Dataset Information

Conceptualizing and measuring sustainability of prevention programs, policies, and practices.

ABSTRACT: A large knowledge gap exists regarding the measurement of sustainability of evidence-based prevention programs for mental and behavioral health. We interviewed 45 representatives of 10 grantees and 9 program officers within 4 Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration prevention grant initiatives to identify experiences with implementation and sustainability barriers and facilitators; what "sustainability" means and what it will take to sustain their programs; and which Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) elements are important for sustainability. Lists of sustainability determinants and outcomes were then compiled from each data set and compared with one another. Analysis of themes from interviews and free lists revealed considerable overlap between sustainability determinants and outcomes. Four sustainability elements were identified by all three data sets (ongoing coalitions, collaborations, and networks and partnerships; infrastructure and capacity to support sustainability; community need for program; and ongoing evaluation of performance and outcomes), and 11 elements were identified by two of three data sets (availability of funding; consistency with organizational culture; evidence of positive outcomes; development of a plan for implementation and sustainment; presence of a champion; institutionalization and integration of program; institutional support and commitment; community buy-in and support; program continuity; supportive leadership; and opportunities for staff training). All but one of the CFIR domain elements (pressure from other states, tribes, or communities) were endorsed as important to sustainability by 50% or more of participants. It may be more important to implement a standardized process of eliciting determinants and outcomes of sustainability than to implement a single standardized instrument.

SUBMITTER: Palinkas LA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7020391 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Conceptualizing and measuring sustainability of prevention programs, policies, and practices.

Palinkas Lawrence A LA Spear Suzanne E SE Mendon Sapna J SJ Villamar Juan J Reynolds Charles C Green Costella D CD Olson Charlotte C Adade Audrey A Brown C Hendricks CH

Translational behavioral medicine 20200201 1

A large knowledge gap exists regarding the measurement of sustainability of evidence-based prevention programs for mental and behavioral health. We interviewed 45 representatives of 10 grantees and 9 program officers within 4 Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration prevention grant initiatives to identify experiences with implementation and sustainability barriers and facilitators; what "sustainability" means and what it will take to sustain their programs; and which Consolidat ...[more]

PMID: 31764968

Similar Datasets

Project description:Sustaining prevention efforts directed at substance use and mental health problems is one of the greatest, yet least understood, challenges in the field of implementation science. A large knowledge gap exists regarding the meaning of the term "sustainment" and what factors predict or even measure sustainability of effective prevention programs and support systems.The U.S. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) supports a diverse portfolio of prevention and treatment grant programs that aim to improve population and individual level behavioral health. This study focuses on four SAMHSA prevention grant programs, two of which target substance abuse prevention at the state or single community level, one targets suicide prevention, and one targets prevention of aggressive/disruptive behavior in elementary schools. An examination of all four grant programs simultaneously provides an opportunity to determine what is meant by the term sustainment and identify and support both the unique requirements for improving sustainability for each program as well as for developing a generalizable framework comprised of core components of sustainment across diverse prevention approaches. Based on an analysis of qualitative and quantitative data of 10 grantees supported by these four programs, we will develop a flexible measurement system, with both general and specific components, that can bring precision to monitoring sustainment of infrastructure, activities, and outcomes for each prevention approach. We will then transform this system for use in evaluating and improving the likelihood of achieving prevention effort sustainment. To achieve these goals, we will (1) identify core components of sustainment of prevention programs and their support infrastructures; (2) design a measurement system for monitoring and providing feedback regarding sustainment within the four SAMHSA's prevention-related grant programs; and (3) pilot test the predictability of this multilevel measurement system across these programs and the feasibility and acceptability of a measurement system to evaluate and improve the likelihood of sustainment.This project is intended to improve sustainment of the supporting prevention infrastructure, activities, and outcomes that are funded by federal, state, community, and foundation sources.

