HealthPathways implementation in a New Zealand health region: a qualitative study using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research.
ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVES:To explore the process of implementation of an online health information web-based portal and referral system (HealthPathways) using implementation science theory: the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). SETTING:Southern Health Region of New Zealand (Otago and Southland). PARTICIPANTS:Key Informants (providers and planners of healthcare) (n=10) who were either involved in the process of implementing HealthPathways or who were intended end-users of HealthPathways. METHODS:Semistructured interviews were undertaken. A deductive thematic analysis using CFIR was conducted using the framework method. RESULTS:CFIR postulates that for an intervention to be implemented successfully, account must be taken of the intervention's core components and the adaptable periphery. The core component of HealthPathways-the web portal and referral system that contains a large number of localised clinical care pathways-had been addressed well by the product developers. Little attention had, however, been paid to addressing the adaptable periphery (adaptable elements, structures and systems related to HealthPathways and the organisation into which it was being implemented); it was seen as sufficient just to deliver the web portal and referral system and the set of clinical care pathways as developed to effect successful implementation. In terms of CFIR's 'inner setting' corporate and professional cultures, the implementation climate and readiness for implementation were not properly addressed during implementation. There were also multiple failures of the implementation process (eg, lack of planning and engagement with clinicians). As a consequence, implementation of HealthPathways was highly problematic. CONCLUSIONS:The use of CFIR has furthered our understanding of the factors needed for the successful implementation of a complex health intervention (HealthPathways) in the New Zealand health system. Those charged with implementing complex health interventions should always consider the local context within which they will be implemented and tailor their implementation strategy to address these.
Project description:BACKGROUND:Despite large investments to prevent mother-to-child-transmission (PMTCT), pediatric HIV elimination goals are not on track in many countries. The Systems Analysis and Improvement Approach (SAIA) study was a cluster randomized trial to test whether a package of systems engineering tools could strengthen PMTCT programs. We sought to (1) define core and adaptable components of the SAIA intervention, and (2) explain the heterogeneity in SAIA's success between facilities. METHODS:The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) guided all data collection efforts. CFIR constructs were assessed in focus group discussions and interviews with study and facility staff in 6 health facilities (1 high-performing and 1 low-performing site per country, identified by study staff) in December 2014 at the end of the intervention period. SAIA staff identified the intervention's core and adaptable components at an end-of-study meeting in August 2015. Two independent analysts used CFIR constructs to code transcripts before reaching consensus. RESULTS:Flow mapping and continuous quality improvement were the core to the SAIA in all settings, whereas the PMTCT cascade analysis tool was the core in high HIV prevalence settings. Five CFIR constructs distinguished strongly between high and low performers: 2 in inner setting (networks and communication, available resources) and 3 in process (external change agents, executing, reflecting and evaluating). DISCUSSION:The CFIR is a valuable tool to categorize elements of an intervention as core versus adaptable, and to understand heterogeneity in study implementation. Future intervention studies should apply evidence-based implementation science frameworks, like the CFIR, to provide salient data to expand implementation to other settings.
Project description:In 2011, the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) implemented electronic consults (e-consults) as an alternative to in-person specialty visits to improve access and reduce travel for veterans. We conducted an evaluation to understand variation in the use of the new e-consult mechanism and the causes of variable implementation, guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR).Qualitative case studies of 3 high- and 5 low-implementation e-consult pilot sites. Participants included e-consult site leaders, primary care providers, specialists, and support staff identified using a modified snowball sample.We used a 3-step approach, with a structured survey of e-consult site leaders to identify key constructs, based on the CFIR. We then conducted open-ended interviews, focused on key constructs, with all participants. Finally, we produced structured, site-level ratings of CFIR constructs and compared them between high- and low-implementation sites.Site leaders identified 14 initial constructs. We conducted 37 interviews, from which 4 CFIR constructs distinguished high implementation e-consult sites: compatibility, networks and communications, training, and access to knowledge and information. For example, illustrating compatibility, a specialist at a high-implementation site reported that the site changed the order of consult options so that all specialties listed e-consults first to maintain consistency. High-implementation sites also exhibited greater agreement on constructs.By using the CFIR to analyze results, we facilitate future synthesis with other findings, and we better identify common patterns of implementation determinants common across settings.
