Implementation Science Theories Research Articles

Toward a roadmap for sustainable lean adoption in hospitals: a Delphi study

BackgroundThe benefits of lean adoption in healthcare include improved process efficiency and quality of patient care. However, research indicates that lean implementation in healthcare, and specifically hospitals, is often not sustained. Furthermore, there is a need for maturity models that guide lean implementation, specifically in hospitals. This study develops a prescriptive maturity model named the Sustaining of Lean Adoption in Hospitals Roadmap (SOLAR) that acts as a practical guideline for the sustainable adoption of lean in hospitals.MethodsThe SOLAR has three theoretical foundations, namely lean implementation success factors in hospitals, implementation science, and change management theory. A systematic literature review was conducted to determine the lean implementation success factors in hospitals as the first building block. Secondly, practices from implementation science were used to create the action items in the SOLAR. Ten change steps were elicited from change management theory as the third theoretical building block of the roadmap. We refined the roadmap through three Delphi rounds that verified its useability in hospitals.ResultsThe final SOLAR consists of four maturity phases (prepare, plan, experiment and learn, and sustain) and includes action items for each phase related to the hospital’s strategy, resources, engaging of people, and culture. The action items and change management steps shown in the SOLAR are not intended as an exhaustive list but provide guidelines on aspects hospitals must consider when they aim to adopt lean sustainably.ConclusionsThe strong theoretical base of the SOLAR enables hospitals to safely experiment and learn which implementation methods are best suited to their unique environment. The SOLAR is, therefore, an actionable guideline that informs both academics and practitioners involved in lean adoption in hospitals. This roadmap can guide future retrospective longitudinal or action research.

The Application and Evolution of the Practical, Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model (PRISM): History and Innovations

Implementation science theories, models, and frameworks (TMF) should help users understand complex issues in translating research into practice, guide selection of appropriate implementation strategies, and evaluate implementation outcomes. They should also be sensitive to evidence from projects that apply the framework, evolve based on those experiences, and be accessible to a range of users. This paper describes these issues as they relate to the Practical, Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model (PRISM). PRISM was created to assess key multilevel contextual factors related to the reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation, and maintenance (RE-AIM) outcomes of health interventions. We describe key aspects of PRISM and how it has been applied, evolved, and adapted across settings, time, and content areas. Since its development in 2008 PRISM has been used in over 200 publications, with increased use in recent years. It has been used for a wide variety of purposes and more recent applications have focused on increasing its accessibility for non-researcher groups and more rapid and iterative application for use in learning heath systems. PRISM has been applied to address health equity issues including representation, representativeness, and co-creation activities in both US and non-US settings. We describe common types of adaptations made by implementation teams when applying PRISM to fit with the resources and priorities of diverse and low-resource settings. We conclude by summarizing lessons learned and providing recommendations for future research and practice using PRISM.

Leveraging implementation science theories to develop and expand the use of a penicillin allergy de-labeling intervention

BackgroundPenicillin allergy is the most frequently reported drug allergy, yet most patients can tolerate the drug if challenged. Despite this discrepancy, large scale penicillin allergy de-labeling interventions have not been widely implemented in many health care systems. The application of a multi-method implementation science approach can provide key tools to study this evidence to practice gap and provide insight to successfully operationalize penicillin allergy evaluation in real-world clinical settings.MethodsWe followed a four-step process that leverages qualitative analysis to design evidence-based, actionable strategies to develop an intervention. First, we specified the clinician-perceived barriers to penicillin allergy de-labeling (intervention targets). We then mapped intervention targets onto Theoretical Domains Framework (domains and constructs) and found the root causes of behavior. Next, we linked root causes of behavior with intervention functions (BCW). In the final step, we synthesized participants’ suggestions for process improvement with implementation strategies aligning with the intervention functions.ResultsEvidence-based strategies such as focused education and training in penicillin allergy evaluation can address knowledge and confidence barriers reported by frontline clinicians. Other key strategies involve developing a system of champions, improving communications systems, and restructuring the healthcare team. Implementation mapping can provide a powerful multi-method framework to study, design, and customize intervention strategies. Conclusion: Empowering clinicians beyond allergy specialists to conduct penicillin allergy assessments requires designing new workflows and systems and providing additional knowledge to those clinicians.