Project description:Acceptability of and public support for prevention are an important part of facilitating policy implementation. This review aims to identify, summarize and synthesize the methods and study designs used to measure and understand public opinion, community attitudes and acceptability of strategies to prevent chronic noncommunicable disease (NCDs) in order to allow for examination of imbalances in methodological approaches and gaps in content areas. We searched four scientific databases (CINAHL, Embase, Ovid/MEDLINE and Scopus) for peer-reviewed, English-language studies published between January 2011 and March 2020 in high-income, democratic countries across North America, Europe and the Asia-Pacific region. Studies were included if they focused on opinions, attitudes and acceptability of primary prevention strategies and interventions addressing the key NCD risk factors of alcohol use, unhealthy diet, overweight/obesity, tobacco use and smoking, and physical inactivity. A total of 293 studies were included. Two thirds of studies (n = 194, 66%) used quantitative methods such as cross-sectional studies involving surveys of representative (n = 129, 44%) or convenience (n = 42, 14%) samples. A smaller number of studies used qualitative methods (n = 60, 20%) such as focus groups (n = 21, 7%) and interviews (n = 21, 7%). Thirty-nine studies (13%) used mixed methods such as content analysis of news media (n = 17, 6%). Tobacco control remains the dominant topic of public opinion literature about prevention (n = 124, 42%). Few studies looked solely at physical inactivity (n = 17, 6%). The results of this review suggest that public opinion and acceptability of prevention in the peer-reviewed literature is investigated primarily through cross-sectional surveys. Qualitative and mixed methods may provide more nuanced insights which can be used to facilitate policy implementation of more upstream strategies and policies to prevent NCDs.

Project description:BackgroundFew validated assessment tools are available to increase understanding and measure factors associated with sustainment of clinical practices, an increasingly recognized need among clinicians. We describe the development of the Clinical Sustainability Assessment Tool (CSAT), designed to assess factors that contribute to sustainable practices in clinical settings.MethodsSixty-four participants from clinical and research fields participated in concept mapping and were recruited to brainstorm factors that lead to sustained clinical practices. Once repeated factors were removed, participants sorted items based on similarity and rated them by importance and feasibility. Using concept mapping analyses, items were grouped into meaningful domains to develop an initial tool. We then recruited pilot sites and early adopters, for a total of 286 practicing clinicians, to pilot and evaluate the tool. Individuals were recruited from clinical settings across pediatric and adult medical and surgical subspecialties. The data were analyzed using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to test hypothesized subscale structure in the instrument. We used root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) and the standardized root mean square residual (SRMR) to assess fit and thus the ability of CSAT to measure the identified domains.ResultsThe concept mapping produced sorted statements that were edited into items that could be responded to, resulting in the creation of a tool with seven determinant domains and 47 items. The pilot and CFA testing resulted in a final CSAT instrument made up 35 items, five per domain. CFA results demonstrated very good fit of the seven domain structure of the CSAT (RMSEA = 0.049; SRMR = 0.049). Usability testing indicated the CSAT is brief, easy to use, easy to learn, and does not require extensive training. Additionally, the measure scored highly (18/20) on the Psychometric and Pragmatic Evidence Rating Scale (PAPERS). The seven final CSAT domains were engaged staff and leadership, engaged stakeholders, organizational readiness, workflow integration, implementation and training, monitoring and evaluation, and outcomes and effectiveness.ConclusionsThe CSAT is a new reliable assessment tool which allows for greater practical and scientific understanding of contextual factors that enable sustainable clinical practices over time.

Project description:BackgroundBreast cancer has positioned itself worldwide as one of the main public health problems, especially in Latin America. In some countries, several programs for the prevention and control of breast cancer in women have been developed and implemented on a permanent basis, but there are no public reports on the policies that originated such programs.ObjectiveA scoping review of scientific publications that identify the type, extent, and scope of policies and programs for the prevention and control of breast cancer in Latin American women was performed, and the main results were presented in this paper.MethodsThis scoping review was carried out according to the method by Arksey and O'Malley based on 3 fundamental questions about breast cancer prevention and control policies in Latin America: their type, extent and scope, and reference framework. The search period was from 2000 to 2019, and the search was carried out in the following databases: MEDLINE (PubMed), MEDLINE (EbscoHost), CINAHL (EbscoHost), Academic Search Complete (EbscoHost), ISI Web of Science (Science Citation Index), and Scopus in English, Spanish, and Portuguese, and Scielo, Cochrane, and MEDES-MEDicina in Spanish and Portuguese. Of the 743 studies found, 20 (2.7%) were selected, which were analyzed using descriptive statistics and qualitative content analysis.ResultsThe selected studies identified several Latin American countries that have generated policies and programs to prevent and control breast cancer in women, focusing mainly on risk communication, prevention and timely detection, effective access to health services, improvement of the screening process, and evaluation of screening programs. Evaluation criteria and greater participation of civil society in policy design and program execution are still lacking. This could undoubtedly help eliminate existing barriers to effective action.ConclusionsAlthough several Latin American countries have generated public policies and action programs for the prevention and control of breast cancer, a pending issue is the evaluation of the results to analyze the effectiveness and impact of their implementation given the magnitude of the public health problem it represents and because women and civil society play an important role in its prevention and control.International registered report identifier (irrid)RR2-10.2196/12624.

