Test Implementation Strategies Research Articles

Barriers and Facilitators to Integrating Acupuncture into the U.S. Health Care System: A Scoping Review.

Background: Acupuncture is a widely practiced complementary and integrative health modality that has multiple clinical applications. The use of acupuncture in the United States is rapidly increasing. Although studies have shown the efficacy and effectiveness of acupuncture for various ailments, the integration of acupuncture into the U.S. health care system remains a challenge. Little is known about the factors affecting this integration. Objective: To provide a systematic review of the barriers and facilitators affecting the integration of acupuncture into the U.S. health care system. Methods: Four electronic databases were searched. Three independent reviewers were involved in the screening and data charting processes. Findings were synthesized and categorized into four levels based on the Social Ecological Model. Results: A total of 22 studies were included in the final review. The barriers and facilitators affecting the integration of acupuncture were mapped into four levels (individual, interpersonal, organizational, and policy). The most frequently reported barriers and facilitators were mapped into the Social Ecological Model constructs within the "Individual" level (i.e., beliefs and attitudes of acupuncture, and practical issues) and the "Organizational" level (i.e., credentialing, space and facility, referral system). Conclusion: This review has identified and synthesized the breadth of evidence on the barriers and facilitators to the integration of acupuncture into the U.S. health care system. Results of this review will guide future implementation studies to develop and test implementation strategies to integrate acupuncture into the U.S. health care system.

A collaborative network trial to evaluate the effectiveness of implementation strategies to maximize adoption of a school-based healthy lunchbox program: a study protocol.

An important impediment to the large-scale adoption of evidence-based school nutrition interventions is the lack of evidence on effective strategies to implement them. This paper describes the protocol for a "Collaborative Network Trial" to support the simultaneous testing of different strategies undertaken by New South Wales Local Health Districts to facilitate the adoption of an effective school-based healthy lunchbox program ('SWAP IT'). The primary objective of this study is to assess the effectiveness of different implementation strategies to increase school adoption of the SWAP across New South Wales Local Health Districts. Within a Master Protocol framework, a collaborative network trial will be undertaken. Independent randomized controlled trials to test implementation strategies to increase school adoption of SWAP IT within primary schools in 10 different New South Wales Local Health Districts will occur. Schools will be randomly allocated to either the intervention or control condition. Schools allocated to the intervention group will receive a combination of implementation strategies. Across the 10 participating Local Health Districts, six broad strategies were developed and combinations of these strategies will be executed over a 6 month period. In six districts an active comparison group (containing one or more implementation strategies) was selected. The primary outcome of the trial will be adoption of SWAP IT, assessed via electronic registration records captured automatically following online school registration to the program. The primary outcome will be assessed using logistic regression analyses for each trial. Individual participant data component network meta-analysis, under a Bayesian framework, will be used to explore strategy-covariate interactions; to model additive main effects (separate effects for each component of an implementation strategy); two way interactions (synergistic/antagonistic effects of components), and full interactions. The study will provide rigorous evidence of the effects of a variety of implementation strategies, employed in different contexts, on the adoption of a school-based healthy lunchbox program at scale. Importantly, it will also provide evidence as to whether health service-centered, collaborative research models can rapidly generate new knowledge and yield health service improvements. This trial is registered prospectively with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12623000558628).

Rethinking Barriers and Enablers in Qualitative Health Research: Limitations, Alternatives, and Enhancements.

Explorations of barriers and enablers (or barriers and facilitators) to a desired health practice, implementation process, or intervention outcome have become so prevalent that they seem to be a default in much health services and public health research. In this article, we argue that decisions to frame research questions or analyses using barriers and enablers (B&Es) should not be default. Contrary to the strengths of qualitative research, the B&Es approach often bypasses critical reflexivity and can lead to shallow research findings with poor understanding of the phenomena of interest. The B&Es approach is untheorised, relying on assumptions of linear, unidirectional processes, universally desirable outcomes, and binary thinking which are at odds with the rich understanding of context and complexity needed to respond to the challenges faced by health services and public health. We encourage researchers to develop research questions using informed deliberation that considers a range of approaches and their implications for producing meaningful knowledge. Alternatives and enhancements to the B&Es approach are explored, including using 'whole package' methodologies; theories, conceptual frameworks, and sensitising ideas; and participatory methods. We also consider ways of advancing existing research on B&Es rather than doing 'more of the same': researchers can usefully investigate how a barrier or enabler works in depth; develop and test implementation strategies for addressing B&Es; or synthesise the B&Es literature to develop a new model or theory. Illustrative examples from the literature are provided. We invite further discussion on this topic.