Reflections on UK science–policy relationships in the light of Covid-19

This article discusses one of many reasons why the UK did so poorly in managing the acute phase of the Covid-19 pandemic despite having access to extensive and high-quality scientific evidence and advice: science–policy relationships. Drawing on the author’s participation in and experiences of the Scientific Advisory Group on Emergencies (SAGE) and its behavioural sub-group, it discusses the following questions: 1. Was the model (framework) for translating scientific advice to policy-makers as effective as it could have been? 2. Could more have been done to communicate science and its implications for policy and practice to the public? 3. Should scientists speak to policy-makers and the public about matters beyond their particular area of study, reflecting their multidisciplinary working and understanding? 4. Do scientists have a social responsibility to discuss policy implications of scientific evidence and challenge politicians when their statements or behaviour go against prevailing evidence? Future directions of inquiry should investigate the process by which research evidence is translated and used, applying social science and implementation science methods, evidence and theories. A question deserving attention across academe and society more generally is how scientists can best interact with, and contribute to, social good beyond their well-trodden paths of academic publications and conference presentations.

Redesigning antenatal care: Prospective use of an implementation framework to establish a population-based multidisciplinary first-trimester screening, assessment and prevention service.

Australian rates of adverse obstetric outcomes have improved little despite guidelines recommending history-based screening and intervention. The first trimester provides a unique opportunity to predict and prevent complications, yet population-based screening has failed to be translated into broad clinical practice. This study aimed to redesign antenatal care within an Australian public healthcare centre to align with evidence-based maternity care, including population-based first-trimester screening with early initiation of preventative strategies in high-risk pregnancies. A five-phase action-process model, sharing key elements with implementation science theory, was used to explore barriers to change in antenatal care, co-design a novel service with consumers and establish a population-based antenatal pathway commencing with a multidisciplinary first-trimester screening, assessment and planning visit. The case for change and associated barriers were defined from the perspective of antenatal care stakeholders. Key needs of each group were established, and solutions were created using co-design methodology, allowing the team to create a novel approach to antenatal care which directly addressed identified barriers. Implementation of the service was associated with a fall in the median gestation at first specialist maternity care provider visit from 20 to 13 weeks. This study confirms the feasibility of establishing a comprehensive first-trimester screening program within a public Australian healthcare setting and highlights a co-design process which places individualised assessment at the forefront of antenatal care. This framework may be applicable to most public maternity settings in Australia, with expansion aimed at providing equity of care, including in rural and remote settings.

Leaders’ experiences of embedding a simulation-based education programme in a teaching hospital: an interview study informed by normalisation process theory

There is limited research on the experiences of people in working to embed, integrate and sustain simulation programmes. This interview-based study explored leaders’ experiences of normalising a simulation-based education programme in a teaching hospital. Fourteen known simulation leaders across Australia and North America were interviewed. Semi-structured interviews were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis sensitised by normalisation process theory, an implementation science theory which defines ‘normal’ as something being embedded, integrated and sustained. We used a combined social and experiential constructivist approach. Four themes were generated from the data: (1) Leadership, (2) business startup mindset, (3) poor understanding of simulation undermines normalisation and (4) tension of competing objectives. These themes were interlinked and represented how leaders experienced the process of normalising simulation. There was a focus on the relationships that influence decision-making of simulation leaders and organisational buy-in, such that what started as a discrete programme becomes part of normal hospital operations. The discourse of ‘survival’ was strong, and this indicated that simulation being normal or embedded and sustained was still more a goal than a reality. The concept of being like a ‘business startup’ was regarded as significant as was the feature of leadership and how simulation leaders influenced organisational change. Participants spoke of trying to normalise simulation for patient safety, but there was also a strong sense that they needed to be agile and innovative and that this status is implied when simulation is not yet ‘normal’. Leadership, change management and entrepreneurship in addition to implementation science may all contribute towards understanding how to embed, integrate and sustain simulation in teaching hospitals without losing responsiveness. Further research on how all stakeholders view simulation as a normal part of a teaching hospital is warranted, including simulation participants, quality and safety teams and hospital executives. This study has highlighted that a shared understanding of the purpose and breadth of simulation is a prerequisite for embedding and sustaining simulation. An approach of marketing simulation beyond simulation-based education as a patient safety and systems improvement mindset, not just a technique nor technology, may assist towards simulation being sustainably embedded within teaching hospitals.

