Search

Technical assistance (TA) has long been a strategy utilized to support implementation of a range of different evidence-based interventions within clinical, community and other service settings. Great progress has come in extending the evidence base to support TA's use across multiple contexts, the result of more extensive categorizing of implementation strategies to support systematic studies of their effectiveness in facilitating successful implementation. This commentary builds on that progress to suggest several opportunities for future investigation and collaborative activity among researchers, practitioners, policymakers and other key decision-makers in hopes of continuing to build the success highlighted in this special issue and elsewhere. Authors call for increased attention to operationalization and tailoring of TA, considering how TA services can be sustained over time and how to consider externally-provided TA versus that housed within an organization. In addition, the commentary suggests a few key areas for capacity-building that can increase the quality, reach, and impact of TA for the future., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Despite the millions of dollars awarded annually by the United States Department of Education to build implementation capacity through technical assistance (TA), data on TA effectiveness are severely lacking. Foundational to the operationalization and consistent research on TA effectiveness is the development and use of standardized TA core competencies, practices, and structures. Despite advances toward a consistent definition of TA, a gap still exists in understanding how these competencies are used within an operationalized set of TA practices to produce targeted outcomes at both individual and organizational levels to facilitate implementation of evidence-based practices. The current article describes key insights derived from the evaluation of an operationalized set of TA practices used by a nationally funded TA center, the State Implementation & Scaling Up of Evidence Based Practices (SISEP) Center. The TA provided by the Center supports the uptake of evidence-based practices in K-12 education for students with disabilities. Lessons learned include: (1) the need to understand the complexities and dependencies of operationalizing TA both longitudinally and at multiple levels of the system (state, regional, local); (2) the relative importance of building general and innovation-specific capacity for implementation success; (3) the value of using a co-design and participatory approach for effective TA delivery; (4) the need to develop TA providers' educational and implementation fluency across areas and levels of the system receiving TA; and (5) the need to ensure coordination and alignment of TA providers from different centers. Gaining an understanding into optimal TA practices will not only provide clarity of definition fundamental to TA research, but it will also inform the conceptual framing and practice of TA., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Background: Implementation strategies are theorized to work well when carefully matched to implementation determinants and when factors-preconditions, moderators, etc.-that influence strategy effectiveness are prospectively identified and addressed. Existing methods for strategy selection are either imprecise or require significant technical expertise and resources, undermining their utility. This article outlines refinements to causal pathway diagrams (CPDs), a method for articulating the causal process through which implementation strategies work and offers illustrations of their use., Method: CPDs are a visualization tool to represent an implementation strategy, its mechanism(s) (i.e., the processes through which a strategy is thought to operate), determinants it is intended to address, factors that may impede or facilitate its effectiveness, and the series of outcomes that should be expected if the strategy is operating as intended. We offer principles for constructing CPDs and describe their key functions., Results: Applications of the CPD method by study teams from two National Institute of Health-funded Implementation Science Centers and a research grant are presented. These include the use of CPDs to (a) match implementation strategies to determinants, (b) understand the conditions under which an implementation strategy works, and (c) develop causal theories of implementation strategies., Conclusions: CPDs offer a novel method for implementers to select, understand, and improve the effectiveness of implementation strategies. They make explicit theoretical assumptions about strategy operation while supporting practical planning. Early applications have led to method refinements and guidance for the field., Competing Interests: The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article., (© The Author(s) 2024.)