Prototyping the implementation of a suicide prevention protocol in primary care settings using PDSA cycles: a mixed method study

IntroductionIn Canada, approximately 4,500 individuals die by suicide annually. Approximately 45% of suicide decedents had contact with their primary care provider within the month prior to their death. Current versus never smokers have an 81% increased risk of death by suicide. Those who smoke have additional risks for suicide such as depression, chronic pain, alcohol, and other substance use. They are more likely to experience adverse social determinants of health. Taken together, this suggests that smoking cessation programs in primary care could be facilitators of suicide prevention, but this has not been studied.Study objectivesThe objectives of the study are to understand barriers/facilitators to implementing a suicide prevention protocol within a smoking cessation program (STOP program), which is deployed by an academic mental health and addiction treatment hospital in primary care clinics and to develop and test implementation strategies to facilitate the uptake of suicide screening and assessment in primary care clinics across Ontario.MethodsThe study employed a three-phase sequential mixed-method design. Phase 1: Conducted interviews guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research exploring barriers to implementing a suicide prevention protocol. Phase 2: Performed consensus discussions to map barriers to implementation strategies using the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change tool and rank barriers by relevance. Phase 3: Evaluated the feasibility and acceptability of implementation strategies using Plan Do Study Act cycles.ResultsEleven healthcare providers and four research assistants identified lack of training and the need of better educational materials as implementation barriers. Participants endorsed and tested the top three ranked implementation strategies, namely, a webinar, adding a preamble before depression survey questions, and an infographic. After participating in the webinar and reviewing the educational materials, all participants endorsed the three strategies as acceptable/very acceptable and feasible/very feasible.ConclusionAlthough there are barriers to implementing a suicide prevention protocol within primary care, it is possible to overcome them with strategies deemed both acceptable and feasible. These results offer promising practice solutions to implement a suicide prevention protocol in smoking cessation programs delivered in primary care settings. Future efforts should track implementation of these strategies and measure outcomes, including provider confidence, self-efficacy, and knowledge, and patient outcomes.

Design of a dual randomized trial in a type 2 hybrid effectiveness—implementation study

BackgroundDual randomized controlled trials (DRCT) are type 2 hybrid studies that include two randomized trials: one testing implementation strategies and one testing an intervention. We argue that this study design offers efficiency by providing rigorous investigation of both implementation and intervention in one study and has potential to accelerate generation of the evidence needed to translate interventions that work into real-world practice. Nevertheless, studies using this design are rare in the literature.Main textWe construct a paradigm that breaks down the components of the DRCT and provide a step-by-step explanation of features of the design and recommendations for use. A clear distinction is made between the dual strands that test the implementation versus the intervention, and a minimum of three randomized arms is advocated. We suggest an active treatment arm that includes both the implementation strategy and intervention that are hypothesized to be superior. We suggest two comparison/control arms: one to test the implementation strategy and the second to test the intervention. Further, we recommend selection criteria for the two control arms that place emphasis on maximizing the utility of the study design to advance public health practice.ConclusionsOn the surface, the design of a DRCT can appear simple, but actual application is complex. We believe it is that complexity that has limited its use in the literature. We hope that this paper will give both implementation scientists and trialists who are not familiar with implementation science a better understanding of the DRCT design and encouragement to use it.

The devil is in the details: Advancing our collective understanding of naturalistic developmental behavioral interventions.