How can a behavioral economics lens contribute to implementation science?

BackgroundImplementation science in health is an interdisciplinary field with an emphasis on supporting behavior change required when clinicians and other actors implement evidence-based practices within organizational constraints. Behavioral economics has emerged in parallel and works towards developing realistic models of how humans behave and categorizes a wide range of features of choices that can influence behavior. We argue that implementation science can be enhanced by the incorporation of approaches from behavioral economics.Main bodyFirst, we provide a general overview of implementation science and ways in which implementation science has been limited to date. Second, we review principles of behavioral economics and describe how concepts from BE have been successfully applied to healthcare including nudges deployed in the electronic health record. For example, de-implementation of low-value prescribing has been supported by changing the default in the electronic health record. We then describe what a behavioral economics lens offers to existing implementation science theories, models and frameworks, including rich and realistic models of human behavior, additional research methods such as pre-mortems and behavioral design, and low-cost and scalable implementation strategies. We argue that insights from behavioral economics can guide the design of implementation strategies and the interpretation of implementation studies. Key objections to incorporating behavioral economics are addressed, including concerns about sustainment and at what level the strategies work.ConclusionScholars should consider augmenting implementation science theories, models, and frameworks with relevant insights from behavioral economics. By drawing on these additional insights, implementation scientists have the potential to boost efforts to expand the provision and availability of high quality care.

Implementation of Food is Medicine Programs in Healthcare Settings: A Narrative Review.

Food is Medicine (FIM) programs to improve the accessibility of fruits and vegetables (FVs) or other healthy foods among patients with low income and diet-related chronic diseases are promising to improve food and nutrition security in the United States (US). However, FIM programs are relatively new and implementation guidance for healthcare settings using an implementation science lens is lacking. We used a narrative review to describe the evidence base on barriers and facilitators to FIM program integration in US healthcare settings following the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, and Sustainment (EPIS) Framework. Evidence surrounding the EPIS Inner Context was a focus, including constructs Leadership, Organizational Characteristics, Quality and Fidelity Monitoring and Support, Organizational Staffing Processes, and Individual Characteristics. Peer-reviewed and grey literature about barriers and facilitators to FIM programs were of interest, defined as programs that screen and refer eligible patients with diet-related chronic disease experiencing food insecurity to healthy, unprepared foods. Thirty-one sources were included in the narrative review, including 22 peer-reviewed articles, four reports, four toolkits, and one thesis. Twenty-eight sources (90%) described EPIS Inner Context facilitators and 26 sources (84%) described FIM program barriers. The most common barriers and facilitators to FIM programs were regarding Quality and Fidelity Monitoring and Support (e.g., use of electronic medical records for tracking and evaluation, strategies to support implementation) and Organizational Staffing Processes (e.g., clear delineation of staff roles and capacity); although, barriers and facilitators to FIM programs were identified among all EPIS Inner Context constructs. We synthesized barriers and facilitators to create an EPIS-informed implementation checklist for healthcare settings for use among healthcare organizations/providers, partner organizations, and technical assistance personnel. We discuss future directions to align FIM efforts with implementation science terminology and theories, models, and frameworks to improve the implementation evidence base and support FIM researchers and practitioners.