Objective: This study explores automated dispensing systems (ADS) implementation in hospitals, focusing on experience transfer between the National Institute of Oncology of Rabat (NIO) and the specialties hospital of Rabat (SHR) to develop a transferable ADS installation and management model., Method: A retrospective implementation and experience data analysis of 3 years ADS implementation at NIO and a prospective planification for SHR new implementation on 6 months were employed. Data collection included pharmacist team reports, personnel interviews, direct observations, and information system data exports. The study focused on identifying challenges a plan-do-check-act (PDCA) cycle., Results: The analysis revealed overestimation in ADS needs at NIO about 42%, leading to: Resource exhaustion; Challenges in timeline installation staff training and management, Disruptions in data integration and Incident Reports. These issues underscored the importance of a phased, well-planned implementation process., Discussion: The study highlighted the crucial role of many comprehensive strategies. In accordance with the results of several studies, this work demonstrates the benefits of ADS in reducing medication errors and enhancing resource management, while also pointing out the necessity for accurate system sizing, effective integration with hospital information systems, and comprehensive staff training., Conclusion: The experience transfer between NIO and SHR provides a valuable model for ADS implementation in hospital pharmacies, proposing optimizations on: Implementation process; Timelines and mapping; Risk management and incident reports; Staff training, sensibilization and change control ., Competing Interests: Declaration of conflicting interestsThe authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Background: School leaders play an integral role in the use of implementation strategies, which in turn support special education teachers in the implementation of evidence-based practices (EBPs). In this convergent mixed methods study, we explored school leaders' perceptions of the facilitators and barriers to EBP implementation, particularly for students receiving special education, as well as the importance and feasibility of 15 implementation strategies., Method: School leaders ( N   =  22, principals, assistant principals, school psychologists, etc.) participated in a semistructured interview that included three parts-qualitative questions, quantitative ratings of strategies' importance and feasibility, and discussion of the top three implementation strategies. Data strands were analyzed independently and then integrated to generate meta-inferences., Results: The qualitative data identified facilitators such as access to resources about the intervention (e.g., professional development) and collaboration and teamwork, while barriers centered on lack of school supports, culture/climate, and organizational factors (e.g., lack of communication). The quantitative data indicated that the implementation strategy provide ongoing consultation/coaching was rated as important and feasible. Monitor the progress of the implementation effort was rated as important but less feasible, while conduct educational meetings and change the environment were rated as feasible, but less important. Build partnerships to support implementation was rated as less important and feasible. There was convergence and divergence in mixed methods findings., Conclusion: This study underscores the critical need to increase school leaders' knowledge and skills related to implementation science to better leverage implementation strategies that address the confluence of relevant implementation determinants., Competing Interests: The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article., (© The Author(s) 2024.)

Background: Increased HIV testing is essential to ending the HIV epidemic. People who inject drugs (PWID) are among the highest risk for HIV infection. Previous research at Tufts Medical Center identified low HIV testing rates in hospitalized PWID. Our research team aimed to identify and overcome barriers to inpatient HIV screening of PWID using implementation science methods., Methods: Stakeholders were engaged to gather perspectives on barriers and facilitators of HIV testing. A PWID care bundle was developed and implemented, which included (1) HIV screening; (2) hepatitis A, B, and C testing and vaccination; (3) medications for opioid use disorder; and (4) naloxone prescription. Strategies from all nine Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) clusters guided the implementation plan. Stakeholder feedback was gathered throughout implementation, and implementation outcomes of acceptability and feasibility were assessed., Results: PWID overall felt comfortable with HIV testing being offered while hospitalized. Clinicians cited that the main barriers to HIV testing were discomfort and confusion around consenting requirements. Many resident physicians surveyed reported that, at times, they forgot HIV testing for PWID. Overall, though, resident physicians felt that the PWID bundle was useful and did not distract from other patient care responsibilities., Conclusions: Engagement of key stakeholders to increase HIV testing in an inpatient setting led to the implementation of a PWID bundle, which was feasible and acceptable. Bundling evidence-informed care elements for inpatient PWID should be investigated further., Competing Interests: The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article., (© The Author(s) 2023.)

There is a lack of knowledge about the successful implementation of family nursing practices. This scoping review maps current knowledge about the implementation of evidence-informed family nursing practices across settings and populations. A systematic search (CINAHL, PubMed, Medline) identified 24 publications, published between 2010 and 2020. We found nurses' implementation experience to be one of disruption, learning, and moving to new ways of practicing. The implementation resulted in benefits to families and self but was marked by fluctuation and partial integration of evidence-informed family nursing practices into care delivery. Uptake was shaped by various contextual determinants, with barriers mainly at the team and organizational levels. We identified low-quality, tentative evidence that capacity-building strategies coupled with dissemination-educational strategies may enable family nursing practice skills and increase the quality of family care. More rigorous research is needed to build further knowledge about effective implementation. Future implementation endeavors should utilize the evolving knowledge base in family nursing and tailor implementation strategies to contextual barriers.