Given the growing body of randomized trials examining various Naturalistic Developmental Behavioral Intervention (NDBI) approaches, a dialog has emerged exploring the overlap in strategies across NDBIs to create single measures that propose to capture core strategies across the interventions. This commentary will ask readers to consider the current state of the science, the potential value of looking not only for similarities but also for differences across approaches, and present five scientific next steps to advance our collective understanding of the NDBIs including: (a) operationalizing intervention strategies and outcomes, (b) expansion of the effectiveness evidence base and begin testing implementation strategies for individual NDBIs, (c) rigorous testing of core intervention components and the mechanism of each intervention, (d) personalization, and (e) supporting transparency with a priori trial registration.

Individual- and neighborhood-level characteristics of lung cancer screening participants undergoing telemedicine shared decision making

BackgroundAlthough lung cancer screening (LCS) for high-risk individuals reduces lung cancer mortality in clinical trial settings, many questions remain about how to implement high-quality LCS in real-world programs. With the increasing use of telemedicine in healthcare, studies examining this approach in the context of LCS are urgently needed. We aimed to identify sociodemographic and other factors associated with screening completion among individuals undergoing telemedicine Shared Decision Making (SDM) for LCS.MethodsThis retrospective study examined patients who completed Shared Decision Making (SDM) via telemedicine between May 4, 2020 – March 18, 2021 in a centralized LCS program. Individuals were categorized into Complete Screening vs. Incomplete Screening subgroups based on the status of subsequent LDCT completion. A multi-level, multivariate model was constructed to identify factors associated with incomplete screening.ResultsAmong individuals undergoing telemedicine SDM during the study period, 20.6% did not complete a LDCT scan. Bivariate analysis demonstrated that Black/African-American race, Medicaid insurance status, and new patient type were associated with greater odds of incomplete screening. On multi-level, multivariate analysis, individuals who were new patients undergoing baseline LDCT or resided in a census tract with a high level of socioeconomic deprivation had significantly higher odds of incomplete screening. Individuals with a greater level of education experienced lower odds of incomplete screening.ConclusionsAmong high-risk individuals undergoing telemedicine SDM for LCS, predictors of incomplete screening included low education, high neighborhood-level deprivation, and new patient type. Future research should focus on testing implementation strategies to improve LDCT completion rates while leveraging telemedicine for high-quality LCS.

Community-engaged optimization of COVID-19 rapid evaluation and testing experiences: roll-out implementation optimization trial

BackgroundThere continues to be a need for COVID-19 testing that is pragmatic, community-centered, and sustainable. This study will refine and test implementation strategies prioritized by community partners: (1) walk-up no-cost testing, (2) community health worker (promotores)-facilitated testing and preventive care counseling, (3) vending machines that dispense no-cost, self-testing kits.MethodsA co-designed Theory of Change from an earlier study phase and the Practical, Robust Implementation and Sustainment Model (PRISM) will guide the study design, measures selection, and evaluation. The first aim is to refine and operationalize a multi-component implementation strategy bundle and outcome measures for COVID-19 testing. A Community and Scientific Advisory Board (CSAB) will be established and include community members, clinical providers/staff from the partnering Federally Qualified Health Center (FQHC), public health researchers, policymakers, and a county health department ambassador. Engagement of CSAB members will be assessed through structured ethnography and a survey about the quality and quantity of engagement practices. The second aim is to implement and evaluate the impact of the implementation strategy bundle to optimize COVID-19 testing in communities using a roll-out implementation optimization (ROIO) design. Seven thousand and five hundred community members will be enrolled across four FQHC clinics over 18 months. Participants will be invited to complete an electronic survey about their demographics, health, and COVID-19 testing results and experiences. CSAB members and clinic partners will participate in PRISM fit and determinant assessments prior to each clinic rollout and post-trial. Interviews will be conducted with 60 community participants and 12 providers/staff following a 3-month rollout period at each clinic, inquiring about their experiences with the implementation strategies. Quantitative data will be analyzed using hierarchical multilevel models to determine the impact of implementation strategies. Qualitative data will be analyzed using rapid qualitative approaches to summarize implementation experiences and identify necessary changes prior to subsequent rollouts. A matrix approach will be used to triangulate data from quantitative and qualitative sources based on PRISM domains.DiscussionThis is one of the first pragmatic implementation trials to use a ROIO design and aims to co-create a sustainable and equitable COVID-19 testing program. Findings are likely to generalize to other public health prevention efforts.Trial registrationNCT05894655 March 2, 2023.

