Dataset Information

Specifying and Reporting Implementation Strategies Used in a School-Based Prevention Efficacy Trial

ABSTRACT:

Background:

Implementation strategies used to enhance the implementation of interventions during efficacy and effectiveness studies are rarely reported. Tracking and reporting implementation strategies during these phases has potential to improve future research studies and real-world implementation. We present an exemplar of how this might be executed by specifying and reporting the implementation strategies that were used during a school-based efficacy trial, Project POWER, which tested a trauma-informed prevention program delivered by a university research team, community members, and school staff facilitators in 29 schools.

Methods:

Following the conclusion of the 4-year trial, core Project POWER research team members identified the implementation strategies that supported intervention delivery during the trial using an established taxonomy of school-based implementation strategies. The actors, actions, action targets, temporality, dose, and implementation outcomes were specified using established implementation strategies reporting guidelines.

Results:

The research team identified 37 implementation strategies that were used during the Project POWER trial. Most strategies fell within the categories of Train and Educate Stakeholders, Use Evaluative and Iterative Strategies, and Develop Stakeholder Interrelationships. Actors included members of the research team and partner schools. Strategies were used multiple times during the preparation and implementation phases. Action targets were most often characteristics of individuals, implementation process, and characteristics of the inner setting. Strategies predominantly targeted the implementation outcomes of fidelity, acceptability, feasibility, and adoption.

Conclusions:

This study provided evidence that implementation strategies are used and can be identified in efficacy research using a retrospective approach. Identifying and specifying implementation strategies used during the initial phases of the translational research pipeline can inform the implementation strategies that are carried forward, adapted, or discontinued in future trials and routine practice to improve implementation and effectiveness outcomes. Plain Language Abstract Intervention development and testing often occurs separately from implementation planning. However, evaluating an intervention without considering how it will be subsequently used in real-world settings is a major factor contributing to the research-to-practice gap. During the rigorous testing of interventions, research teams invest significant effort and resources to ensure their program is delivered as intended and so that beneficial outcomes can be assessed. However, the methods or techniques used to support implementation (i.e., implementation strategies) are often not measured or specified to be used and evaluated during later research or included with intervention materials that are distributed to stakeholders; this is a missed opportunity. This study identifies and describes the implementation strategies used during a large school-based research trial of a universal trauma-informed prevention program delivered by a university research team, community members, and school staff. In collaboration with the trial’s research team, we identified 37 implementation strategies that were used during the trial and defined how each strategy was used, including: the actions (i.e., things done), people who carried out the strategies, the targets of the actions, when and how often during the implementation process the strategies were used, and which implementation outcome(s) the strategy was expected to impact. Explicating implementation strategies during early phases of intervention research in schools can inform which implementation supports to carry forward, adapt, or discontinue in future studies and routine practice.

SUBMITTER: Moore S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8577529 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Implementation fidelity describes how well an intervention is implemented in the real-world setting. Assessing implementation fidelity is essential in the understanding of intervention results. In most studies, implementation fidelity is measured insufficiently, though, not taking into account the complexity of the concept nor the intervention. The objective of the present study was to develop an overall quantitative measure of implementation fidelity, to examine the degree of implementation fidelity and the association of implementation and effect of a randomized school-based smoking prevention trial-the X:IT study.A cluster-randomized trial testing is a multi-component intervention to prevent smoking among adolescents in 94 Danish elementary schools (51 intervention, 43 control schools). Participants were grade 7 pupils (mean age 12.5 years). Data was collected by electronic questionnaires among pupils at baseline (n = 4161), the first follow-up (n = 3764), and the second follow-up (n = 3269) and among school coordinators at intervention schools at the first and second follow-up (50 and 39 coordinators).The intervention included three components: (1) smoke-free school grounds, (2) smoke-free curriculum, and (3) parental involvement, contracts, and dialogues. Implementation fidelity was assessed by four domains: adherence, dose, quality of delivery, and participant responsiveness. These were combined into an overall school-wise implementation index. The association of implementation and smoking was examined by logistic regression analyses.One fourth of the schools was characterized as high implementers of the program (all three components) at both first (12 schools, 24.0 %) and second follow-up (11 schools, 28.2 %). Implementation fidelity was strongly associated with smoking at the first and second follow-up, e.g., the odds for smoking at schools with high implementation both years were OR = 0.44 (95 % CI 0.32 to 0.68).Using an overall measure based on several aspects of implementation fidelity, we showed a negative graded association between implementation and smoking. This study suggests that higher degrees of implementation will improve the effect of the X:IT intervention. Studying the association between implementation and effect is extremely important; only by doing so, we can distinguish the quality of the intervention from the success of the implementation.Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN77415416.

