Dataset Information

The Cognitive Walkthrough for Implementation Strategies (CWIS): a pragmatic method for assessing implementation strategy usability.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Implementation strategies have flourished in an effort to increase integration of research evidence into clinical practice. Most strategies are complex, socially mediated processes. Many are complicated, expensive, and ultimately impractical to deliver in real-world settings. The field lacks methods to assess the extent to which strategies are usable and aligned with the needs and constraints of the individuals and contexts who will deliver or receive them. Drawn from the field of human-centered design, cognitive walkthroughs are an efficient assessment method with potential to identify aspects of strategies that may inhibit their usability and, ultimately, effectiveness. This article presents a novel walkthrough methodology for evaluating strategy usability as well as an example application to a post-training consultation strategy to support school mental health clinicians to adopt measurement-based care.

Method

The Cognitive Walkthrough for Implementation Strategies (CWIS) is a pragmatic, mixed-methods approach for evaluating complex, socially mediated implementation strategies. CWIS includes six steps: (1) determine preconditions; (2) hierarchical task analysis; (3) task prioritization; (4) convert tasks to scenarios; (5) pragmatic group testing; and (6) usability issue identification, classification, and prioritization. A facilitator conducted two group testing sessions with clinician users (N = 10), guiding participants through 6 scenarios and 11 associated subtasks. Clinicians reported their anticipated likelihood of completing each subtask and provided qualitative justifications during group discussion. Following the walkthrough sessions, users completed an adapted quantitative assessment of strategy usability.

Results

Average anticipated success ratings indicated substantial variability across participants and subtasks. Usability ratings (scale 0-100) of the consultation protocol averaged 71.3 (SD = 10.6). Twenty-one usability problems were identified via qualitative content analysis with consensus coding, and classified by severity and problem type. High-severity problems included potential misalignment between consultation and clinical service timelines as well as digressions during consultation processes.

Conclusions

CWIS quantitative usability ratings indicated that the consultation protocol was at the low end of the "acceptable" range (based on norms from the unadapted scale). Collectively, the 21 resulting usability issues explained the quantitative usability data and provided specific direction for usability enhancements. The current study provides preliminary evidence for the utility of CWIS to assess strategy usability and generate a blueprint for redesign.

SUBMITTER: Lyon AR

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8285864 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Objective/aimGood design of cancer registry systems makes them easy to use, while poor design of their user interfaces leads to user dissatisfaction and resistance. The objective of this study was to evaluate the usability of a cancer registry system using Cognitive Walkthrough (CW) and to assess users' agreement with its usability problems.MethodsCW was used to evaluate the registry system. We developed a checklist to help evaluators speed up the evaluation process, a problems form to collect the usability issues identified by the evaluators, and a problems severity form to determine the severity of problems by the evaluators. The problems were classified into two categories according to the CW questions and the system tasks. The agreement of the users with the system problems was examined by an online questionnaire. Users' agreement with the problems was then analyzed using the Interclass Correlation Coefficient in the SPSS 22 (Statistical Package for Social Science).ResultsIn this study, 114 problems were identified. In the categorization of problems based on the CW questions, 41% (n = 47) of the problems concerned the issue of "users do not know what to do at each stage of working with the system", 24% (n = 27) were classified as "users cannot link what they intend to do with system controls", and 22% (n = 25) were related to "user's lack of understanding of the system processes". Based on user tasks, about 36% (n = 41) of the problems were related to "removing patient duplication" and 33% (n = 38) were related to "registration of patient identification information". User agreement with the problems was high (CI 95% = 0.9 (0.96, 0.98)).ConclusionSystem problems often originate from user ignorance about what to do at each stage of using the system. Also, half of the system problems concern a mismatch between what users want to do and the system controls, or a lack of understanding about what the system does at different stages. Therefore, to avoid user confusion, designers should use clues and guides on the screen for users, design controls consistent with the user model of thinking, and provide appropriate feedback after each user action to help users understand what the system is doing. The high agreement of users with the problems showed that in the absence of users system designers can use CW to identify the problems that users face in the real environment.

Project description: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. 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. 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. 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.

Project description:BackgroundPeople often prefer evidence-based psychosocial interventions (EBPIs) for mental health care; however, these interventions frequently remain unavailable to people in nonspecialty or integrated settings, such as primary care and schools. Previous research has suggested that usability, a concept from human-centered design, could support an understanding of the barriers to and facilitators of the successful adoption of EBPIs and support the redesign of EBPIs and implementation strategies.ObjectiveThis study aimed to identify and categorize usability issues in EBPIs and their implementation strategies.MethodsWe adapted a usability issue analysis and reporting format from a human-centered design. A total of 13 projects supported by the National Institute of Mental Health-funded Accelerating the Reach and Impact of Treatments for Youth and Adults with Mental Illness Center at the University of Washington used this format to describe usability issues for EBPIs and implementation strategies with which they were working. Center researchers used iterative affinity diagramming and coding processes to identify usability issue categories. On the basis of these categories and the underlying issues, we propose heuristics for the design or redesign of EBPIs and implementation strategies.ResultsThe 13 projects reported a total of 90 usability issues, which we categorized into 12 categories, including complex and/or cognitively overwhelming, required time exceeding available time, incompatibility with interventionist preference or practice, incompatibility with existing workflow, insufficient customization to clients/recipients, intervention buy-in (value), interventionist buy-in (trust), overreliance on technology, requires unavailable infrastructure, inadequate scaffolding for client/recipient, inadequate training and scaffolding for interventionists, and lack of support for necessary communication. These issues range from minor inconveniences that affect a few interventionists or recipients to severe issues that prevent all interventionists or recipients in a setting from completing part or all of the intervention. We propose 12 corresponding heuristics to guide EBPIs and implementation strategy designers in preventing and addressing these usability issues.ConclusionsUsability issues were prevalent in the studied EBPIs and implementation strategies. We recommend using the lens of usability evaluation to understand and address barriers to the effective use and reach of EBPIs and implementation strategies.International registered report identifier (irrid)RR2-10.2196/14990.

