Search

Abstract Background Mississippi (MS) experiences disproportionally high rates of new HIV infections and limited availability of pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP). Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs) are poised to increase access to PrEP. However, little is known about the implementation strategies needed to successfully integrate PrEP services into FQHCs in MS. Purpose The study had two objectives: identify barriers and facilitators to PrEP use and to develop tailored implementation strategies for FQHCs. Methods Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 19 staff and 17 PrEP-eligible patients in MS FQHCs between April 2021 and March 2022. The interview was guided by the integrated-Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (i-PARIHS) framework which covered PrEP facilitators and barriers. Interviews were coded according to the i-PARIHS domains of context, innovation, and recipients, followed by thematic analysis of these codes. Identified implementation strategies were presented to 9 FQHC staff for feedback. Results Data suggested that PrEP use at FQHCs is influenced by patient and clinic staff knowledge with higher levels of knowledge reflecting more PrEP use. Perceived side effects are the most significant barrier to PrEP use for patients, but participants also identified several other barriers including low HIV risk perception and untrained providers. Despite these barriers, patients also expressed a strong motivation to protect themselves, their partners, and their communities from HIV. Implementation strategies included education and provider training which were perceived as acceptable and appropriate. Conclusions Though patients are motivated to increase protection against HIV, multiple barriers threaten uptake of PrEP within FQHCs in MS. Educating patients and providers, as well as training providers, are promising implementation strategies to overcome these barriers.

Abstract Background Successful implementation of evidence-based treatments (EBT) for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in primary care may address treatment access and quality gaps by providing care in novel and less stigmatized settings. Yet, PTSD treatments are largely unavailable in safety net primary care. We aimed to collect clinician stakeholder data on organizational, attitudinal, and contextual factors relevant to EBT implementation. Methods Our developmental formative evaluation was guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), including (a) surveys assessing implementation climate and attitudes towards EBTs and behavioral health integration and (b) semi-structured interviews to identify barriers and facilitators to implementation and need for augmentation. Participants were hospital employees (N = 22), including primary care physicians (n = 6), integrated behavioral health clinicians (n = 8), community wellness advocates (n = 3), and clinic leadership (n = 5). We report frequency and descriptives of survey data and findings from directed content analysis of interviews. We used a concurrent mixed-methods approach, integrating survey and interview data collected simultaneously using a joint display approach. A primary care community advisory board (CAB) helped to refine interview guides and interpret findings. Results Stakeholders described implementation determinants of the EBT related to the CFIR domains of intervention characteristics (relative advantage, adaptability), outer setting (patient needs and resources), inner setting (networks and communication, relative priority, leadership engagement, available resources), and individuals involved (knowledge and beliefs, cultural considerations). Stakeholders described strong attitudinal support (relative advantage), yet therapist time and capacity restraints are major PTSD treatment implementation barriers (available resources). Changes in hospital management were perceived as potentially allowing for greater access to behavioral health services, including EBTs. Patient engagement barriers such as stigma, mistrust, and care preferences were also noted (patient needs and resources). Recommendations included tailoring the intervention to meet existing workflows (adaptability), system alignment efforts focused on improving detection, referral, and care coordination processes (networks and communication), protecting clinician time for training and consultation (leadership engagement), and embedding a researcher in the practice (available resources). Conclusions Our evaluation identified key CFIR determinants of implementation of PTSD treatments in safety net integrated primary care settings. Our project also demonstrates that successful implementation necessitates strong stakeholder engagement.