Perspectives on digital testing services for sexually transmitted and blood-borne infections from Two-Spirit, gay, bisexual, transgender, and other queer Black, Indigenous, people of colour living in Ontario, Canada

ABSTRACT Objectives Increased sexually transmitted and blood-borne infections (STBBI) testing can reduce the burden of disease among Two-Spirit, gay, bisexual, transgender, and other queer Black, Indigenous, people of colour (2SGBTQ+ BIPOC). However, this population encounters barriers, such as discrimination, when accessing in-person STBBI testing services. Digital STBBI testing, such as self-testing/collection kits ordered online and digital requisitions, may address some of these barriers. Our aim was to understand acceptability of free digital STBBI testing among 2SGBTQ+ BIPOC living in Ontario, Canada. Design We approached this analysis using Implementation Science and Critical Race Theory. We conducted interviews and focus groups with 21 2SGBTQ + BIPOC individuals from 2020–2021. Participants were asked about their perceptions of the benefits and drawbacks of digital STBBI testing, populations that would benefit from using these services, and recommendations for how these services may be implemented in Ontario. Interviews and focus groups were transcribed verbatim and analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis. Results Six themes emerged. Digital STBBI testing services: (1) May reduce oppression experienced by 2SGBTQ + BIPOC when testing in-person; (2) Should address the unique needs that 2SGBTQ + BIPOC experience due to other intersecting identities they possess; (3) Should adapt their services to suit the varying cultural contexts and living circumstances of 2SGBTQ + BIPOC; (4) Should be accessible to 2SGBTQ + BIPOC who hold diverse or no documentation; (5) Should be offered in multiple languages; (6) May be inaccessible to those without Internet access or devices. Conclusion Digital STBBI testing is one strategy that may reduce discrimination experienced by 2SGBTQ + BIPOC when getting tested in-person. However, digital STBBI testing services may not address all the needs of 2SGBTQ + BIPOC. Racism and other forms of oppression embedded into in-person and digital testing services will need to be addressed to meet the needs of this diverse population.

The use of implementation science theories, models, and frameworks in implementation research for medicinal products: A scoping review

BackgroundThe uptake, adoption and integration of new medicines and treatment regimens within healthcare delivery can take a decade or more. Increasingly, implementation science (IS) research is being used to bridge this gap between the availability of new therapeutic evidence and its actual application in clinical practice. Little is known, however, about the quality of IS research in this area, including the degree to which theories, models and frameworks (TMFs) are being used. The objective of this study was to conduct a scoping review of the use of TMFs in implementation research involving medicinal products.MethodsA search was conducted for English language abstracts and manuscripts describing the application of TMFs in IS studies for medicinal products. Eligible publications were those published between 1 January 1974 and 12 December 2022. All records were screened at the title and abstract stage; included full-text papers were abstracted using data extraction tables designed for the study. Study quality was appraised using the Implementation Research Development Tool.ResultsThe initial scoping search identified 2697 publications, of which 9 were ultimately eligible for inclusion in the review. Most studies were published after 2020 and varied in their objectives, design and therapeutic area. Most studies had sample sizes of fewer than 50 participants, and all focused on the post-marketing phase of drug development. The TMF most frequently used was the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Although most studies applied all TMF domains, TMF use was limited to instrument development and/or qualitative analysis. Quality appraisals indicated the need for engaging patients and other stakeholders in the implementation research, reporting on the cost of implementation strategies, and evaluating the unintended consequences of implementation efforts.ConclusionsWe found that few IS studies involving medicinal products reported using TMFs. Those that did encompassed a wide variety of therapeutic indications and medicinal products; all were in the post-marketing phase and involved limited application of the TMFs. Researchers should consider conducting IS in earlier phases of drug development and integrating the TMFs throughout the research process. More consistent and in-depth use of TMFs may help advance research in this area.

Applying implementation science theories to support practice change in the assessment of cognition by occupational therapists.