Background: As part of the Substance Abuse Treatment to HIV Care Project, the Implementation & Sustainment Facilitation (ISF) strategy was found to be an effective adjunct to the Addiction Technology Transfer Center (ATTC) strategy for integrating a motivational interviewing-based brief intervention (MIBI) for substance use disorders. This study presents the cost and cost-effectiveness results. Methods: Thirty-nine HIV service organizations were randomized to receive the ATTC-only condition or the ATTC + ISF condition. Two staff from each organization received the ATTC-training. In ATTC + ISF organizations, the same two staff and additional support staff participated in facilitation sessions to support MIBI implementation. We estimated costs using primary data on the time spent in each strategy and the time spent delivering 409 MIBIs to clients. We estimated staff-level cost-effectiveness for the number of MIBIs delivered, average MIBI quality scores, and total client days abstinent per staff. We used sensitivity analyses to test how changes to key variables affect the results. Results: Adjusted per-staff costs were $2,915 for the ATTC strategy and $5,371 for ATTC + ISF, resulting in an incremental cost of $2,457. ATTC + ISF significantly increased the number of MIBIs delivered (3.73) and the average MIBI quality score (61.45), yielding incremental cost effectiveness ratios (ICERs) of $659 and $40. Client days abstinent increased by 59 days per staff with a quality-adjusted life-year ICER of $40,578 (95% confidence interval $29,795-$61,031). Conclusions: From the perspective of federal policymakers, ISF as an adjunct to the ATTC strategy may be cost-effective for improving the integration of MIBIs within HIV service organizations, especially if scaled up to reach more clients. Travel accounted for nearly half of costs, and virtual implementation may further increase value. We also highlight two considerations for cost-effectiveness analysis with hybrid trials: study protocols kept recruitment low and modeling choices affect how we interpret the effects on client-level outcomes., Competing Interests: The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article., (© The Author(s) 2022.)

Background: Facilitation is an effective strategy to implement evidence-based practices, often involving external facilitators (EFs) bringing content expertise to implementation sites. Estimating time spent on multifaceted EF activities is complex. Furthermore, collecting continuous time-motion data for facilitation tasks is challenging. However, organizations need this information to allocate implementation resources to sites. Thus, our objectives were to conduct a time-motion analysis of external facilitation, and compare continuous versus noncontinuous approaches to collecting time-motion data. Methods: We analyzed EF time-motion data from six VA mental health clinics implementing the evidence-based Collaborative Chronic Care Model (CCM). We documented EF activities during pre-implementation (4-6 weeks) and implementation (12 months) phases. We collected continuous data during the pre-implementation phase, followed by data collection over a 2-week period (henceforth, "a two-week interval") at each of three time points (beginning/middle/end) during the implementation phase. As a validity check, we assessed how closely interval data represented continuous data collected throughout implementation for two of the sites. Results: EFs spent 21.8 ± 4.5 h/site during pre-implementation off-site, then 27.5 ± 4.6 h/site site-visiting to initiate implementation. Based on the 2-week interval data, EFs spent 2.5 ± 0.8, 1.4 ± 0.6, and 1.2 ± 0.6 h/week toward the implementation's beginning, middle, and end, respectively. Prevalent activities were preparation/planning, process monitoring, program adaptation, problem identification, and problem-solving. Across all activities, 73.6% of EF time involved email, phone, or video communication. For the two continuous data sites, computed weekly time averages toward the implementation's beginning, middle, and end differed from the interval data's averages by 1.0, 0.1, and 0.2 h, respectively. Activities inconsistently captured in the interval data included irregular assessment, stakeholder engagement, and network development. Conclusions: Time-motion analysis of CCM implementation showed initial higher-intensity EF involvement that tapered. The 2-week interval data collection approach, if accounting for its potential underestimation of irregular activities, may be promising/efficient for implementation studies collecting time-motion data., Competing Interests: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article., (© The Author(s) 2022.)