RationaleThe host-pathogen relationship is inherently dynamic and constantly evolving. Applying an implementation science lens to policy evaluation suggests that policy impacts are variable depending upon key implementation outcomes (feasibility, acceptability, appropriateness costs) and conditions and contexts.COVID-19 case studyExperiences with non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) including masking, testing, and social distancing/business and school closures during the COVID-19 pandemic response highlight the importance of considering public health policy impacts through an implementation science lens of constantly evolving contexts, conditions, evidence, and public perceptions. As implementation outcomes (feasibility, acceptability) changed, the effectiveness of these interventions changed thereby altering public health policy impact. Sustainment of behavioral change may be a key factor determining the duration of effectiveness and ultimate impact of pandemic policy recommendations, particularly for interventions that require ongoing compliance at the level of the individual.Practical framework for assessing and evaluating pandemic policyUpdating public health policy recommendations as more data and alternative interventions become available is the evidence-based policy approach and grounded in principles of implementation science and dynamic sustainability. Achieving the ideal of real-time policy updates requires improvements in public health data collection and analysis infrastructure and a shift in public health messaging to incorporate uncertainty and the necessity of ongoing changes. In this review, the Dynamic Infectious Diseases Public Health Response Framework is presented as a model with a practical tool for iteratively incorporating implementation outcomes into public health policy design with the aim of sustaining benefits and identifying when policies are no longer functioning as intended and need to be adapted or de-implemented.Conclusions and implicationsReal-time decision making requires sensitivity to conditions on the ground and adaptation of interventions at all levels. When asking about the public health effectiveness and impact of non-pharmaceutical interventions, the focus should be on when, how, and for how long they can achieve public health impact. In the future, rather than focusing on models of public health intervention effectiveness that assume static impacts, policy impacts should be considered as dynamic with ongoing re-evaluation as conditions change to meet the ongoing needs of the ultimate end-user of the intervention: the public.

Abstract Background Surgical site infections are common. Risk can be reduced substantially with appropriate preoperative antimicrobial administration. In 2005, the VA implemented the Surgical Care Improvement Project (SCIP) in the setting of high rates of non-compliance with antimicrobial prophylaxis guidelines. SCIP included public reporting of evidenced-based antimicrobial guideline compliance metrics in high-risk surgeries. SCIP was highly successful and led to high rates of adoption of preoperative antimicrobials and early discontinuation of postoperative antimicrobials (>95%). The program was retired in 2015, as the manual measurement and reporting process was costly with limited expected additional benefit. To our knowledge, no studies have assessed whether the gains achieved by SCIP were sustained since active support for the program was discontinued. Furthermore, there has been no investigation of the spread of antimicrobial prophylaxis guideline adoption beyond the limited set of procedures that were included in the program. Methods Using a mixed methods sequential exploratory approach, this study will (1) quantitatively measure compliance with SCIP metrics over time and across all procedures in the five major surgical specialties targeted by SCIP and (2) collect qualitative data from stakeholders to identify strategies that were effective for sustaining compliance. Diffusion of Innovation Theory will guide assessment of whether improvements achieved spread to procedures not included under the umbrella of the program. Electronic algorithms to measure SCIP antimicrobial use will be adapted from previously developed methodology. These highly novel data mining algorithms leverage the rich VA electronic health record and capture structured and text data and represent a substantial technological advancement over resource-intensive manual chart review or incomplete electronic surveillance based on pharmacy data. An interrupted time series analysis will be used to assess whether SCIP compliance was sustained following program discontinuation. Generalized linear models will be used to assess whether compliance with appropriate prophylaxis increased in all SCIP targeted and non-targeted procedures by specialty over the duration the program’s active reporting. The Dynamic Sustainability Framework will guide the qualitative methods to assess intervention, provider, facility, specialty, and contextual factors associated with sustainability over time. Barriers and facilitators to sustainability will be mapped to implementation strategies and the study will yield an implementation playbook to guide future sustainment efforts. Relevance Sustainability of practice change has been described as one of the most important, but least studied areas of clinical medicine. Learning how practices spread is also a critically important area of investigation. This study will use novel informatics strategies to evaluate factors associated with sustainability following removal of active policy surveillance and advance our understanding about these important, yet understudied, areas.