Background Understanding cognitive impairments is essential for effective rehabilitation and discharge planning for adults with neurological conditions. The aim of this study was to identify barriers to completing standardised cognitive assessments and evaluate the implementation of an intervention to support practice change. Methods A mixed-methods approach was applied to translate cognitive assessment recommendations into clinical practice using the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) and the Capability, Opportunity, and Motivation Behaviour model (COM-B) theories. Occupational therapists at one metropolitan health service in Australia were invited to participate. Pre- and post-implementation file audits and surveys were conducted, along with focus groups that collected qualitative data analysed using the TDF and COM-B. Results Survey 1 (n =40) and focus group data (n =24) identified barriers in the TDF domains of knowledge (selection of assessments), environment and resources (equipment and time constraints), and social influences (pressure from other disciplines). To address barriers to implementing a cognitive assessment framework, scripts, cue cards, video-recorded training, and posters were developed as guided by the Behaviour Change Wheel (BCW). Survey 2 showed increased capability to physically administer cognitive assessments (53-74%) and improved clinician understanding of relevant clinical practice guideline (CPG) recommendations (22-50%). File audit data indicated a 30% increase in the number of standardised assessments completed. Conclusions The application of two implementation theories led to the development of an intervention that increased occupational therapists' confidence and their adherence to CPG recommendations. This study serves as a potential model for using the TDF and COM-B to create implementation interventions in various clinical practice areas.

Systems approaches to public service delivery: methods and frameworks

AbstractResearchers and practitioners are increasingly embracing systems approaches to deal with the complexity of public service delivery and policy evaluation. However, there is little agreement on what exactly constitutes a systems approach, conceptually or methodologically. We review and critically synthesize systems literature from the fields of health, education, and infrastructure. We argue that the common theoretical core of systems approaches is the idea that multi-dimensional complementarities between a policy and other aspects of the policy context are the first-order problem of policy design and evaluation. We distinguish between macro-systems approaches, which focus on the collective coherence of a set of policies or institutions, and micro-systems approaches, which focus on how a single policy interacts with the context in which it operates. We develop a typology of micro-systems approaches and discuss their relationship to standard impact evaluation methods as well as to work in external validity, implementation science, and complexity theory.

Instrumental variables for implementation science: exploring context-dependent causal pathways between implementation strategies and evidence-based interventions

BackgroundThe impact of both implementation strategies (IS) and evidence-based interventions (EBI) can vary across contexts, and a better understanding of how and why this occurs presents fundamental but challenging questions that implementation science as a field will need to grapple with. We use causal epidemiologic methods to explore the mechanisms of why sharp distinctions between implementation strategies (IS) and efficacy of an evidence-based intervention (EBI) may fail to recognize that the effect of an EBI can be deeply intertwined and dependent on the context of the IS leading to its uptake.MethodsWe explore the use of instrumental variable (IV) analyses as a critical tool for implementation science methods to isolate three relevant quantities within the same intervention context when exposure to an implementation strategy is random: (1) the effect of an IS on implementation outcomes (e.g., uptake), (2) effect of EBI uptake on patient outcomes, and (3) overall effectiveness of the IS (i.e., ~ implementation*efficacy). We discuss the mechanisms by which an implementation strategy can alter the context, and therefore effect, of an EBI using the underlying IV assumptions. We illustrate these concepts using examples of the implementation of new ART initiation guidelines in Zambia and community-based masking programs in Bangladesh.ResultsCausal questions relevant to implementation science are answered at each stage of an IV analysis. The first stage assesses the effect of the IS (e.g., new guidelines) on EBI uptake (e.g., same-day treatment initiation). The second stage leverages the IS as an IV to estimate the complier average causal effect (CACE) of the EBI on patient outcomes (e.g., effect of same-day treatment initiation on viral suppression). The underlying assumptions of CACE formalize that the causal effect of EBI may differ in the context of a different IS because (1) the mechanisms by which individuals uptake an intervention may differ and (2) the subgroup of individuals who take up an EBI may differ. IV methods thus provide a conceptual framework for how IS and EBIs are linked and that the IS itself needs to be considered a critical contextual determinant. Moreover, it also provides rigorous methodologic tools to isolate the effect of an IS, EBI, and combined effect of the IS and EBI.DiscussionLeveraging IV methods when exposure to an implementation strategy is random helps to conceptualize the context-dependent nature of implementation strategies, EBIs, and patient outcomes. IV methods formalize that the causal effect of an EBI may be specific to the context of the implementation strategy used to promote uptake. This integration of implementation science concepts and theory with rigorous causal epidemiologic methods yields novel insights and provides important tools for exploring the next generation of questions related to mechanisms and context in implementation science.