Background: Violence against women [VAW] is an urgent public health issue and health care providers [HCPs] are in a unique position to respond to such violence within a multi-sectoral health system response. In 2013, the World Health Organization (WHO) published clinical and policy guidelines (henceforth - the Guidelines) for responding to intimate partner violence and sexual violence against women. In this practical implementation report, we describe the adaptation of the Guidelines to train HCPs to respond to violence against women in tertiary health facilities in Maharashtra, India., Methods: We describe the strategies employed to adapt and implement the Guidelines, including participatory methods to identify and address HCPs' motivations and the barriers they face in providing care for women subjected to violence. The adaptation is built on querying health-systems level enablers and obstacles, as well as individual HCPs' perspectives on content and delivery of training and service delivery., Results: The training component of the intervention was delivered in a manner that included creating ownership among health managers who became champions for other health care providers; joint training across cadres to have clear roles, responsibilities and division of labour; and generating critical reflections about how gender power dynamics influence women's experience of violence and their health. The health systems strengthening activities included establishment of standard operating procedures [SOPs] for management of VAW and strengthening referrals to other services., Conclusions: In this intervention, standard training delivery was enhanced through participatory, joint and reflexive methods to generate critical reflection about gender, power and its influence on health outcomes. Training was combined with health system readiness activities to create an enabling environment. The lessons learned from this case study can be utilized to scale-up response in other levels of health facilities and states in India, as well as other LMIC contexts., Plain Language Summary: Violence against women affects millions of women globally. Health care providers may be able to support women in various ways, and finding ways to train and support health care providers in low and middle-income countries to provide high-quality care to women affected by violence is an urgent need. The WHO developed Clinical and Policy Guidelines in 2013, which provide guidance on how to improve health systems response to violence against women. We developed and implemented a series of interventions, including training of health care providers and innovations in service delivery, to implement the WHO guidelines for responding to violence against women in 3 tertiary hospitals of Maharashtra, India. The nascent published literature on health systems approaches to addressing violence against women in low and middle-income countries focuses on the impact of these interventions. This practical implementation report focuses on the interventions themselves, describes the processes of developing and adapting the intervention, and thus provides important insights for donors, policy-makers and researchers., Competing Interests: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article., (© The Author(s) 2022.)

Background: Despite the promise of implementation science (IS) to reduce health inequities, critical gaps and opportunities remain in the field to promote health equity. Prioritizing racial equity and antiracism approaches is critical in these efforts, so that IS does not inadvertently exacerbate disparities based on the selection of frameworks, methods, interventions, and strategies that do not reflect consideration of structural racism and its impacts., Methods: Grounded in extant research on structural racism and antiracism, we discuss the importance of advancing understanding of how structural racism as a system shapes racial health inequities and inequitable implementation of evidence-based interventions among racially and ethnically diverse communities. We outline recommendations for explicitly applying an antiracism lens to address structural racism and its manifests through IS. An anti-racism lens provides a framework to guide efforts to confront, address, and eradicate racism and racial privilege by helping people identify racism as a root cause of health inequities and critically examine how it is embedded in policies, structures, and systems that differentially affect racially and ethnically diverse populations., Results: We provide guidance for the application of an antiracism lens in the field of IS, focusing on select core elements in implementation research, including: (1) stakeholder engagement; (2) conceptual frameworks and models; (3) development, selection, adaptation of EBIs; (4) evaluation approaches; and (5) implementation strategies. We highlight the need for foundational grounding in antiracism frameworks among implementation scientists to facilitate ongoing self-reflection, accountability, and attention to racial equity, and provide questions to guide such reflection and consideration., Conclusion: We conclude with a reflection on how this is a critical time for IS to prioritize focus on justice, racial equity, and real-world equitable impact. Moving IS towards making consideration of health equity and an antiracism lens foundational is central to strengthening the field and enhancing its impact., Plain Language Abstract: There are important gaps and opportunities that exist in promoting health equity through implementation science. Historically, the commonly used frameworks, measures, interventions, strategies, and approaches in the field have not been explicitly focused on equity, nor do they consider the role of structural racism in shaping health and inequitable delivery of evidence-based practices/programs. This work seeks to build off of the long history of research on structural racism and health, and seeks to provide guidance on how to apply an antiracism lens to select core elements of implementation research. We highlight important opportunities for the field to reflect and consider applying an antiracism approach in: 1) stakeholder/community engagement; 2) use of conceptual frameworks; 3) development, selection and adaptation of evidence-based interventions; 4) evaluation approaches; 5) implementation strategies (e.g., how to deliver evidence-based practices, programs, policies); and 6) how researchers conduct their research, with a focus on racial equity. This is an important time for the field of implementation science to prioritize a foundational focus on justice, equity, and real-world impact through the application of an anti-racism lens in their work., Competing Interests: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article., (© The Author(s) 2021.)