Analysis of Key Factors for Improved Customer Experience, Engagement, and Loyalty in the E-Commerce Industry in Indonesia

In Indonesia's rapidly growing e-commerce industry, customer experience, engagement, and loyalty are pivotal variables for business success and sustainability. By addressing gaps in understanding these critical factors to enhance positive customer experiences, optimize engagement levels, and fortify customer loyalty. This research aims to identify key factors influencing customer experience, engagement, and loyalty in Indonesia's e-commerce industry, hence resulting in practical implementation recommendations for companies interested in developing an e-commerce platform or as a reference for future research. This study employs an explanatory qualitative approach to explore the intricate relationship between customer experience, engagement, and loyalty in the dynamic landscape of the e-commerce industry. Data is gathered from five prominent e-commerce platforms in Indonesia. The qualitative analysis delves into the narratives of these respondents, uncovering rich insights into their perceptions. Recommendations to bridge these gaps include implementing live chat with sellers, elevating personalized content and recommendations, prioritizing responsiveness and page loading speed, emphasizing security in online shopping, and amplifying personalized content and recommendations during customer engagement. Adopting these strategies, e-commerce companies can deliver more gratifying customer experiences, elevate engagement, and strengthen loyalty, thus establishing a competitive advantage in this dynamic market and fostering sustainable business growth. The research identifies factors impacting customer experience, engagement, and loyalty in e-commerce. Key factors for a positive experience include discounts, product quality, user interface, and customer support. Addressing gaps between factors and expectations can enhance satisfaction and loyalty. Recommendations include live chat, personalization, speed, security, and content improvement for a competitive advantage and sustainable growth. The recommendations for future research include conducting a comparative analysis, undertaking a longitudinal study, testing implementation strategies, and measuring long-term loyalty effects.

Identification and Characterization of Workflow Models for Medication Therapy Management in Community Pharmacies.

Community pharmacists providing medication therapy management (MTM) services report difficulty incorporating MTM services with dispensing and other pharmacy services. A variety of approaches exist due to a lack of an ideal standard for service integration. This study seeks to identify and characterize MTM workflow models in pharmacies of one geographic area of a large community pharmacy chain. Thirteen semi-structured interviews were conducted with pharmacists from thirteen different pharmacies. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analyzed for common themes using an inductive qualitative approach. We did not find a high level of MTM task integration into the dispensing workflow in this setting. However, three main strategies used to delegate work of MTM activities were identified and defined: shared teamwork, delegated teamwork, and single delegation. Few MTM tasks were integrated into the dispensing workflow among interviewed pharmacies; most tasks were performed outside of workflow. The most common integration was performing patient interviews at pick up. There were no trends identified among high performing or low performing pharmacies. This work may provide a basis to define workflow models for further research to test implementation strategies within community pharmacies.

Developing and Testing Implementation Strategies to support the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Initiative for Falls Risk Management in Outpatient Physical Therapy: A Protocol

ObjectivesTo develop and test implementation strategies to support implementing the Centers for Disease Control and Preventions’ Stopping Elderly Accidents, Deaths, and Injuries (STEADI) initiative for falls prevention and falls risk management in a novel setting, outpatient physical therapy. DesignA feasibility implementation study engaging key partners involved in or affected by the implementation throughout the study. SettingFive outpatient physical therapy clinics embedded in a health system. ParticipantsKey partners (physical therapists, physical therapist assistants, referring physicians, administrative clinic staff, older adults, and caregivers) involved in or affected by the implementation (N=48) will participate in surveys and interviews to identify barriers and facilitators prior to implementation and post implementation. Twelve key partners representing at least 1 of each group will participate in evidence-based quality improvement panels to identify which barriers and facilitators are most important and feasible to address and to assist in choosing and designing implementation strategies to support the uptake of STEADI in outpatient rehabilitation. STEADI will be implemented in 5 outpatient physical therapy clinics as a standard of care for the ∼1200 older adults attending those clinics annually. OutcomesPrimary outcomes include clinic- and provider-level (physical therapists and physical therapist assistant) adoption and fidelity to STEADI screening, multifactorial assessment, and falls risk interventions for older adults (65 years or older) attending outpatient physical therapy. Key partners’ perceived feasibility, acceptability, and appropriateness of STEADI in outpatient physical therapy will also be measured using validated implementation science questionnaires. Exploratory clinical outcomes of older adults’ falls risk pre- and post rehabilitation will be investigated.