Using Participatory Implementation Science to Advance Health Equity.

Participatory approaches to implementation science (IS) offer an inclusive, collaborative, and iterative perspective on implementing and sustaining evidence-based interventions (EBIs) to advance health equity. This review provides guidance on the principles and practice of participatory IS, which enables academic researchers, community members, implementers, and other actors to collaboratively integrate practice-, community-, and research-based evidence into public health and health care services. With a foundational focus on supporting academics in coproducing knowledge and action, participatory IS seeks to improve health, reduce inequity, and create transformational change. The three main sections of this review provide (a) a rationale for participatory approaches to research in implementation science, (b) a framework for integrating participatory approaches in research utilizing IS theory and methods, and (c) critical considerations for optimizing the practice and impact of participatory IS. Ultimately, participatory approaches can move IS activities beyond efforts to make EBIs work within harmful systems toward transformative solutions that reshape these systems to center equity.

Multisite Implementation of the Tiered Skills Acquisition Model for Orientation: Review and Analysis.

Nursing professional development (NPD) directors and practitioners are called to lead practice changes. Knowledge of implementation science and diffusion theory equips NPD professionals with the tools necessary for successfully influencing nursing practice. This article analyzes a multisite implementation of the tiered skills acquisition model for clinical orientation and provides NPD directors and practitioners with recommendations for effective implementation strategies that translate beyond clinical orientation to a variety of NPD programs and initiatives. [J Contin Educ Nurs. 2024;55(3):130-136.].

Applications of implementation science frameworks, models and theories in disparities-focused cancer screening interventions: a scoping review protocol

BackgroundImplementation science (IS) frameworks, models and theories (FMTs) have gained popularity in guiding the implementation and evaluation of evidence-based interventions (EBIs) for cancer screening. However, there are significant research gaps...

Developing the intersectionality supplemented Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) and tools for intersectionality considerations

BackgroundThe concept of intersectionality proposes that demographic and social constructs intersect with larger social structures of oppression and privilege to shape experiences. While intersectionality is a widely accepted concept in feminist and gender studies, there has been little attempt to use this lens in implementation science. We aimed to supplement the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), a commonly used framework in implementation science, to support the incorporation of intersectionality in implementation science projects by (1) integrating an intersectional lens to the CFIR; and (2) developing a tool for researchers to be used alongside the updated framework.MethodsUsing a nominal group technique, an interdisciplinary framework committee (n = 17) prioritized the CFIR as one of three implementation science models, theories, and frameworks to supplement with intersectionality considerations; the modification of the other two frameworks are described in other papers. The CFIR subgroup (n = 7) reviewed the five domains and 26 constructs in the CFIR and prioritized domains and constructs for supplementation with intersectional considerations. The subgroup then iteratively developed recommendations and prompts for incorporating an intersectional approach within the prioritized domains and constructs. We developed recommendations and prompts to help researchers consider how personal identities and power structures may affect the facilitators and inhibitors of behavior change and the implementation of subsequent interventions.ResultsWe achieved consensus on how to apply an intersectional lens to CFIR after six rounds of meetings. The final intersectionality supplemented CFIR includes the five original domains, and 28 constructs; the outer systems and structures and the outer cultures constructs were added to the outer setting domain. Intersectionality prompts were added to 13 of the 28 constructs.ConclusionThrough an expert-consensus approach, we modified the CFIR to include intersectionality considerations and developed a tool with prompts to help implementation users apply an intersectional lens using the updated framework.