Project description:ContextIncreasing the adoption and implementation of evidence-based policies and practices is a key strategy for improving public health. Although there is widespread agreement about the importance of implementing evidence-based public health policies and practices, there are gaps between what has been shown to be effective and what is implemented at the state level.ObjectiveThe Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) developed the Prevention Status Reports (PSRs), a performance measurement system, to highlight evidence-based public health policies and practices and catalyze state performance and quality improvement efforts across the nation.DesignCDC selected a set of 10 topics representing some of the most important public health challenges in the nation. Stakeholders, including state health departments and other partners, helped conceptualize the PSRs and informed the development of the PSR framework, which provides an organizational structure for the system. CDC subject matter experts developed criteria for selecting policies and practices, indicators for each policy and practice, and a criteria-based rating system for each indicator.Participants and settingThe PSRs were developed for all 50 states and the District of Columbia.Main outcomeThe PSRs were developed and serve as a performance measurement system for monitoring the adoption, reach, and implementation fidelity of evidence-based public health policies and practices nationwide.ResultsThe PSRs include 33 policy and practice indicators across the 10 health topics. They use a simple 3-level rating system-green, yellow, and red-to report the extent to which each state (and the District of Columbia) has implemented the policy or practice in accordance with supporting evidence or expert recommendations. Results from aggregate analyses show positive change or improvement.ConclusionThe PSRs are a unique part of CDC's work to improve the performance and accountability of the public health system, serving as both a monitoring tool and a call to action to improve health outcomes. The PSRs can be used to track the reach of and fidelity to evidence-based policies and practices nationally over time, as well as inform state efforts to improve their use of evidence-based policies and practice.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Gender-based violence among young women is a growing problem worldwide. The consequences of this victimization have been well reported in the scientific literature, among which negative health outcomes stand out. The factors influencing this problem are many; one highlighted by research is socialization into a dominant coercive discourse that associates sexual-affective attraction to males with violent attitudes and behaviors, while in turn, such discourse empties males with egalitarian behaviors from sexual attractiveness. This coercive discourse may be shaping the sexual preferences of female youth. The current paper explores young women's preferences for different types of sexual relationships and, more particularly, for what type of sexual affective relationships they coercively preferred men with violent attitudes and behavior. METHODS:A quantitative, mixed-design vignette study was conducted with 191 college females in Spain. We focused the analysis only on responses about vignettes including narratives of men with violent attitudes and behaviors. In addition, we examined whether participants would report higher coerced preferences for violent men when asked about the coerced preferences of their female friends than when asked about their own preferences. RESULTS:Only 28.95% of participants responded that their female friends would prefer a young man with violent behavior for a stable relationship, meanwhile 58.42% would do it for hooking up. When reporting about themselves, the difference was greater: 28.42% would prefer a young man with violent behavior for hooking up and just 5.78% for a stable relationship. CONCLUSIONS:The dominant coercive discourse that links attractiveness to people with violent attitudes and behaviors may be explaining the results obtained in this study. The findings can help eliminate the stereotype largely adopted by some intervention and prevention programs which assume that gender-based violence occurs mainly in stable relationships, considering that falling in love is the reason that lead women to suffer from violence. Our results can also support health professionals and others serving young women to enhance their identification of gender violence victimization, as well as our findings point to the need to include the evidence of gender violence in sporadic relationships in prevention programs and campaigns addressed to young women.

Dataset Information

Conceptualizing and measuring sustainability of prevention programs, policies, and practices.

Publications

Conceptualizing and measuring sustainability of prevention programs, policies, and practices.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets