Dataset Information

Protocol for a hybrid type 3 cluster randomized trial of a technical assistance system supporting coalitions and evidence-based drug prevention programs.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Over 5000 community anti-drug coalitions operating in the USA serve as a cornerstone of federal drug prevention. These coalitions, however, have demonstrated effectiveness in preventing substance use only when they use technical assistance (TA) and implement evidence-based programs (EBPs). The absence of TA and EBP implementation by coalitions is a key research-to-practice gap. The Coalition Check-Up TA system is designed to fill this gap by supporting community coalition implementation of EBPs. Existing TA models for evidence-based coalition approaches are resource intensive and coalition model specific. The Coalition Check-Up is a lower cost strategy that works with a variety of types of coalitions to support sustainable implementation of EBPs. This study protocol describes a hybrid type 3 effectiveness-implementation trial applying Wandersman's Interactive Systems Framework to test the effects of the Coalition Check-Up on coalition EBP implementation capacity and outcomes. The Interactive Systems Framework outlines how the prevention support system-especially TA-bolsters EBP dissemination and implementation.

Methods

Using a cluster randomized controlled design, this trial will test the overall effectiveness of the Coalition Check-Up, including how it contributes to EBP implementation and prevention of youth substance use. The first aim is to estimate the impact of the Coalition Check-Up on coalitions' capacity to do their work. We will recruit 68 anti-drug coalitions for random assignment to the Coalition Check-Up or "TA as usual" condition. We will evaluate whether the Coalition Check-Up improves coalition capacity using measures of coalition member responses about team processes, coalition network composition, and collaborative structure. Our second aim is to estimate the impact of the Coalition Check-Up on implementation of EBPs, and our third aim is to estimate the impact of the Coalition Check-Up on youth substance use.

Discussion

This project will clarify how the Coalition Check-Up, a scalable approach to TA due to its low cost, affects coalition capacity to support EBP implementation. Analyses also provide insight into causal pathways from the prevention support system to the prevention delivery system outlined by the Interactive Systems Framework. Results will build the evidence-base for how to support community coalitions' sustainable implementation of evidence-based prevention programs and policies.

Trial registration

Clinicaltrials.gov registration number NCT04592120 . Registered on October 19, 2020.

SUBMITTER: Brown LD

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8235808 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Significance:Prior research suggests that Community Engagement and Planning (CEP) for coalition support compared with Resources for Services (RS) for program technical assistance to implement depression quality improvement programs improves 6- and 12-month client mental-health related quality of life (MHRQL); however, effects for clients with multiple chronic medical conditions (MCC) are unknown. Objective:To explore effectiveness of CEP vs RS in MCC and non-MCC subgroups. Design:Secondary analyses of a cluster-randomized trial. Setting:93 health care and community-based programs in two neighborhoods. Participants:Of 4,440 clients screened, 1,322 depressed (Patient Health Questionnaire, PHQ8) provided contact information, 1,246 enrolled and 1,018 (548 with ?3 MCC) completed baseline, 6- or 12-month surveys. Intervention:CEP or RS for implementing depression quality improvement programs. Outcomes and Analyses:Primary: depression (PHQ9 <10), poor MHRQL (Short Form Health Survey, SF-12<40); Secondary: mental wellness, good physical health, behavioral health hospitalization, chronic homelessness risk, work/workloss days, services use at 6 and 12 months. End-point regressions were used to estimate intervention effects on outcomes for subgroups with ?3 MCC, non-MCC, and intervention-by-MCC interactions (exploratory). Results:Among MCC clients at 6 months, CEP vs RS lowered likelihoods of depression and poor MHRQL; increased likelihood of mental wellness; reduced work-loss days among employed and likelihoods of ?4 behavioral-health hospitalization nights and chronic homelessness risk, while increasing faith-based and park community center depression services; and at 12 months, likelihood of good physical health and park community center depression services use (each P<.05). There were no significant interactions or primary outcome effects for non-MCC. Conclusions:CEP was more effective than RS in improving 6-month primary outcomes among depressed MCC clients, without significant interactions.

Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate the effect of the Oregon and New Mexico Health Insurance Flexibility and Accountability (HIFA) demonstrations. HIFA is an optional state Medicaid expansion targeted at adults and children with incomes below 200 percent of the federal poverty level (FPL). The study has five research questions: What type of health insurance do HIFA enrollees self report in surveys? What are the demographic characteristics of these enrollees? What type of health insurance coverage, if any, did HIFA enrollees have just prior to enrollment in the HIFA program? Among those with prior coverage, what prompted participation in the HIFA program? What type of health insurance, if any, would HIFA enrollees have in the absence of HIFA?MethodsData were collected via telephone interviews with a total of 406 enrollees from Oregon and 409 enrollees from New Mexico. The survey was conducted between July 7 and September 20, 2009, for both states. The sample frame for the survey was based on administrative records of adults enrolled in June 2009. After completion of the survey, active enrollment status as of the date the telephone interview was confirmed. Respondents no longer enrolled at the time of the survey (7 cases in NM and 14 in OR) were excluded from the analysis. The final sample size was 794 verified HIFA enrollees.ResultsHIFA enrollees tended to be middle-aged, male, and relatively unhealthy. Employment status varied tremendously from the self-employed to retired to unable to work. HIFA enrollees were reasonably well educated with 80 percent having at least a high school education. Most HIFA enrollees (90 percent) reported being uninsured just prior to participation in HIFA. Of those who were uninsured, most reported having been uninsured for an extended time-a year or more. Most enrollees joined HIFA because they lacked access to health insurance or could not afford insurance on the private market. The overwhelming majority (76 percent) of respondents believed that they would be uninsured in the absence of HIFA, with few considering either an employer plan or private purchase to be a viable option. Over 90 percent of enrollees correctly indicated they had insurance coverage. However, characterization of the type of coverage was problematic, particularly in the absence of the program-specific name.ConclusionsHIFA enrolled a relatively sick, male, middle-aged population that tended to have been long-term uninsured--the kind of enrollees for which the programs were designed--with little apparent crowd-out of private insurance. The reported health status coupled with low incomes suggests that individual purchase is unlikely, a sentiment echoed by the respondents. In the absence of HIFA, most enrollees believed they would rejoin the ranks of the uninsured from where they came.