Private Practice, Private Insurance, and Private Pay Mental Health Services: An Understudied Area in Implementation Science.

The private practice setting is understudied. Private practice includes settings in which mental health providers are unaffiliated with healthcare and hospital systems. Private practices may accept insurance (private and sometimes public) or no insurance (private pay). Increasing attention to this setting is critical to facilitating equitable access to mental health services, especially given enduring mental health workforce shortages and service waitlists. Further, there have been recent federal government calls to increase mental health and physical healthcare parity and to reduce out-of-pocket patient costs. Implementation science theories, models, frameworks, and methods can help illuminate determinants of private practice service availability and quality (e.g., evidence-based intervention delivery with fidelity), guide evaluation of implementation outcomes such as cost and acceptability of interventions to patients, and identify strategies to mitigate barriers to high-quality, affordable private practice services. This article suggests research questions to begin filling the private practice research gap using an implementation determinants framework - the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) 2.0. Research questions are proposed across CFIR domains: outer context (e.g., policies impacting whether private practices accept insurance); individuals involved (e.g., provider professional experiences; direct-to-consumer marketing impacts on evidence-based intervention demand); innovation characteristics (e.g., appropriateness for private practice); inner context (e.g., organizational characteristics); and implementation processes (e.g., innovation sustainability). The illustrative research questions aim to begin a conversation amongst researchers and funders. Bringing an implementation science lens to the private practice context has the potential to improve the quality and affordability of mental health care for many.

NIH-supported implementation science and nutrition research: a portfolio review of the past decade.

This portfolio analysis aims to describe the scope of NIH-funded extramural research grants at the intersection of nutrition research and implementation science (IS) from 2011 to 2022 and to offer insights into future research opportunities relevant to the Strategic Plan for NIH Nutrition Research 2020-2030. A portfolio analysis of funded grants using NIH reporting systems was conducted to identify nutrition research and IS awarded between fiscal years 2011 and 2022. The authors screened the titles and abstracts for inclusion criteria: research and career development awards involved a nutrition and/or dietary intervention and measured a stated implementation outcome or used an IS theory, model, or framework. In total, 33 NIH-funded awards met the inclusion criteria. Almost half of the awards (48.5%) were investigator-initiated research projects compared to research career awards and cooperative agreements. While studies were predominantly conducted in the United States, 15.2% were conducted in low- and middle-income countries in Africa, Latin America, and Asia. Adults aged 19-64 years and children aged 2-11 years represented most of the study populations (45.5 and 15.2%, respectively). Studies provided nutrition/dietary guidelines and created culturally tailored interventions, which were then adapted in collaboration with community partners in schools, hospitals, and religious settings. The most cited IS outcomes were feasibility, costs, adoption, and acceptability. Sixteen awards (48.5%) used an IS theory, model, or framework to guide their work. The findings show the breadth of NIH-funded nutrition and implementation research and highlight potential research opportunities.

Implementation costs of sugary drink policies in the United States.

To support implementation of important public health policies, policymakers need information about implementation costs over time and across stakeholder groups. We assessed implementation costs of two federal sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) policies of current policy interest and with evidence to support their effects: excise taxes and health warning labels. Our analysis encompassed the entire policy life cycle using the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, and Sustainment framework. We identified implementation actions using key informant interviews and developed quantitative estimates of implementation costs using published literature and government documents. Results show that implementation costs vary over time and among stakeholders. Explicitly integrating implementation science theory and using mixed methods improved the comprehensiveness of our results. Although this work is specific to federal SSB policies, the process can inform how we understand the costs of many public health policies, providing crucial information for public health policy making.