Background: Digital interventions delivering Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for insomnia (Digital CBTi) may increase utilization of effective care for a common and serious condition. A low-intensity implementation strategy may facilitate digital CBTi use in healthcare settings. This pilot study assessed the feasibility of implementing a digital CBTi in Veterans Health Administration (VA) primary care through iterative modifications to a low-intensity implementation strategy, while evaluating clinical outcomes of a specific digital CBTi program., Methods: A self-directed digital CBTi was implemented in the primary care clinics of a single VA facility using a cohort trial design that iteratively modified an implementation strategy over three 8-month phases. The phase 1 implementation strategy included (1) provider education; (2) point-of-care information via pamphlets; and (3) provider referral to digital CBTi through phone calls or messages. Phases 2 and 3 maintained these activities, while (1) adding a clinic-based coach who performed initial patient education and follow-up support contacts, (2) providing additional recruitment pathways, and (3) integrating the referral mechanism into provider workflow. Implementation outcomes included provider adoption, patient adoption, and acceptability. Clinical outcomes (insomnia severity, depression severity, and sedative hypnotic use) were compared among enrollees at baseline and 10 weeks., Results: Across all phases 66 providers (48.9%) made 153 referrals, representing 0.38% of unique clinic patients. Of referrals, 77 (50.3%) enrolled in the study, 45 (29.4%) engaged in the program, and 24 (15.7%) completed it. Provider and patient adoption did not differ meaningfully across phases. Among enrollees, digital CBTi was acceptable and the Insomnia Severity Index decreased by 4.3 points (t = 6.41, p < 0.001) and 13 (18.6%) reached remission. The mean number of weakly sedative-hypnotic doses decreased by 2.2 (35.5%) (t = 2.39, p < 0.02)., Conclusions: Digital CBTi implementation in VA primary care is feasible using low-intensity implementation strategy, resulting in improved clinical outcomes for users. However, iterative implementation strategy modifications did not improve adoption.The trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03151083)., (© The Author(s) 2021.)

Background: Tailoring implementation strategies and adapting treatments to better fit the local context may improve their effectiveness. However, there is a dearth of valid, reliable, pragmatic measures that allow for the prospective tracking of strategies and adaptations according to reporting recommendations. This study describes the development and pilot testing of three tools to be designed to serve this purpose., Methods: Measure development was informed by two systematic reviews of the literature (implementation strategies and treatment adaptation). The three resulting tools vary with respect to the degree of structure (brainstorming log = low , activity log = moderate , detailed tracking log = high ). To prospectively track treatment adaptations and implementation strategies, three stakeholder groups (treatment developer, implementation practitioners, and mental health providers) were randomly assigned one tool per week through an anonymous web-based survey for 12 weeks and incentivized to participate. Three established implementation outcome measures, the Acceptability of Intervention Measure, Intervention Appropriateness Measure, and Feasibility of Intervention Measure, were used to assess the tools. Semi-structured interviews were conducted to gather more nuanced information from stakeholders regarding their perceptions of the tools and the tracking process., Results: The three tracking tools demonstrated moderate to good acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility; the activity log was deemed the most feasible of the three tools. Implementation practitioners rated the tools the highest of the three stakeholder groups. The tools took an average of 15 min or less to complete., Conclusion: This study sought to fill methodological gaps that prevent stakeholders and researchers from discerning which strategies are most important to deploy for promoting implementation and sustainment of evidence-based practices. These tools would allow researchers and practitioners to track whether activities were treatment adaptations or implementation strategies and what barrier(s) each targets. These tools could inform prospective tailoring of implementation strategies and treatment adaptations, which would promote scale out and spread., Plain Language Summary: Strategies to support the implementation of evidence-based practices may be more successful if they are carefully customized based on local factors. Evidence-based practices themselves may be thoughtfully changed to better meet the needs of the settings and recipients. This study reports on a pilot study that aimed to create various types of tools to help individuals involved in implementation efforts track the actions they take to modify and implement interventions. These tools allow individuals to track the types of activities they are involved in, when the activities occurred, who was involved in the implementation efforts, and the reasons or rationale for the actions. The three tools in this study used a combination of open-ended and forced-response questions to test how the type of data recorded changed. Participants generally found the tools quick and easy to use and helpful in planning the delivery of an evidence-based practice. Most participants wanted more training in implementation science terminology and how to complete the tracking tools. Participating mental health providers would have liked more opportunities to review the data collected from the tools with their supervisors to use the data to improve the delivery of the evidence-based practice. These tools can help researchers, providers, and staff involved in implementation efforts to better understand what actions are needed to improve implementation success. Future research should address gaps identified in this study, such as the need to involve more participants in the tool development process., Competing Interests: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article., (© The Author(s) 2021.)