Considerations in implementation of social risk factor screening and referral in maternal and infant care in Washington, DC: A qualitative study.

The District of Columbia (DC) has striking disparities in maternal and infant outcomes comparing Black to White women and babies. Social determinants of health (SDoH) are widely recognized as a significant contributor to these disparities in health outcomes. Screening for social risk factors and referral for appropriate services is a critical step in addressing social needs and reducing outcome disparities. We conducted interviews among employees (n = 18) and patients (n = 9) across three diverse, urban clinics within a healthcare system and one community-based organization involved in a five-year initiative to reduce maternal and infant disparities in DC. Interviews were guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research to understand current processes and organizational factors that contributed to or impeded delivery of social risk factor screening and referral for indicated needs. We found that current processes for social risk factor screening and referral differed between and within clinics depending on the patient population. Key facilitators of successful screening included a supportive organizational culture and adaptability of more patient-centered screening processes. Key barriers to delivery included high patient volume and limited electronic health record capabilities to record results and track the status of internal and community referrals. Areas identified for improvement included additional social risk factor assessment training for new providers, patient-centered approaches to screening, improved tracking processes, and facilitation of connections to social services within clinical settings. Despite proliferation of social risk factor screeners and recognition of their importance within health care settings, few studies detail implementation processes for social risk factor screening and referrals. Future studies should test implementation strategies for screening and referral services to address identified barriers to implementation.

Development and testing of a decision aid to achieve shared decision-making for routine labor induction.

This quality improvement project aimed to create a decision aid for labor induction in healthy pregnancies at or beyond 39 weeks that met the needs of pregnant people least likely to experience shared decision-making and to identify and test implementation strategies to support its use in prenatal care. We used quality improvement and qualitative methods to develop, test, and refine a patient decision aid. The decision aid was tested in three languages by providers across obstetrics, family medicine, and midwifery practices at a tertiary care hospital and two community health centers. Outcomes included patients' understanding of their choices, pros and cons of choices, and the decision being theirs or a shared one with their provider. Patient interview data indicated that shared decision-making on labor induction was achieved. Across three Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles, we interviewed a diverse group of 24 pregnant people: 20 were people of color, 16 were publicly insured, and 15 were born outside the United States. All but one (23/24) reported feeling the decision was theirs or a shared one with their provider. The majority could name induction choices they had along with pros and cons. Interviewees described the decision-making experience as empowering and positive. Nine medical providers tested the decision aid and gave feedback. Providers stated the tool helped improve the quality of their counseling and reduce bias. This project suggests that using an evidence-based and well-tested decision aid can help achieve shared decision-making on labor induction for a diverse group of pregnant people.