Project description:BackgroundThe use of implementation strategies is an active and purposive approach to translate research findings into routine clinical care. The Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) identified and defined discrete implementation strategies, and Proctor and colleagues have made recommendations for specifying operationalization of each strategy. We use empirical data to test how the ERIC taxonomy applies to a large dissemination and implementation initiative aimed at taking cardiac prevention to scale in primary care practice.MethodsEvidenceNOW is an Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality initiative that funded seven cooperatives across seven regions in the USA. Cooperatives implemented multi-component interventions to improve heart health and build quality improvement capacity, and used a range of implementation strategies to foster practice change. We used ERIC to identify cooperatives' implementation strategies and specified the actor, action, target, dose, temporality, justification, and expected outcome for each. We mapped and compiled a matrix of the specified ERIC strategies across the cooperatives, and used consensus to resolve mapping differences. We then grouped implementation strategies by outcomes and justifications, which led to insights regarding the use of and linkages between ERIC strategies in real-world scale-up efforts.ResultsThirty-three ERIC strategies were used by cooperatives. We identified a range of revisions to the ERIC taxonomy to improve the practical application of these strategies. These proposed changes include revisions to four strategy names and 12 definitions. We suggest adding three new strategies because they encapsulate distinct actions that were not described in the existing ERIC taxonomy. In addition, we organized ERIC implementation strategies into four functional groupings based on the way we observed them being applied in practice. These groupings show how ERIC strategies are, out of necessity, interconnected, to achieve the work involved in rapidly taking evidence to scale.ConclusionsFindings of our work suggest revisions to the ERIC implementation strategies to reflect their utilization in real-work dissemination and implementation efforts. The functional groupings of the ERIC implementation strategies that emerged from on-the-ground implementers will help guide others in choosing among and linking multiple implementation strategies when planning small- and large-scale implementation efforts.Trial registrationRegistered as Observational Study at www.clinicaltrials.gov ( NCT02560428 ).

Project description:BackgroundFor approximately one in five children who have social, emotional, and behavioral (SEB) challenges, accessible evidence-based prevention practices (EBPPs) are critical. In the USA, schools are the primary setting for children's SEB service delivery. Still, EBPPs are rarely adopted and implemented by front-line educators (e.g., teachers) with sufficient fidelity to see effects. Given that individual behavior change is ultimately required for successful implementation, focusing on individual-level processes holds promise as a parsimonious approach to enhance impact. Beliefs and Attitudes for Successful Implementation in Schools for Teachers (BASIS-T) is a pragmatic, multifaceted pre-implementation strategy targeting volitional and motivational mechanisms of educators' behavior change to enhance implementation and student SEB outcomes. This study protocol describes a hybrid type 3 effectiveness-implementation trial designed to evaluate the main effects, mediators, and moderators of the BASIS-T implementation strategy as applied to Positive Greetings at the Door, a universal school-based EBPP previously demonstrated to reduce student disruptive behavior and increase academic engagement.MethodsThis project uses a blocked randomized cohort design with an active comparison control (ACC) condition. We will recruit and include approximately 276 teachers from 46 schools randomly assigned to BASIS-T or ACC conditions. Aim 1 will evaluate the main effects of BASIS-T on proximal implementation mechanisms (attitudes, subjective norms, self-efficacy, intentions to implement, and maintenance self-efficacy), implementation outcomes (adoption, reach, fidelity, and sustainment), and child outcomes (SEB, attendance, discipline, achievement). Aim 2 will examine how, for whom, under what conditions, and how efficiently BASIS-T works, specifically by testing whether the effects of BASIS-T on child outcomes are (a) mediated via its putative mechanisms of behavior change, (b) moderated by teacher factors or school contextual factors, and (c) cost-effective.DiscussionThis study will provide a rigorous test of BASIS-T-a pragmatic, theory-driven, and generalizable implementation strategy designed to target theoretically-derived motivational mechanisms-to increase the yield of standard EBPP training and support strategies.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT05989568. Registered on May 30, 2023.