Project description:Past research has focused on typhoid fever surveillance with little attention to implementation methods or effectiveness of control interventions. This study purposefully sampled key informants working in public health in Chile, India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Thailand, Vietnam, South Africa, and Nigeria to 1) scope typhoid-relevant interventions implemented between 1990 and 2015 and 2) explore contextual factors perceived to be associated with their implementation, based on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). We used a mixed methods design and collected quantitative data (CFIR questionnaire) and qualitative data (interviews with 34 public health experts). Interview data were analyzed using a deductive qualitative content analysis and summary descriptive statistics are provided for the CFIR data. Despite relatively few typhoid-specific interventions reportedly implemented in these countries, interventions for diarrheal disease control and regulations for food safety and food handlers were common. Most countries implemented agricultural and sewage treatment practices, yet few addressed the control of antibiotic medication. Several contextual factors were perceived to have influenced the implementation of typhoid interventions, either as enablers (e.g., economic development) or barriers (e.g., limited resources and habitual behaviors). Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research factors rated as important in the implementation of typhoid interventions were remarkably consistent across countries. The findings provide a snapshot of typhoid-relevant interventions implemented over 25 years and highlight factors associated with implementation success from the perspective of a sample of key informants. These findings can inform systematic investigations of the implementation of typhoid control interventions and contribute to a better understanding of the direct effects of implementation efforts.
Project description:BACKGROUND:Preventing the onset of poor mental health in adolescence is an international public health priority. Universal, whole school preventative approaches are valued for their reach, and anti-stigmatising and resilience building principles. Mindfulness approaches to well-being have the potential to be effective when delivered as a whole school approach for both young people and staff. However, despite growing demand, there is little understanding of possible and optimal ways to implement a mindfulness, whole school approach (M-WSA) to well-being. This study aimed to identify the determinants of early implementation success of a M-WSA. We tested the capacity of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), to capture the determinants of the implementation of a mental health intervention in a school setting. METHODS:Key members of school staff (n?=?15) from five UK secondary schools attempting to implement a M-WSA were interviewed at two-time points, 6 months apart, generating a total of 30 interviews. Interviews explored participants' attitudes, beliefs and experiences around implementing a M-WSA. Interview data were coded as CFIR constructs or other (non CFIR) factors affecting implementation. We also mapped school-reported implementation activity and perceived success over 30?months. RESULTS:The CFIR captured the implementation activities and challenges well, with 74% of CFIR constructs identifiable in the dataset. Of the 38 CFIR constructs, 11 appeared to distinguish between high and low implementation schools. The most essential construct was school leadership. It strongly distinguished between high and low implementation schools and appeared inter-related with many other distinguishing constructs. Other strongly distinguishing constructs included relative priority, networks and communications, formally appointed implementation leaders, knowledge and beliefs about the intervention, and executing. CONCLUSIONS:Our findings suggest key implementation constructs that schools, commissioners and policy makers should focus on to promote successful early implementation of mental health programs. School leadership is a key construct to target at the outset. The CFIR appears useful for assessing the implementation of mental health programs in UK secondary schools.
Project description:In 2009, Damschroder et al. developed the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), which provides a comprehensive listing of constructs thought to influence implementation. This systematic review assesses the extent to which the CFIR's use in implementation research fulfills goals set forth by Damschroder et al. in terms of breadth of use, depth of application, and contribution to implementation research.We searched Scopus and Web of Science for publications that cited the original CFIR publication by Damschroder et al. (Implement Sci 4:50, 2009) and downloaded each unique result for review. After applying exclusion criteria, the final articles were empirical studies published in peer-review journals that used the CFIR in a meaningful way (i.e., used the CFIR to guide data collection, measurement, coding, analysis, and/or reporting). A framework analysis approach was used to guide abstraction and synthesis of the included articles.Twenty-six of 429 unique articles (6 %) met inclusion criteria. We found great breadth in CFIR application; the CFIR was applied across a wide variety of study objectives, settings, and units of analysis. There was also variation in the method of included studies (mixed methods (n = 13); qualitative (n = 10); quantitative (n = 3)). Depth of CFIR application revealed some areas for improvement. Few studies (n = 3) reported justification for selection of CFIR constructs used; the majority of studies (n = 14) used the CFIR to guide data analysis only; and few studies investigated any outcomes (n = 11). Finally, reflections on the contribution of the CFIR to implementation research were scarce.Our results indicate that the CFIR has been used across a wide range of studies, though more in-depth use of the CFIR may help advance implementation science. To harness its potential, researchers should consider how to most meaningfully use the CFIR. Specific recommendations for applying the CFIR include explicitly justifying selection of CFIR constructs; integrating the CFIR throughout the research process (in study design, data collection, and analysis); and appropriately using the CFIR given the phase of implementation of the research (e.g., if the research is post-implementation, using the CFIR to link determinants of implementation to outcomes).