Enhancing review criteria for dissemination and implementation science grants

BackgroundThe existing grant review criteria do not consider unique methods and priorities of Dissemination and Implementation Science (DIS). The ImplemeNtation and Improvement Science Proposals Evaluation CriTeria (INSPECT) scoring system includes 10 criteria based on Proctor et al.’s “ten key ingredients” and was developed to support the assessment of DIS research proposals. We describe how we adapted INSPECT and used it in combination with the NIH scoring system to evaluate pilot DIS study proposals through our DIS Center.MethodsWe adapted INSPECT to broaden considerations for diverse DIS settings and concepts (e.g., explicitly including dissemination and implementation methods). Five PhD-level researchers with intermediate to advanced DIS knowledge were trained to conduct reviews of seven grant applications using both the INSPECT and NIH criteria. The INSPECT overall scores range from 0 to 30 (higher scores are better), and the NIH overall scores range from 1 to 9 (lower scores are better). Each grant was independently reviewed by two reviewers, then discussed in a group meeting to compare the experiences using both criteria to evaluate the proposal and to finalize scoring decisions. A follow-up survey was sent to grant reviewers to solicit further reflections on each scoring criterion.ResultsAveraged across reviewers, the INSPECT overall scores ranged from 13 to 24, while the NIH overall scores ranged from 2 to 5. Reviewer reflections highlighted the unique value and utility for each scoring criterion. The NIH criteria had a broad scientific purview and were better suited to evaluate more effectiveness-focused and pre-implementation proposals not testing implementation strategies. The INSPECT criteria were easier to rate in terms of the quality of integrating DIS considerations into the proposal and to assess the potential for generalizability, real-world feasibility, and impact. Overall, reviewers noted that INSPECT was a helpful tool to guide DIS research proposal writing.ConclusionsWe confirmed complementarity in using both scoring criteria in our pilot study grant proposal review and highlighted the utility of INSPECT as a potential DIS resource for training and capacity building. Possible refinements to INSPECT include more explicit reviewer guidance on assessing pre-implementation proposals, providing reviewers with the opportunity to submit written commentary with each numerical rating, and greater clarity on rating criteria with overlapping descriptions.

Implementation of a food retail intervention to reduce purchase of unhealthy food and beverages in remote Australia: mixed-method evaluation using the consolidated framework for implementation research

BackgroundAdoption of health-enabling food retail interventions in food retail will require effective implementation strategies. To inform this, we applied an implementation framework to a novel real-world food retail intervention, the Healthy Stores 2020 strategy, to identify factors salient to intervention implementation from the perspective of the food retailer.MethodsA convergent mixed-method design was used and data were interpreted using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). The study was conducted alongside a randomised controlled trial in partnership with the Arnhem Land Progress Aboriginal Corporation (ALPA). Adherence data were collected for the 20 consenting Healthy Stores 2020 study stores (ten intervention /ten control) in 19 communities in remote Northern Australia using photographic material and an adherence checklist. Retailer implementation experience data were collected through interviews with the primary Store Manager for each of the ten intervention stores at baseline, mid- and end-strategy. Deductive thematic analysis of interview data was conducted and informed by the CFIR. Intervention adherence scores derived for each store assisted interview data interpretation.ResultsHealthy Stores 2020 strategy was, for the most part, adhered to. Analysis of the 30 interviews revealed that implementation climate of the ALPA organisation, its readiness for implementation including a strong sense of social purpose, and the networks and communication between the Store Managers and other parts of ALPA, were CFIR inner and outer domains most frequently referred to as positive to strategy implementation. Store Managers were a ‘make-or-break’ touchstone of implementation success. The co-designed intervention and strategy characteristics and its perceived cost–benefit, combined with the inner and outer setting factors, galvanised the individual characteristics of Store Managers (e.g., optimism, adaptability and retail competency) to champion implementation. Where there was less perceived cost–benefit, Store Managers seemed less enthusiastic for the strategy.ConclusionsFactors critical to implementation (a strong sense of social purpose; structures and processes within and external to the food retail organisation and their alignment with intervention characteristics (low complexity, cost advantage); and Store Manager characteristics) can inform the design of implementation strategies for the adoption of this health-enabling food retail initiative in the remote setting. This research can help inform a shift in research focus to identify, develop and test implementation strategies for the wide adoption of health-enabling food retail initiatives into practice.Trial Registration.Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN 12,618,001,588,280.

Tailoring implementation strategies for scale-up: Preparing to take the Med-South Lifestyle program to scale statewide.

Tailoring implementation strategies for scale-up involves engaging stakeholders, identifying implementation determinants, and designing implementation strategies to target those determinants. The purpose of this paper is to describe the multiphase process used to engage stakeholders in tailoring strategies to scale-up the Med-South Lifestyle Program, a research-supported lifestyle behavior change intervention that translates the Mediterranean dietary pattern for the southeastern US. Guided by Barker et al. framework, we tailored scale-up strategies over four-phases. In Phase 1, we engaged stakeholders from delivery systems that implement lifestyle interventions and from support systems that provide training and other support for statewide scale-up. In Phase 2, we partnered with delivery systems (community health centers and health departments) to design and pilot test implementation strategies (2014-2019). In Phase 3, we partnered with both delivery and support systems to tailor Phase 2 strategies for scale-up (2019-2021) and are now testing those tailored strategies in a type 3 hybrid study (2021-2023). This paper reports on the Phase 3 methods used to tailor implementation strategies for scale-up. To identify determinants of scale-up, we surveyed North Carolina delivery systems (n = 114 community health centers and health departments) and elicited input from delivery and support system stakeholders. We tailored strategies to address identified determinants by adapting the form of Phase 2 strategies while retaining their functions. We pilot tested strategies in three sites and collected data on intermediate, implementation, and effectiveness outcomes. Determinants of scale-up included limited staffing, competing priorities, and safety concerns during COVID-19, among others. Tailoring yielded two levels of implementation strategies. At the level of the delivery system, strategies included implementation teams, an implementation blueprint, and cyclical small tests of change. At the level of the support system, strategies included training, educational materials, quality monitoring, and technical assistance. Findings from the pilot study provide evidence for the implementation strategies' reach, acceptability, and feasibility, with mixed findings on fidelity. Strategies were only moderately successful at building delivery system capacity to implement Med-South. This paper describes the multiphase approach used to plan for Med-South scale-up, including the methods used to tailor two-levels of implementation strategies by identifying and targeting multilevel determinants.

Using default opt-out strategies to undercover the unknown HCV infections: a scoping review

Abstract Background Following the advent of directly acting antivirals (DAAs) a global effort is underway to eliminate viral hepatitis C (HCV) by 2030. Yet identification of infected individuals and access to dedicated services may pose a challenge to the achievement elimination targets. A scoping review to synthesize studies that explored the efficacy of opt-out strategies to improve HCV testing capacity was conducted. Methods We searched PubMed and Scopus (from 2015 to March 2022) for all English original articles and systematic reviews addressing opt-out strategies for HCV testing in different settings, published in the WHO's European Region Countries. We excluded articles that focused on other testing implementation strategies. Results A total of 136 articles were screened at the title and abstract level, of which 41 were also assessed at full text for eligibility after deduplication. In the end, 30 articles met the inclusion criteria. Studies originated from 19 different countries of the WHO's European Region, with the most prevalent being France (26.9%, 11/41). The 43.3% of the articles addressed opt-out testing strategies in emergency departments (EDs), 36.6% into prisons, 13.3% in primary care, and 6.6% among people who use drugs. Opt-out default testing was found to be effective in EDs and prisons, whereas only 2 articles tested the efficacy of opt-out strategies for HCV testing in primary care settings. Conclusions Opt-out strategies resulted in increased testing rates and higher cost-effectiveness in different settings, especially EDs and prisons. However, to identify individuals with undiagnosed infections, birth cohorts screening in the general population may be needed. Further research is needed to assess the utility of an opt-out default testing strategy in primary care settings. Key messages

Using Implementation Mapping to develop protocols supporting the implementation of a state policy on screening children for Adverse Childhood Experiences in a system of health centers in inland Southern California.

Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs) are defined as traumatic events occurring before age 18, such as maltreatment, life-threatening accidents, harsh migration experiences, or violence. Screening for ACEs includes asking questions about an individual's early exposure to these types of events. ACEs screenings have potential value in identifying children exposed to chronic and significant stress that produces elevated cortisol levels (i.e., toxic stress), and its associated physical and mental health conditions, such as heart disease, diabetes, depression, asthma, ADHD, anxiety, and substance dependence. However, ACEs screenings are seldom used in primary care settings. The Surgeon General of California has addressed this care gap by introducing ACEs Aware, an ACEs screening fee-for-service healthcare policy signed into law by Gov. Gavin Newsom. Since January 2020, Medi-Cal, California's Medicaid health care program, has reimbursed primary care providers for using the Pediatric ACEs and Related Life-events Screener (PEARLS) tool to screen children and adults for ACEs during wellness visits. To achieve the goals set by the ACEs Aware state policy, it is essential to develop and test implementation strategies that are informed by the values, priorities, and resources of clinical settings, healthcare professionals, and end-users. To address this need, we partnered with a system of federally qualified health centers in Southern California on a pilot study to facilitate the implementation of ACEs screenings in five community-based clinics. The health centers had broad ideas for an implementation strategy, as well as best practices to improve adoption of screenings, such as focusing on staff training to improve clinic workflow. This knowledge was incorporated into the development of an implementation strategy template, used at the outset of this study. We used the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation and Sustainment (EPIS) framework to guide the study and inform a participatory planning process called Implementation Mapping. In this paper, we describe how Implementation Mapping was used to engage diverse stakeholders and guide them through a systematic process that resulted in the development of the implementation strategy. We also detail how the EPIS framework informed each Implementation Mapping Task and provide recommendations for developing implementation strategies using EPIS and Implementation Mapping in health-care settings.

Healthcare delivery and recovery after critical illness.

To summarize improvements and innovations in healthcare delivery which could be implemented to improve the recovery experience after critical illness for adult survivors and their families. For survivors of critical illness, the transitions in care during their recovery journey are points of heightened vulnerability associated with adverse events. Survivors of critical illness often have errors in the management of their medications during the recovery period. A multicomponent intervention delivered for 30 days that focused on four key principles of improved recovery care after sepsis care was associated with a durable effect on 12-month rehospitalization and mortality compared with usual care. A recent multicentre study which piloted integrating health and social care for critical care survivors demonstrated improvements in health-related quality of life and self-efficacy at 12 months. Multiple qualitative studies provide insights into how peer support programmes could potentially benefit survivors of critical illness by providing them mechanism to share their experiences, to give back to other patients, and to set more realistic expectations for recovery. Future research could focus on exploring safety outcomes as primary endpoints and finding ways to develop and test implementation strategies to improve the recovery after critical illness.

Preferences Elicited and Respected for Seriously Ill Veterans through Enhanced Decision-Making (PERSIVED): a protocol for an implementation study in the Veterans Health Administration

BackgroundEmpirical evidence supports the use of structured goals of care conversations and documentation of life-sustaining treatment (LST) preferences in durable, accessible, and actionable orders to improve the care for people living with serious illness. As the largest integrated healthcare system in the USA, the Veterans Health Administration (VA) provides an excellent environment to test implementation strategies that promote this evidence-based practice. The Preferences Elicited and Respected for Seriously Ill Veterans through Enhanced Decision-Making (PERSIVED) program seeks to improve care outcomes for seriously ill Veterans by supporting efforts to conduct goals of care conversations, systematically document LST preferences, and ensure timely and accurate communication about preferences across VA and non-VA settings.MethodsPERSIVED encompasses two separate but related implementation projects that support the same evidence-based practice. Project 1 will enroll 12 VA Home Based Primary Care (HBPC) programs and Project 2 will enroll six VA Community Nursing Home (CNH) programs. Both projects begin with a pre-implementation phase during which data from diverse stakeholders are gathered to identify barriers and facilitators to adoption of the LST evidence-based practice. This baseline assessment is used to tailor quality improvement activities using audit with feedback and implementation facilitation during the implementation phase. Site champions serve as the lynchpin between the PERSIVED project team and site personnel. PERSIVED teams support site champions through monthly coaching sessions. At the end of implementation, baseline site process maps are updated to reflect new steps and procedures to ensure timely conversations and documentation of treatment preferences. During the sustainability phase, intense engagement with champions ends, at which point champions work independently to maintain and improve processes and outcomes. Ongoing process evaluation, guided by the RE-AIM framework, is used to monitor Reach, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance outcomes. Effectiveness will be assessed using several endorsed clinical metrics for seriously ill populations.DiscussionThe PERSIVED program aims to prevent potentially burdensome LSTs by consistently eliciting and documenting values, goals, and treatment preferences of seriously ill Veterans. Working with clinical operational partners, we will apply our findings to HBPC and CNH programs throughout the national VA healthcare system during a future scale-out period.