Search

Background: The implementation science literature acknowledges a need for engagement of key stakeholders when designing, delivering and evaluating implementation work. To date, the literature reports minimal or focused stakeholder engagement, where stakeholders are engaged in either barrier identification and/or barrier prioritisation. This paper begins to answer calls from the literature for the development of tools and guidance to support comprehensive stakeholder engagement in implementation research and practice. The paper describes the systematic development of the Implementation‐STakeholder Engagement Model (I‐STEM) in the context of an international, large‐scale empirical implementation study (ImpleMentAll) aimed at evaluating the effectiveness of a tailored implementation toolkit. The I‐STEM is a sensitising tool that defines key considerations and activities for undertaking stakeholder engagement activities across an implementation process. Methods: In‐depth, semistructured interviews and observations were conducted with implementers who were tailoring implementation strategies to integrate and embed internet‐based cognitive behavioural therapy (iCBT) services in 12 routine mental health care organisations in nine countries in Europe and Australia. The analytical process was informed by principles of first‐ and third‐generation Grounded Theory, including constant comparative method. Results: We conducted 55 interviews and observed 19 implementation‐related activities (e.g., team meetings and technical support calls). The final outcome of our analysis is expressed in an initial version of the I‐STEM, consisting of five interrelated concepts: engagement objectives, stakeholder mapping, engagement approaches, engagement qualities and engagement outcomes. Engagement objectives are goals that implementers plan to achieve by working with stakeholders in the implementation process. Stakeholder mapping involves identifying a range of organisations, groups or people who may be instrumental in achieving the engagement objectives. Engagement approaches define the type of work that is undertaken with stakeholders to achieve the engagement objectives. Engagement qualities define the logistics of the engagement approach. Lastly, every engagement activity may result in a range of engagement outcomes. Conclusion: The I‐STEM represents potential avenues for substantial stakeholder engagement activity across key phases of an implementation process. It provides a conceptual model for the planning, delivery, evaluation and reporting of stakeholder engagement activities. The I‐STEM is nonprescriptive and highlights the importance of a flexible, iterative approach to stakeholder engagement. It is developmental and will require application and validation across a range of implementation activities. Patient or Public Contribution: Patient contribution to ImpleMentAll trial was facilitated by GAMIAN‐Europe at all stages—from grant development to dissemination. GAMIAN‐Europe brings together a wide variety of patient representation organisations (local, regional and national) from almost all European countries. GAMIAN‐Europe was involved in pilot testing the ItFits‐toolkit and provided their views on the various aspects, including stakeholder engagement. Patients were also represented in the external advisory board providing support and advice on the design, conduct and interpretation of the wider project, including the development of the ItFits‐toolkit. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03652883. Retrospectively registered on 29 August 2018. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Healthcare professionals (HCPs) provide an important point of contact through which people who use performance and image enhancing drugs (PIEDs) could access reliable information, advice, and interventions on a range of PIEDs, their use and related harms. However, HCPs often report difficulties engaging and building rapport with people who use PIEDs, and research suggests that they often lack specialist knowledge on these substances. Providing credible evidence-based resources to support HCPs is thus important. However, educational materials in this area are generally absent and the ones that exist have not been assessed for their utility in the HCP workforce. This paper examines the acceptability and usability of a PIED e-learning module (the Dopinglinkki e-module) targeted at HCPs in three EU Member States and Australia.Methods: A standardised two stage, mixed methodology was implemented. Stage 1 involved HCPs completing the e-module and completing an online survey (N = 77). Stage 2 involved conducting individual structured interviews with a subset of survey respondents (N = 37). Normalisation Process Theory and the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability were used as conceptual lenses.Findings: The e-module provided information that was perceived as useful for HCPs' current and future practice. However, several individual, organisational and societal level barriers were reported as preventing the e-module becoming an accepted and normalised aspect of the HCP workforce, including the need for up to date evidence, the time-consuming nature of completing the e-module, lack of organisational support, the use of over-complex language, and the module's potential to reinforce the stigmatisation of PIEDs.Conclusion: Providing credible evidence-based resources to support HCPs' knowledge development is important. Evidence-based and theory informed interventions are needed to equip HCPs with knowledge that can aid culturally sensitive interactions and effective engagement with people who use PIEDs. Reflecting on our study findings, it is important that the development of interventions should include the voices of both HCP and those using PIEDs, and that careful consideration is given to the various factors that may act as a barrier to effective implementation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]