Project description:BackgroundUntil now, there is no clear overview of how fidelity is assessed in school-based obesity prevention programmes. In order to move the field of obesity prevention programmes forward, the current review aimed to 1) identify which fidelity components have been measured in school-based obesity prevention programmes; 2) identify how fidelity components have been measured; and 3) score the quality of these methods.MethodsStudies published between January 2001-October 2017 were selected from searches in PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Cochrane Library and ERIC. We included studies examining the fidelity of obesity prevention programmes (nutrition and/or physical activity and/or sitting) at school (children aged 4-18 year) measuring at least one component of implementation fidelity. A data extraction was performed to identify which and how fidelity components were measured. Thereafter, a quality assessment was performed to score the quality of these methods. We scored each fidelity component on 7 quality criteria. Each fidelity component was rated high (>?75% positive), moderate (50-75%) or low (<?50%).ResultsOf the 26,294 retrieved articles, 73 articles reporting on 63 different studies were included in this review. In 17 studies a process evaluation was based on a theoretical framework. In total, 120 fidelity components were measured across studies: dose was measured most often (N =?50), followed by responsiveness (N =?36), adherence (N =?26) and quality of delivery (N =?8). There was substantial variability in how fidelity components were defined as well as how they were measured. Most common methods were observations, logbooks and questionnaires targeting teachers. The quality assessment scores ranged from 0 to 86%; most fidelity components scored low quality (n =?77).ConclusionsThere is no consensus on the operationalisation of concepts and methods used for assessing fidelity in school-based obesity prevention programmes and the quality of methods used is weak. As a result, we call for more consensus on the concepts and clear reporting on the methods employed for measurements of fidelity to increase the quality of fidelity measurements. Moreover, researchers should focus on the relation between fidelity and programme outcomes and determine to what extent adaptations to programmes have been made, whilst still being effective.

Project description:BackgroundSoil Transmitted Helminths (STH) infect over 1.5 billion people globally and are associated with anemia and stunting, resulting in an annual toll of 1.9 million Disability-Adjusted Life Years (DALYs). School-based deworming (SBD), via mass drug administration (MDA) campaigns with albendazole or mebendazole, has been recommended by the World Health Organization to reduce levels of morbidity due to STH in endemic areas. DeWorm3 is a cluster-randomized trial, conducted in three study sites in Benin, India, and Malawi, designed to assess the feasibility of interrupting STH transmission with community-wide MDA as a potential strategy to replace SBD. This analysis examines data from the DeWorm3 trial to quantify discrepancies between school-level reporting of SBD and gold standard individual-level survey reporting of SBD.Methodology/principal findingsPopulation-weighted averages of school-level SBD calculated at the cluster level were compared to aggregated individual-level SBD estimates to produce a Mean Squared Error (MSE) estimate for each study site. In order to estimate individual-level SBD coverage, these MSE values were applied to SBD estimates from the control arm of the DeWorm3 trial, where only school-level reporting of SBD coverage had been collected. In each study site, SBD coverage in the school-level datasets was substantially higher than that obtained from individual-level datasets, indicating possible overestimation of school-level SBD coverage. When applying observed MSE to project expected coverages in the control arm, SBD coverage dropped from 89.1% to 70.5% (p-value < 0.001) in Benin, from 97.7% to 84.5% (p-value < 0.001) in India, and from 41.5% to 37.5% (p-value < 0.001) in Malawi.Conclusions/significanceThese estimates indicate that school-level SBD reporting is likely to significantly overestimate program coverage. These findings suggest that current SBD coverage estimates derived from school-based program data may substantially overestimate true pediatric deworming coverage within targeted communities.Trial registrationNCT03014167.

Project description:BACKGROUND: Given the increase in overweight and obesity prevalence in adolescents in the last decade, effective prevention strategies for these conditions in adolescents are urgently needed. The PRALIMAP (Promotion de l'ALImentation et de l'Activité Physique) trial aims to evaluate the effectiveness for these conditions of 3 health promotion strategies--educational, screening and environmental--applied singly or in combination in high schools over a 2-year intervention period. METHODS: PRALIMAP is a stratified 2 × 2 × 2 factorial cluster randomised controlled trial including 24 state high schools in Lorraine, northeastern France, in 2 waves: 8 schools in 2006 (wave 1) and 16 in 2007 (wave 2). Students entering the selected high schools in the 4 academic years from 2006 to 2009 are eligible for data collection. Interventional strategies are organized over 2 academic years. The follow-up consists of 3 visits: at the entry of grade 10 (T0), grade 11 (T1) and grade 12 (T2). At T0, 5,458 (85.7%) adolescents participated. The educational strategy consists of nutritional lessons, working groups and a final party. The screening strategy consists in detecting overweight/obesity and eating disorders in adolescents and proposing, if necessary, an adapted care management program of 7 group educational sessions. The environmental strategy consists in improving dietary and physical activity offerings in high schools and facilities, especially catering. The main outcomes are body size evolution over time, nutritional behaviour and knowledge, health and quality of life. An evaluation process documents how each intervention strategy is implemented in the schools and estimates the dose of the intervention, allowing for a per protocol analysis after the main intention-to-treat analysis. DISCUSSION: PRALIMAP aims at improving the prevention and management of overweight and obesity in adolescents by translating current evidence into public health practice. Particular attention is paid to clustering, multiple factorials and long-term duration to address common pitfalls in health promotion trials. The results should inform how best to implement, in a school environment, effective nutrition prevention programs targeting adolescents who are at a point their lives when they develop responsibilities and empowerment for health attitude behaviours. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov under NCT00814554.