coalitions comprised of community members and service providers, who work with COPE-hired community health workers (CHWs) recruited to represent the diversity of the communities they serve. CHWs in each county are tasked with addressing unmet social needs of residents and supporting their county’s LHEAT. LHEATs are charged with implementing strategies to improve social determinants of health in their county. Monthly, LHEATs and CHWs from all 20 counties will come together as part of a learning collaborative to share strategies, foster innovation, and engage in peer problem-solving. These efforts will be supported by a multilevel communications strategy that will increase awareness of COPE activities and resources at the local level and successes across the state. Our mixed methods evaluation design will assess the processes and impact of COPE activities as well as barriers and facilitators to implementation using aspects of both the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) and Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation and Maintenance (RE-AIM) models.DiscussionThis protocol is designed to expand community capacity to strategically partner with local public health and social service partners to prioritize and implement health equity efforts. COPE intentionally engages historically resilient communities and those living in underserved rural areas to inform pragmatic strategies to improve health equity.

Implementation of virtual academic detailing in North America: A qualitative study.

The shift toward virtual academic detailing (AD) was accelerated by the COVID-19 pandemic. We aimed to examine the role of external, contextual, and intrinsic programme-specific factors in virtual engagement of healthcare providers (HCPs) and delivery of AD. AD groups throughout North America were contacted to participate in semistructured interviews. An interview guide was constructed by adapting the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). A point of emphasis included strategies AD groups employed for provider engagement while implementing virtual AD programmes. Independent coders conducted qualitative analysis using the framework method. Fifteen AD groups from Canada (n = 3) and the United States (n = 12) participated. Technological issues and training detailers and HCPs were challenges during the transition to virtual AD visits. Restrictions on in-person activities during the pandemic created difficulties engaging HCPs and fewer AD visits. Continuing education was one strategy to incentivize participation, but credits were often not claimed by HCPs. Groups with established networks and prior experience with virtual AD leveraged connections to mitigate disruptions and continue AD visits. Other facilitators included emphasizing contemporary topics, including opioid education beyond fundamental guidelines. Virtual AD had the additional benefit of expanding geographic reach and flexible scheduling with providers. AD groups across North America have shifted to virtual outreach and delivery strategies. This trend toward virtual AD may aid outreach to vulnerable rural communities, improving health equity. More research is needed on the effectiveness of virtual AD and its future implications.

Personalised exercise rehabilitation in cancer survivorship: the percs triage and referral system study protocol

BackgroundTo effectively embed exercise rehabilitation in cancer survivorship care, a co-ordinated system of acute and community exercise rehabilitation services, forming a stepped model of care, is recommended. Patients can be directed to the exercise rehabilitation service which best meets their needs through a system of assessment, triage and referral. Triage and referral systems are not yet widely applied in cancer survivorship practice and need to be evaluated in real-world contexts. The PERCS (Personalised Exercise Rehabilitation in Cancer Survivorship) study aims to evaluate the real-world application of an exercise rehabilitation triage and referral system in cancer survivors treated during the COVID-19 pandemic. Secondary aims are to evaluate change in physical and psychosocial outcomes, and to qualitatively evaluate the impact of the system and patient experiences, at three months after application of the triage and referral system.MethodsThis study will assess the implementation of an exercise rehabilitation triage and referral system within the context of a physiotherapy-led cancer rehabilitation clinic for cancer survivors who received cancer treatment during the COVID-19 pandemic. The PERCS triage and referral system supports decision making in exercise rehabilitation referral by recommending one of three pathways: independent exercise; fitness professional referral; or health professional referral. Up to 100 adult cancer survivors treated during the COVID-19 pandemic who have completed treatment and have no signs of active disease will be recruited. We will assess participants’ physical and psychosocial wellbeing and evaluate whether medical clearance for exercise is needed. Participants will then be triaged to a referral pathway and an exercise recommendation will be collaboratively decided. Reassessment will be after 12 weeks. Primary outcomes are implementation-related, guided by the RE-AIM framework. Secondary outcomes include physical function, psychosocial wellbeing and exercise levels. Qualitative analysis of semi-structured interviews guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) will provide insights on implementation and system impact.DiscussionThe PERCS study will investigate the real-world application of a cancer rehabilitation triage and referral system. This will provide proof of concept evidence for this triage approach and important insights on the implementation of a triage system in a specialist cancer centre.Trial registrationThis study is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, registration number: NCT05615285, date registered: 21st October 2022.

Program of All-Inclusive Care for the Elderly: an untapped setting for research to advance pain care in older persons.

The Program of All-Inclusive Care for the Elderly (PACE) is a community-based care model in the United States that provides comprehensive health and social services to frail, nursing home-eligible adults aged 55 years and older. PACE organizations aim to support adequate pain control in their participants, yet few evidence-based pain interventions have been adopted or integrated into this setting. This article provides a roadmap for researchers who are interested in collaborating with PACE organizations to embed and evaluate evidence-based pain tools and interventions. We situate our discussion within the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), a meta-theoretical framework that considers multi-level influences to implementation and evaluation of evidence-based programs. Within each CFIR domain, we identify key factors informed by our own work that merit consideration by research teams and PACE collaborators. Inner setting components pertain to the organizational culture of each PACE organization, the type and quality of electronic health record data, and availability of staff to assist with data abstraction. Outer setting components include external policies and regulations by the National PACE Association and audits conducted by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, which have implications for research participant recruitment and enrollment. Individual-level characteristics of PACE organization leaders include their receptivity toward new innovations and perceived ability to implement them. Forming and sustaining research-PACE partnerships to deliver evidence-based pain interventions pain will require attention to multi-level factors that may influence future uptake and provides a way to improve the health and well-being of patients served by these programs.