Project description:The Telephone Lifestyle Coaching (TLC) program provided telephone-based coaching for six lifestyle behaviors to 5321 Veterans at 24 Veterans Health Administration (VHA) medical facilities. The purpose of the study was to conduct an evaluation of the TLC program to identify factors associated with successful implementation. A mixed-methods study design was used. Quantitative measures of organizational readiness for implementation and facility complexity were used to purposively select a subset of facilities for in-depth evaluation. Context assessments were conducted using interview transcripts. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) was used to guide qualitative data collection and analysis. Factors most strongly correlated with referral rates included having a skilled implementation leader who used effective multi-component strategies to engage primary care clinicians as well as general clinic structures that supported implementation. Evaluation findings pointed to recommendations for local and national leaders to help anticipate and mitigate potential barriers to successful implementation.
Project description:BACKGROUND:The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) is a determinants framework that may require adaptation or contextualization to fit the needs of implementation scientists in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). The purpose of this review is to characterize how the CFIR has been applied in LMIC contexts, to evaluate the utility of specific constructs to global implementation science research, and to identify opportunities to refine the CFIR to optimize utility in LMIC settings. METHODS:A systematic literature review was performed to evaluate the use of the CFIR in LMICs. Citation searches were conducted in Medline, CINAHL, PsycINFO, CINAHL, SCOPUS, and Web of Science. Data abstraction included study location, study design, phase of implementation, manner of implementation (ex., data analysis), domains and constructs used, and justifications for use, among other variables. A standardized questionnaire was sent to the corresponding authors of included studies to determine which CFIR domains and constructs authors found to be compatible with use in LMICs and to solicit feedback regarding ways in which CFIR performance could be improved for use in LMICs. RESULTS:Our database search yielded 504 articles, of which 34 met final inclusion criteria. The studies took place across 21 countries and focused on 18 different health topics. The studies primarily used qualitative study designs (68%). Over half (59%) of the studies applied the CFIR at study endline, primarily to guide data analysis or to contextualize study findings. Nineteen (59%) of the contacted authors participated in the survey. Authors unanimously identified culture and engaging as compatible with use in global implementation research. Only two constructs, patient needs and resources and individual stages of change were commonly identified as incompatible with use. Author feedback centered on team level influences on implementation, as well as systems characteristics, such as health system architecture. We propose a "Characteristics of Systems" domain and eleven novel constructs be added to the CFIR to increase its compatibility for use in LMICs. CONCLUSIONS:These additions provide global implementation science practitioners opportunities to account for systems-level determinants operating independently of the implementing organization. Newly proposed constructs require further reliability and validity assessments. TRIAL REGISTRATION:PROSPERO, CRD42018095762.
Project description:The Massachusetts Screening, Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment (MASBIRT) Program, a substance use screening program in general medical settings, created a web-based, point-of-care (POC), application--the MASBIRT Portal (the "Portal") to meet program goals.We report on development and implementation of the Portal.Five year program process outcomes recorded by an independent evaluator and an anonymous survey of Health Educator's (HEs) adoption, perceptions and Portal use with a modified version of the Technology Readiness Index are described.  Specific management team members, selected based on their roles in program leadership, development and implementation of the Portal and supervision of HEs, participated in semi-structured, qualitative interviews.At the conclusion of the program 73% (24/33) of the HEs completed a survey on their experience using the Portal. HEs reported that the Portal made recording screening information easy (96%); improved planning their workday (83%); facilitated POC data collection (84%); decreased time dedicated to data entry (100%); and improved job satisfaction (59%). The top two barriers to use were "no or limited wireless connectivity" (46%) and "the tablet was too heavy/bulky to carry" (29%). Qualitative management team interviews identified strategies for successful HIT implementation: importance of engaging HEs in outlining specifications and workflow needs, collaborative testing prior to implementation and clear agreement on data collection purpose, quality requirements and staff roles.Overall, HEs perceived the Portal favorably with regard to time saving ability and improved workflow. Lessons learned included identifying core requirements early during system development and need for managers to institute and enforce consistent behavioral work norms.Barriers and HEs' views of technology impacted the utilization of the MASBIRT Portal. Further research is needed to determine best approaches for HIT system implementation in general medical settings.
Project description:Understanding and addressing the needs of frail persons is an emerging health priority for Nova Scotia and internationally. Primary healthcare (PHC) providers regularly encounter frail persons in their daily clinical work. However, routine identification and measurement of frailty is not standard practice and, in general, there is a lack of awareness about how to identify and respond to frailty. A web-based tool called the Frailty Portal was developed to aid in identifying, screening, and providing care for frail patients in PHC settings. In this study, we will assess the implementation feasibility and impact of the Frailty Portal to: (1) support increased awareness of frailty among providers and patients, (2) identify the degree of frailty within individual patients, and (3) develop and deliver actions to respond to frailtyl in community PHC practice.This study will be approached using a convergent mixed method design where quantitative and qualitative data are collected concurrently, in this case, over a 9-month period, analyzed separately, and then merged to summarize, interpret and produce a more comprehensive understanding of the initiative's feasibility and scalability. Methods will be informed by the 'Implementing the Frailty Portal in Community Primary Care Practice' logic model and questions will be guided by domains and constructs from an implementation science framework, the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR).The 'Frailty Portal' aims to improve access to, and coordination of, primary care services for persons experiencing frailty. It also aims to increase primary care providers' ability to care for patients in the context of their frailty. Our goal is to help optimize care in the community by helping community providers gain the knowledge they may lack about frailty both in general and in their practice, support improved identification of frailty with the use of screening tools, offer evidence based severity-specific care goals and connect providers with local available community supports.
Project description:Although there is growing evidence of the positive effects of Internet-based patient-provider communication (IPPC) services for both patients and health care providers, their implementation into clinical practice continues to be a challenge.The 3 aims of this study were to (1) identify and compare barriers and facilitators influencing the implementation of an IPPC service in 5 hospital units using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), (2) assess the ability of the different constructs of CFIR to distinguish between high and low implementation success, and (3) compare our findings with those from other studies that used the CFIR to discriminate between high and low implementation success.This study was based on individual interviews with 10 nurses, 6 physicians, and 1 nutritionist who had used the IPPC to answer messages from patients.Of the 36 CFIR constructs, 28 were addressed in the interviews, of which 12 distinguished between high and low implementation units. Most of the distinguishing constructs were related to the inner setting domain of CFIR, indicating that institutional factors were particularly important for successful implementation. Health care providers' beliefs in the intervention as useful for themselves and their patients as well as the implementation process itself were also important. A comparison of constructs across ours and 2 other studies that also used the CFIR to discriminate between high and low implementation success showed that 24 CFIR constructs distinguished between high and low implementation units in at least 1 study; 11 constructs distinguished in 2 studies. However, only 2 constructs (patient need and resources and available resources) distinguished consistently between high and low implementation units in all 3 studies.The CFIR is a helpful framework for illuminating barriers and facilitators influencing IPPC implementation. However, CFIR's strength of being broad and comprehensive also limits its usefulness as an implementation framework because it does not discriminate between the relative importance of its many constructs for implementation success. This is the first study to identify which CFIR constructs are the most promising to distinguish between high and low implementation success across settings and interventions. Findings from this study can contribute to the refinement of CFIR toward a more succinct and parsimonious framework for planning and evaluation of the implementation of clinical interventions.Clinicaltrials.gov NCT00971139; http://clinicaltrial.gov/ct2/show/NCT00971139 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6cWeqN1uY).