Abstract Background Despite a strong evidence base and clinical guidelines specifically recommending against prolonged post-procedural antimicrobial use, studies indicate that the practice is common following cardiac device procedures. Formative evaluations conducted by the study team suggest that inappropriate antimicrobial use may be driven by information silos that drive provider belief that antimicrobials are not harmful, in part due to lack of complete feedback about all types of clinical outcomes. De-implementation is recognized as an important area of research that can lead to reductions in unnecessary, wasteful, or harmful practices, such as excess antimicrobial use following cardiac device procedures; however, investigations into strategies that lead to successful de-implementation are limited. The overarching hypothesis to be tested in this trial is that a bundle of implementation strategies that includes audit and feedback about direct patient harms caused by inappropriate prescribing can lead to successful de-implementation of guideline-discordant care. Methods We propose a hybrid type III effectiveness-implementation stepped-wedge intervention trial at three high-volume, high-complexity VA medical centers. The main study intervention (an informatics-based, real-time audit-and-feedback tool) was developed based on learning/unlearning theory and formative evaluations and guided by the integrated-Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (i-PARIHS) Framework. Elements of the bundled and multifaceted implementation strategy to promote appropriate prescribing will include audit-and-feedback reports that include information about antibiotic harms, stakeholder engagement, patient and provider education, identification of local champions, and blended facilitation. The primary study outcome is adoption of evidence-based practice (de-implementation of inappropriate antimicrobial use). Clinical outcomes (cardiac device infections, acute kidney injuries and Clostridioides difficile infections) are secondary. Qualitative interviews will assess relevant implementation outcomes (acceptability, adoption, fidelity, feasibility). Discussion De-implementation theory suggests that factors that may have a particularly strong influence on de-implementation include strength of the underlying evidence, the complexity of the intervention, and patient and provider anxiety and fear about changing an established practice. This study will assess whether a multifaceted intervention mapped to identified de-implementation barriers leads to measurable improvements in provision of guideline-concordant antimicrobial use. Findings will improve understanding about factors that impact successful or unsuccessful de-implementation of harmful or wasteful healthcare practices. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05020418

Effective de-implementation models often include replacement of an ineffective practice with an alternative. We co-developed patient education materials as a replacement strategy for inappropriate post-procedural antibiotics in cardiac device procedures. Lessons learned and developed materials may be used to promote infection prevention in other periprocedural settings.

Abstract Background Psychosocial factors are pivotal in recovery after acute orthopedic traumatic injuries. Addressing psychosocial factors is an important opportunity for preventing persistent pain and disability. We aim to identify barriers and facilitators to the implementation of psychosocial care within outpatient orthopedic trauma settings using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) and Proctor’s taxonomy of implementation outcomes, and to provide implementation strategies derived from qualitative data and supplemented by the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change. Methods We conducted live video qualitative focus groups, exit interviews and individual interviews with stakeholders within 3 geographically diverse level 1 trauma settings (N = 79; 20 attendings, 28 residents, 10 nurses, 13 medical assistants, 5 physical therapists/social workers, and 3 fellows) at 3 trauma centers in Texas, Kentucky, and Massachusetts. We used directed and conventional content analyses to derive information on barriers, facilitators, and implementation strategies within 26 CFIR constructs nested within 3 relevant Proctor outcomes of acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility. Results Stakeholders noted that implementing psychosocial care within their practice can be acceptable, appropriate, and feasible. Many perceived integrated psychosocial care as crucial for preventing persistent pain and reducing provider burden, noting they lack the time and specialized training to address patients’ psychosocial needs. Providers suggested strategies for integrating psychosocial care within orthopedic settings, including obtaining buy-in from leadership, providing concise and data-driven education to providers, bypassing stigma, and flexibly adapting to fast-paced clinics. Conclusions Results provide a blueprint for successful implementation of psychosocial care in orthopedic trauma settings, with important implications for prevention of persistent pain and disability.