Background: Organizational readiness for implementation (ORI) is a barrier to disseminating recovery-oriented evidence-based practices for people with severe mental illnesses. However, there is a knowledge gap regarding implementation strategies and specific actions related to those strategies that may enhance ORI across organizations. The Transtheoretical Model (TTM) is a well-established stage-based model used to support organizational change. In TTM, the first three stages-Pre-contemplation, Contemplation, and Preparation-represent the pre-implementation phase, during which ORI should be developed. This study explored ORI enhancement strategies reported as useful by different stakeholders in the field of community mental health (CMH) and tested the applicability of the TTM readiness stages as an organizing framework to direct ORI development., Methods: The study included the following two phases: (1) a qualitative exploration of ORI enhancement actions reported by various stakeholders in the CMH field ( N = 16) based on their experience in successful implementation projects and (2) a consolidation process performed by the research team to create coherent groups of actions and their overarching implementation strategies per readiness stage., Results: A comprehensive list of strategies and related actions was created. The strategies and actions correspond with each of the first three stages of the TTM. Stakeholders differed in their methods of facilitating engagement across the organization and in their level of involvement in developing ORI., Conclusions: This study is a first step in conceptualizing a systematic process for developing ORI using the TTM as a theoretical framework. Future studies should test the transferability and effectiveness of this repository to other implementation efforts, expend the lists per stage, and further explore differences between stakeholders' role in ORI development., Plain Language Abstract: Interventions that were proven effective in supporting the recovery of people with mental illnesses are not sufficiently available in the field of community mental health. One barrier to getting those interventions implemented is the lack of willingness and preparedness of organizations to change their practice, also referred to as organizational readiness for implementation (ORI). Little is known about how to enhance ORI to increase the availability of interventions. This study explored actions used to enhance ORI by people in different roles who successfully implemented new recovery-oriented interventions in community mental health settings. The actions were organized into three stages of readiness development based on the Transtheoretical Model (TTM) of behavioral change. Differences were found between administrators, consultants, supervisors, and providers in the type and number of strategies they described. The results show the applicability of the TTM as an organizing framework for ORI development and provide sets of strategies and specific actions to support different readiness needs across the organization., Competing Interests: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article., (© The Author(s) 2021.)

Background: The importance of having a champion to promote implementation efforts has been discussed in the literature for more than five decades. However, the empirical literature on champions remains underdeveloped. As a result, health organizations commonly use champions in their implementation efforts without the benefit of evidence to guide decisions about how to identify, prepare, and evaluate their champions. The goal of this article is to present a model of champion impact that draws upon previous literature and is intended to inform future research on champions and serve as a guide for practitioners serving in a champion role., Methods: The proposed model is informed by existing literature, both conceptual and empirical. Prior studies and reviews of the literature have faced challenges in terms of operationalizing and reporting on champion characteristics, activities, and impacts. The proposed model addresses this challenge by delineating these constructs, which allows for consolidation of factors previously discussed about champions as well as new hypothesized relationships between constructs., Results: The model proposes that a combination of champion commitment and champion experience and self-efficacy influence champion performance, which influences peer engagement with the champion, which ultimately influences the champion's impact. Two additional constructs have indirect effects on champion impact. Champion beliefs about the innovation and organizational support for the champion affect champion commitment., Conclusion: The proposed model is intended to support prospective studies of champions by hypothesizing relationships between constructs identified in the champion literature, specifically relationships between modifiable factors that influence a champion's potential impact. Over time, the model should be modified, as appropriate, based on new findings from champion-related research., Competing Interests: Declaration of conflicting interests The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Background: The best approach to provide comprehensive care for individuals with co-occurring disorders (CODs) related to substance use and mental health is to address both disorders through an integrated treatment approach. However, only 25% of behavioral health agencies offer integrated care and less than 7% of individuals who need integrated treatment receive it. A project used a cluster-randomized waitlist control group design to evaluate the effectiveness of Network for the Improvement of Addiction Treatment (NIATx) implementation strategies to improve access to addiction and psychotropic medications., Methods: This study represents a secondary analysis of data from the NIATx project. Forty-nine agencies were randomized to Cohort1 (active implementation group, receiving the NIATx strategy [n=25]) or Cohort2 (waitlist control group [n=24]). Data were collected at three time points (Baseline, Year1 and Year2). A two-level (patient within agency) multinomial logistic regression model investigated the effects of implementation strategy condition on one of four medication outcomes: both medication types, only psychotropic medication, only addiction medication, or neither medication type. A per-protocol analysis included time, NIATx fidelity, and agency focus as predictors., Results: The intent-to-treat analysis found a statistically significant change in access to addiction versus neither medication, but Cohort1 compared to Cohort2 at Year1 showed no differences. Changes were associated with the experimental intervention and occurred in the transition from Year 1 to Year 2, where greater increases were seen for agencies in Cohort2 versus Cohort1. The per-protocol analysis showed increased access to both medications and addiction medications from pre- to post-intervention for agencies in both cohorts; however, differences in change between high- and low-implementation agencies were not significant., Conclusions: Access to integrated services for people with CODs is a long-standing problem. NIATx implementation strategies had limited effectiveness in improving medication access for individuals with CODs. Implementation strategy adherence is associated with increased medication access.

For the treatment choice of localized prostate cancer, effective patient decision aids have been developed. The implementation of decision aids in routine care, however, lags behind. Main known barriers are lack of confidence in the tool, lack of training on its use, lack of resources and lack of time. A new implementation strategy addresses these barriers. Using this implementation strategy, the implementation rate of a decision aid was measured in eight hospitals and questionnaires were filled out by 24 care providers and 255 patients. The average implementation rate was 60 per cent (range 31%-100%). Hardly any barriers remained for care providers. Patients who did not use the decision aid appeared to be more unwilling than unable to use the decision aid. By addressing known barriers, that is, informing care providers on the effectiveness of the decision aid, providing instructions on its use, embedding it in the existing workflow and making it available free of charge, a successful implementation of a prostate cancer decision aid was reached.

Background: Implementation science's focus on establishing implementation strategy effectiveness has overshadowed the need to understand differential performance of such strategies under various conditions. Methods allowing for assessment between implementation context and process can help address this gap. This paper provides a detailed description of a mixed method procedure for assessing factors related to the implementation context and process intersection, which was developed as part of the pilot study of the Housing First Technical Assistance and Training (HFTAT) Program, a multifaceted strategy designed to support Housing First model implementation., Methods: The HFTAT was pilot tested among a sample of three organizations. Our mixed method approach combines two tools often used in implementation research-the Stages of Implementation Completion and the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research-in a novel way. Several stages to analysis were completed, starting with a separate analysis of data pertaining to each measure and then two levels of mixed method analysis., Results: The approach provided a better understanding of the issues that impacted the implementation guided by the HFTAT, suggesting: (1) individual determinants seemed to have a bigger impact based on the number of SIC phases they affected, (2) implementation context and process were connected through climate-related factors in the inner setting that made the sites more or less responsive to addressing identified barriers, and (3) there is a need to better assess context factors to identify areas where implementation drivers should be better targeted to facilitate change, and this is supported by prior research., Conclusions: Understanding the underlying factors impacting a setting's performance related to a specific implementation strategy has potential to improve decision-making and optimize future implementation efforts. The approach likely be as successful combining the SIC with other determinant frameworks and should be utilized at the onset of an implementation project to maximize its usefulness.