Search

Introduction A mental health provider's perception of how well an intervention can be carried out in their context (i.e., feasibility) is an important implementation outcome. This article aims to identify determinants of feasibility of trauma-focused cognitive behavioral therapy (TF-CBT) through a case-based causal approach. Method Data come from an implementation-effectiveness study in which lay counselors (teachers and community health volunteers) implemented a culturally adapted manualized mental health intervention, TF-CBT, delivered to teens who were previously orphaned and were experiencing posttraumatic stress symptoms and prolonged grief in Western Kenya. The intervention team identified combinations of determinants that led to feasibility among teacher- and community health volunteer-counselors through coincidence analysis. Results Among teacher-counselors, organizational-level factors (implementation climate, implementation leadership) determined moderate and high levels of feasibility. Among community health volunteer-counselors, a strong relationship between a clinical supervisor and the supervisee was the most influential determinant of feasibility. Conclusion Methodology and findings from this article can guide the assessment of determinants of feasibility and the development of implementation strategies for manualized mental health interventions in contexts like Western Kenya. Plain Language Summary A mental health provider's perception of how easy a therapy is to use in their work setting (i.e., feasibility) can impact whether the provider uses the therapy in their setting. Implementation researchers have recommended finding practices and constructs that lead to important indicators that a therapy will be used. However, limited research to our knowledge has searched and found practices and constructs that might determine feasibility of a therapy. This article uses existing data from a large trial looking at the continued use of a trauma-focused therapy to find practices and constructs that lead to moderate and high levels of feasibility. We found that in settings with a strong organizational structure that organization and leadership support for the therapy led to teachers in Kenya to perceive the therapy as easy to use. On the other hand, in settings with a weaker organizational structure, outside support from a clinical supervisor led to community health volunteers in Kenya perceiving the therapy as easy to use. The findings from this article can guide context-specific recommendations for increasing perceived therapy feasibility at the provider-, organization-, and policy levels.

Background Interdisciplinary collaboration and stakeholder engagement are key ingredients in implementation science research. However, effective and efficient collaboration can be limited by the complexity of implementation science terms. In this article, we argue that the development and use of plain language implementation science terms is an essential step to facilitate collaboration and engagement. Method We present an example of plain language development to portray the process and the potential benefits plain language can have on implementation science research. Implementation scientists and intervention experts codeveloped plain language implementation terms as a part of an implementation-effectiveness trial in western Kenya and in preparation for a stakeholder collaborative design meeting. Results The developed plain language terms facilitated wider stakeholder understanding and integration of implementation science findings that could inform the design of a stakeholder-led implementation coaching program. Conclusions We encourage the use of the plain language terms presented in this article, further translation, and additional development of other plain language terms for implementation science constructs.