Abstract Background This paper reports on a qualitative evaluation of a hybrid type II stepped-wedge, cluster randomized trial using implementation facilitation to implement team-based care in the form of the collaborative chronic care model (CCM) in interdisciplinary outpatient mental health teams. The objective of this analysis is to compare the alignment of sites’ clinical processes with the CCM elements at baseline (time 1) and after 12 months of implementation facilitation (time 2) from the perspective of providers. Methods We conducted semi-structured interviews to assess the extent to which six CCM elements were in place: work role redesign, patient self-management support, provider decision support, clinical information systems, linkages to community resources, and organizational/leadership support. Interviews were transcribed and a priori CCM elements were coded using a directed content analysis approach at times 1 and 2. We sought consensus on, and compared, the extent to which each CCM element was in place at times 1 and 2. Results We conducted 27 and 31 telephone interviews at times 1 and 2, respectively, with outpatient mental health providers at nine participating sites. At time 1 and time 2, three CCM elements were most frequently present across the sites: work role redesign, patient self-management support, and provider decision support. The CCM elements with increased implementation from time 1 to time 2 were work role redesign, patient self-management support, and clinical information systems. For two CCM elements, linkages to community resources and organizational/leadership support, some sites had increased implementation at time 2 compared to time 1, while others had reductions. For the provider decision support element, we saw little change in the extent of its implementation. Conclusions Sites increased the extent of implementation on several CCM elements. The most progress was made in the CCM elements where sites had CCM-aligned processes in place at time 1. Teams made progress on elements they could more easily control, such as work role redesign. Our results suggest that maximizing the benefits of CCM-based outpatient mental health care may require targeting resources and training toward specific CCM elements—especially in the use of clinical information systems and linking with community resources. Trial registration Clinical Trials NCT02543840 .

Although COVID-19 vaccines have been available to many U.S. Veterans Affairs (VA) healthcare system employees and Veteran patients since early 2021, vaccine receipt data indicates some groups are not receiving them. Our objective was to conduct a rapid qualitative assessment of Veterans’ and VA employees’ views on COVID-19 vaccination to inform clinical leaders’ ongoing efforts to increase vaccine uptake across the VA. We employed semi-structured interviews and a focus group involving employees and Veterans as part of a quality improvement project between January and June 2021 at three VA medical centers. Thirty-one employees and 27 Veterans participated in semi-structured interviews; 5 Veterans from a national stakeholder organization participated in a focus group. Data were analyzed using directed content analysis, involving an a priori coding framework comprised of four domains with subcodes under each: contextual influences, barriers and facilitators, vaccine-specific issues, and VA/military experiences. We then classified initial codes into five categories of hesitancy: vaccine deliberation, dissent, distrust, indifference and skepticism. A subset of Veterans (n = 14) and employees (n = 8) identified as vaccine hesitant. Vaccine hesitancy categories were represented by subcodes of religion, culture, gender or socio-economic factors, perceptions of politics and policies, role of healthcare providers, and historical influences; (contextual influences); knowledge or awareness of vaccines, perceived susceptibility to COVID-19, and beliefs and attitudes about health and illness (barriers and facilitators); vaccine development process (vaccine-specific issues) and military experiences (VA/military factors). Facilitators involved talking with trusted others, ease of vaccine access, and perceptions of family and societal benefits of vaccines. Vaccine hesitancy is multi-faceted and likely requires multiple strategies for engaging in conversations to address Veteran and VA employee concerns. Messages should involve patient-centered communication strategies delivered by trusted healthcare providers and peers and should focus on addressing expected benefits for family, friends, and society.