Project description:BackgroundMore than two-thirds of youth experience trauma during childhood, and up to 1 in 5 of these youth develops posttraumatic stress symptoms that significantly impair their functioning. Although trauma-focused cognitive behavior therapy (TF-CBT) has a strong evidence base, it is rarely adopted, delivered with adequate fidelity, or evaluated in the most common setting where youth access mental health services-schools. Given that individual behavior change is ultimately required for successful implementation, even when organizational factors are firmly in place, focusing on individual-level processes represents a potentially parsimonious approach. Beliefs and Attitudes for Successful Implementation in Schools (BASIS) is a pragmatic, motivationally focused multifaceted strategy that augments training and consultation and is designed to target precise mechanisms of behavior change to produce enhanced implementation and youth clinical outcomes. This study protocol describes a hybrid type 2 effectiveness-implementation trial designed to concurrently evaluate the main effects, mediators, and moderators of both the BASIS implementation strategy on implementation outcomes and TF-CBT on youth mental health outcomes.MethodsUsing a cluster randomized controlled design, this trial will assign school-based mental health (SMH) clinicians and schools to one of three study arms: (a) enhanced treatment-as-usual (TAU), (b) attention control plus TF-CBT, or (c) BASIS+TF-CBT. With a proposed sample of 120 SMH clinicians who will each recruit 4-6 youth with a history of trauma (480 children), this project will gather data across 12 different time points to address two project aims. Aim 1 will evaluate, relative to an enhanced TAU condition, the effects of TF-CBT on identified mechanisms of change, youth mental health outcomes, and intervention costs and cost-effectiveness. Aim 2 will compare the effects of BASIS against an attention control plus TF-CBT condition on theoretical mechanisms of clinician behavior change and implementation outcomes, as well as examine costs and cost-effectiveness.DiscussionThis study will generate critical knowledge about the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of BASIS-a pragmatic, theory-driven, and generalizable implementation strategy designed to enhance motivation-to increase the yield of evidence-based practice training and consultation, as well as the effectiveness of TF-CBT in a novel service setting.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov registration number NCT04451161 . Registered on June 30, 2020.

Project description:BackgroundValid and reliable measurement of implementation strategies is essential to advancing implementation science; however, this area lags behind the measurement of implementation outcomes and determinants. Clinical supervision is a promising and highly feasible implementation strategy in behavioral healthcare for which pragmatic measures are lacking. This research aimed to develop and psychometrically evaluate a pragmatic measure of clinical supervision conceptualized in terms of two broadly applicable, discrete clinical supervision techniques shown to improve providers' implementation of evidence-based psychosocial interventions-(1) audit and feedback and (2) active learning.MethodsItems were generated based on a systematic review of the literature and administered to a sample of 154 outpatient mental health clinicians serving youth and 181 community-based mental health providers serving adults. Scores were evaluated for evidence of reliability, structural validity, construct-related validity, and measurement invariance across the two samples.ResultsIn sample 1, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) supported the hypothesized two-factor structure of scores on the Evidence-Based Clinical Supervision Strategies (EBCSS) scale (χ2=5.89, df=4, p=0.208; RMSEA=0.055, CFI=0.988, SRMR=0.033). In sample 2, CFA replicated the EBCSS factor structure and provided discriminant validity evidence relative to an established supervisory alliance measure (χ2=36.12, df=30, p=0.204; RMSEA=0.034; CFI=0.990; SRMR=0.031). Construct-related validity evidence was provided by theoretically concordant associations between EBCSS subscale scores and agency climate for evidence-based practice implementation in sample 1 (d= .47 and .55) as well as measures of the supervision process in sample 2. Multiple group CFA supported the configural, metric, and partial scalar invariance of scores on the EBCSS across the two samples.ConclusionsScores on the EBCSS provide a valid basis for inferences regarding the extent to which behavioral health providers experience audit and feedback and active learning as part of their clinical supervision in both clinic- and community-based behavioral health settings.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT04096274 . Registered on 19 September 2019.

Project description:Regional-scale air quality models and observations at routine air quality monitoring sites are used to determine attainment/non-attainment of the ozone air quality standard in the United States. In current regulatory applications, a regional-scale air quality model is applied for a base year and a future year with reduced emissions using the same meteorological conditions as those in the base year. Because of the stochastic nature of the atmosphere, the same meteorological conditions would not prevail in the future year. Therefore, we use multi-decadal observations to develop a new method for estimating the confidence bounds for the future ozone design value (based on the 4th highest value in the daily maximum 8-hr ozone concentration time series, DM8HR) for each emission loading scenario along with the probability of the design value exceeding a given ozone threshold concentration at all monitoring sites in the contiguous United States. To this end, we spectrally decompose the observed DM8HR ozone time series covering the period from 1981 to 2014 using the Kolmogorov-Zurbenko (KZ) filter and examine the variability in the relative strengths of the short-term variations (induced by synoptic-scale weather fluctuations; referred to as synoptic component, SY) and the long-term component (dictated by changes in emissions, seasonality and other slow-changing processes such as climate change; referred to as baseline component, BL). Results indicate that combining the projected change in the ozone baseline level with the adjusted synoptic forcing in historical ozone observations enables us to provide a probabilistic assessment of the efficacy of a selected emissions control strategy in complying with the ozone standard in future years. In addition, attainment demonstration is illustrated with a real-world application of the proposed methodology by using air quality model simulations, thereby helping build confidence in the use of regional-scale air quality models for supporting regulatory policies.