Project description:BackgroundDespite the potential to reach at-risk children in childcare, there is a significant gap between current practices and evidence-based obesity prevention in this setting. There are few investigations of the impact of implementation strategies on the uptake of evidence-based practices (EBPs) for obesity prevention and nutrition promotion. This study protocol describes a three-phase approach to developing and testing implementation strategies to support uptake of EBPs for obesity prevention practices in childcare (i.e., key components of the WISE intervention).MethodsInformed by the i-PARIHS framework, we will use a stakeholder-driven evidence-based quality improvement (EBQI) process to apply information gathered in qualitative interviews on barriers and facilitators to practice to inform the design of implementation strategies. Then, a Hybrid Type III cluster randomized trial will compare a basic implementation strategy (i.e., intervention as usual) with an enhanced implementation strategy informed by stakeholders. All Head Start centers (N = 12) within one agency in an urban area in a southern state in the USA will be randomized to receive the basic or enhanced implementation with approximately 20 classrooms per group (40 educators, 400 children per group). The educators involved in the study, the data collectors, and the biostastician will be blinded to the study condition. The basic and enhanced implementation strategies will be compared on outcomes specified by the RE-AIM model (e.g., Reach to families, Effectiveness of impact on child diet and health indicators, Adoption commitment of agency, Implementation fidelity and acceptability, and Maintenance after 6 months). Principles of formative evaluation will be used throughout the hybrid trial.DiscussionThis study will test a stakeholder-driven approach to improve implementation, fidelity, and maintenance of EBPs for obesity prevention in childcare. Further, this study provides an example of a systematic process to develop and test a tailored, enhanced implementation strategy.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03075085.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Food control is defined as a mandatory regulatory activity of enforcement aimed at ensuring that all foods during production, handling, storage, processing, and distribution are safe, wholesome, and fit for human consumption; conform to safety and quality requirements; and are honestly and accurately labeled as prescribed by law. This applies to food served by the conventional food supply chain as well as the charitable food assistance programs (CFAPs). This review sought to map the available evidence on the food control in the CFAPs globally. METHODS:In order to identify the literature, we developed a series of search terms, as well as parameters for including articles to review the literature using African Index Medicus, PubMed, Google Scholar, and EBSCOhost (MEDLINE with full text, Academic search complete, MEDLINE) search engines. Articles were also searched through the "Cited by" search as well as citations included in the reference lists of included articles. We included studies reported in all languages and published from inception to 2018. We included studies if they presented evidence of the CFAPs, namely food banks, food charitable organizations (FCOs), pantries, community soup kitchens, and emergency shelters. We presented the results of our search using thematic analysis in order to reveal the emerging themes. RESULTS:Beyond inconsistencies with the classification of the CFAPs, our study found significant knowledge gaps in crucial areas, namely food vulnerability, food traceability, vulnerability of beneficiary populations, and lack of food control. Our search yielded a total of 23 articles, which we included in the analysis. Results show that while food is the critical commodity to saving lives, if not controlled properly, it can have an adverse effect, especially on people it is meant to benefit (the vulnerable). CONCLUSION:With no previous comprehensive review to assess what is known about food control in the CFAPs, we undertook a scoping review, focusing on mapping the key concepts, including the main sources and types of evidence available. By drawing conclusions about the overall state of research activity and identifying research gaps and priorities in the existing literature, this study provides a baseline assessment of the CFAP research published in peer-reviewed journals from inception to 2018.

Project description:BackgroundThis paper discusses the initial testing of the Housing First Training and Technical Assistance (HFTAT) Program, a multifaceted, distance-based strategy for the implementation of the Housing First (HF) supportive housing model. HF is a complex housing intervention for serving people living with serious mental illness and a substance use disorder that requires significant individual- and structural-level changes to implement. As such, the HFTAT employs a combined training and consultation approach to target different levels of the organization. Training delivered to all organizational staff focuses on building individual knowledge and uses narrative storytelling to overcome attitudinal implementation barriers. Consultation seeks to build skills through technical assistance and fidelity audit and feedback.MethodWe employed a mixed method design to understand both individual-level (e.g., satisfaction with the HFTAT, HF knowledge acquisition and retention, and HF acceptability and appropriateness) and structural-level (e.g., fidelity) outcomes. Quantitative data were collected at various time points, and qualitative data were collected at the end of HFTAT activities. Staff and administrators (n = 113) from three programs across three states participated in the study.ResultsSatisfaction with both training and consultation was high, and discussions demonstrated both activities were necessary. Flexibility of training modality and narrative storytelling were particular strengths, while digital badging and the community of practice were perceived as less valuable because of incompatibilities with the work context. HF knowledge was high post training and retained after 3-month follow-up. Participants reported training helped them better understand the model. Attitudes toward evidence-based interventions improved over 6 months, with qualitative data supporting this but demonstrating some minor concerns related to acceptability and appropriateness. Fidelity scores for all programs improved over 9 months.ConclusionThe HFTAT was a well-liked and generally useful implementation strategy. Results support prior research pointing to the value of both (a) multifaceted strategies and (b) combined training and consultation approaches. The study also provides evidence for narrative storytelling as an approach for changing attitudinal implementation barriers. The need for compatibility between specific elements of an implementation strategy and the work environment was also observed.

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.