Purpose. We investigated how health care systems should communicate with patients about possible exposures to blood-borne pathogens that may have occurred during their care. Our goal was to determine how best to communicate uncertain risk information in a way that would minimize harm to patients, maintain their trust, and encourage patients to seek follow-up treatment. Methods. Participants ( N = 1103) were randomized to receive one of six vignette surveys; 997 (98.4%) responded. All vignettes described the same event, but differed by risk level and recommendations (lower risk v. higher risk) and by communication mode (telephone, letter, social media). We measured participants’ perceived risk of blood-borne infection, trust in the health care system, and shared decision making about next clinical steps. Open-ended questions were analyzed using grounded thematic analysis. Results. When the vignette requested patients to undergo testing and practice certain health behaviors (higher risk), participants’ likelihood of seeking follow-up testing for blood-borne pathogens and their understanding of health issues increased. Perceived trust was unaffected by risk level or communication processes. Qualitative data indicated a desire for telephone communication from providers known to the patient. Limitations. It is not clear whether higher risk language or objective risk levels in vignettes motivated patients’ behavioral intentions. Conclusion. Using higher risk language when disclosing large-scale adverse events increased participants’ willingness to seek follow-up care. Implications. Health care organizations’ disclosures should focus on the next steps to take after health care exposures. This communication should involve helping patients to understand their personal health issues better, make them feel that they know which steps to take following the receipt of this information, and encouraging them to seek follow-up infectious disease testing in order to better take care of themselves.

We conducted a qualitative exploration and implementation evaluation of a Massachusetts policy initiative, the Community Hospital Acceleration, Revitalization, and Transformation (CHART) investment program, to examine how CHART innovations aimed at reducing unnecessary emergency department (ED) visits also addressed patients’ social disconnection problems according to a social connection framework (structural, functional, quality or multilevel). We performed interviews with 236 stakeholders (hospital managers, CHART providers, staff, and community partners) one-year post CHART implementation. Interviews were analyzed using a directed content analysis approach. Data were then mapped to levels of the social connection framework. Our results support that social disconnection, described as “loneliness” and “social isolation” by stakeholders, met the definition of a structural social connection problem according to our framework. These structural problems led patients to the ED for reasons not always related to their physical health. CHART innovations involving home visit programs, elder services interventions, work flow changes in the ED, and regular telephone follow-ups provided functional level emotional and tangible support to meet these structural problems. We did not find substantive support for mapping interview data to the quality and multi-level dimensions of the framework. Innovations to address high ED use, according to stakeholders, provided functional level emotional and tangible support to address structural level problems of social disconnection. Future work should examine the sustainability of innovations in a value-based healthcare climate, and the effectiveness of these programs on reducing ED utilization. Experience Framework This article is associated with the Policy & Measurement lens of The Beryl Institute Experience Framework. (http://bit.ly/ExperienceFramework) Access other PXJ articles related to this lens. Access other resources related to this lens.

Abstract Background Many healthcare organizations have developed disclosure policies for large-scale adverse events, including the Veterans Health Administration (VA). This study evaluated VA’s national large-scale disclosure policy and identifies gaps and successes in its implementation. Methods Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with leaders, hospital employees, and patients at nine sites to elicit their perceptions of recent large-scale adverse events notifications and the national disclosure policy. Data were coded using the constructs of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Results We conducted 97 interviews. Insights included how to handle the communication of large-scale disclosures through multiple levels of a large healthcare organization and manage ongoing communications about the event with employees. Of the 5 CFIR constructs and 26 sub-constructs assessed, seven were prominent in interviews. Leaders and employees specifically mentioned key problem areas involving 1) networks and communications during disclosure, 2) organizational culture, 3) engagement of external change agents during disclosure, and 4) a need for reflecting on and evaluating the policy implementation and disclosure itself. Patients shared 5) preferences for personal outreach by phone in place of the current use of certified letters. All interviewees discussed 6) issues with execution and 7) costs of the disclosure. Conclusions CFIR analysis reveals key problem areas that need to be addresses during disclosure, including: timely communication patterns throughout the organization, establishing a supportive culture prior to implementation, using patient-approved, effective communications strategies during disclosures; providing follow-up support for employees and patients, and sharing lessons learned.

BackgroundSuicide and suicidal behavior during adolescence have been steadily increasing over the past two decades. The preponderance of interventions focuses on crisis intervention, underlying psychiatric disorders, regulating negative affect, and reducing cognitive distortions. However, low positive affectivity may be a mechanism that contributes to adolescent suicidal ideation and behaviors independent of other risk factors. Skills to Enhance Positivity (STEP) is an acceptance-based intervention, designed to increase attention to, and awareness of, positive affect and positive experiences. Results from a pilot RCT demonstrated engagement of the target (positive affect) and a decrease in clinical outcomes (suicidal events; i.e., either a suicide attempt or an emergency intervention for an acute suicidal crisis), providing support to test the clinical effectiveness of STEP in a larger clinical trial with clinical staff implementing the intervention.ObjectiveTo test the effectiveness of STEP, compared to Enhanced Treatment as Usual (ETAU), in reducing suicidal events and ideation in adolescents admitted to inpatient psychiatric care due to suicide risk. We hypothesize that those randomized to STEP, compared to ETAU, will have lower rates of suicide events, active suicidal ideation (SI), and depressed mood over the 6-month follow-up period. We hypothesize that those randomized to STEP, compared to ETAU, will demonstrate greater improvement in the hypothesized mechanisms of attention to positive affect stimuli and gratitude and satisfaction with life.MethodsParticipants will be randomized to either STEP or ETAU. STEP consists of four in-person sessions focused on psychoeducation regarding positive and negative affect, mindfulness meditation, gratitude, and savoring. Mood monitoring prompts and skill reminders will be sent via text messaging daily for the first month post-discharge and every other day for the following two months. The ETAU condition will receive text-delivered reminders to use a safety plan provided at discharge from the hospital and healthy habits messages, matched in frequency to the STEP group. This trial was registered on 6 August 2021 (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04994873).ResultsThe STEP protocol was approved by the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) Data and Safety Monitoring Board on March 4, 2022. The RCT is currently in progress.DiscussionThe STEP protocol is an innovative, adjunctive treatment that has the potential to have positive effects on adolescent suicidal ideation and attempts beyond that found for standard treatment alone.

BackgroundThe largest nationally integrated health system in the United States, the Veterans Health Administration (VHA), has been undergoing a transformation toward a Whole Health (WH) System of Care. WH Clinical Care, a component of this system, includes holistically assessing the Veteran's life context, identifying what really matters to the Veteran, collaboratively setting and monitoring personal health and well-being goals, and equipping the Veteran with access to conventional and complementary and integrative health resources. Implementation of WH Clinical Care has been challenging. Understanding healthcare professionals' perspectives on the value of and barriers and facilitators to practicing WH Clinical Care holds relevance for not only VHA's efforts but also other health systems, in the U.S. and internationally, that are engaged in person-centered care implementation.ObjectivesWe sought to understand perspectives of healthcare professionals at VHA on providing WH Clinical Care to Veterans with COPD, as a lens to understand the broader issue of WH Clinical Care for Veterans living with complex chronic conditions.DesignWe interviewed 25 healthcare professionals across disciplines and services at a VA Medical Center in 2020-2021, including primary care providers, pulmonologists, palliative care providers, and chaplains. Interview transcripts were analyzed using qualitative content analysis.Key resultsEach element of WH Clinical Care raised complex questions and/or concerns, including: (1) the appropriate depth/breadth of inquiry in person-centered assessment; (2) the rationale for elicitation of what really matters; (3) the feasibility and appropriate division of labor in personal health goal setting and planning; and (4) challenges related to referring Veterans to a broad spectrum of supportive services.ConclusionsEfforts to promote person-centered care must account for healthcare professionals' existing comfort with its elements, advocate for a team-based approach, and continue to grapple with the conflicting structural conditions and organizational imperatives.

The COVID-19 pandemic has necessitated a rapid shift to web-based or blended design models for both ongoing and future clinical research activities. Research conducted virtually not only has the potential to increase the patient-centeredness of clinical research but may also further widen existing disparities in research participation among underrepresented individuals. In this viewpoint, we discuss practical strategies for quantitative and qualitative remote research data collection based on previous literature and our own ongoing clinical research to overcome challenges presented by the shift to remote data collection. We aim to contribute to and catalyze the dissemination of best practices related to remote data collection methodologies to address the opportunities presented by this shift and develop strategies for inclusive research.