Essential interventions: implementation strategies and proposed packages of care.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Lassi ZS
PROVIDER: S-EPMC4145859 | biostudies-other | 2014
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other
Publications
Essential interventions: implementation strategies and proposed packages of care.
Lassi Zohra S ZS Kumar Rohail R Mansoor Tarab T Salam Rehana A RA Das Jai K JK Bhutta Zulfiqar A ZA
Reproductive health 20140821
In an effort to accelerate progress towards achieving Millennium Development Goal (MDG) 4 and 5, provision of essential reproductive, maternal, newborn and child health (RMNCH) interventions is being considered. Not only should a state-of-the-art approach be taken for services delivered to the mother, neonate and to the child, but services must also be deployed across the household to hospital continuum of care approach and in the form of packages. The paper proposed several packages for improve ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:The notion of preconception care aims to target the existing risks before pregnancy, whereby resources may be used to improve reproductive health and optimize knowledge before conceiving. The preconception period provides an opportunity to intervene earlier to optimize the health of potential mothers (and fathers) and to prevent harmful exposures from affecting the developing fetus. These interventions include birth spacing and preventing teenage pregnancy, promotion of contraceptive use, optimization of weight and micronutrient status, prevention and management of infectious diseases, and screening for and managing chronic conditions. Given existing interventions and the need to organize services to optimize delivery of care in a logical and effective manner, interventions are frequently co-packaged or bundled together. This paper highlights packages of preconception interventions that can be combined and co-delivered to women through various delivery channels and provides a logical framework for development of such packages in varying contexts.
| S-EPMC4196568 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Neonatal mortality remains a significant health problem in low-income settings. Low-cost essential newborn care (ENC) interventions with proven efficacy and cost-effectiveness exist but have not reached high coverage (≥90%). Little is known about the strategies used to implement these interventions or how they relate to improved coverage. We conducted a systematic review of implementation strategies and implementation outcomes for ENC in low- and low middle-income countries capturing evidence from five medical and global health databases from 1990 to 2018. We included studies of implementation of delayed cord clamping, immediate drying, skin-to-skin contact (SSC) and/or early initiation of breastfeeding implemented in the first hour (facility-based studies) or the 1st day (community-based studies) of life. Implementation strategies and outcomes were categorized according to published frameworks: Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change and Outcomes for Implementation Research. The relationship between implementation strategies and outcomes was evaluated using standardized mean differences and correlation coefficients. Forty-three papers met inclusion criteria. Interventions included community-based care/health promotion and facility-based support and health care provider training. Included studies used 3-31 implementation strategies, though the consistency with which strategies were applied was variable. Conduct educational meetings was the most frequently used strategy. Included studies reported 1-4 implementation outcomes with coverage reported most frequently. Heterogeneity was high and no statistically significant association was found between the number of implementation strategies used and coverage of ENC. This review highlights several challenges in learning from implementation of ENC in low- and low middle-income countries, particularly poor description of interventions and implementation outcomes. We recommend use of UK Medical Research Council guidelines (2015) for process evaluations and checklists for reporting implementation studies. Improved reporting of implementation research in this setting is necessary to learn how to improve service delivery and outcomes and thereby reduce neonatal mortality.
| S-EPMC7646733 | biostudies-literature
Project description:U.S. health care systems are tasked with alleviating the burden of mental health, but are frequently underprepared and lack workforce and resource capacity to deliver services to all in need. Digital mental health interventions (DMHIs) can increase access to evidence-based mental health care. However, DMHIs commonly do not fit into the day-to-day activities of the people who engage with them, resulting in a research-to-practice gap for DMHI implementation. For health care settings, differences between digital and traditional mental health services make alignment and integration challenging. Specialized attention is needed to improve the implementation of DMHIs in health care settings so that these services yield high uptake, engagement, and sustainment. The purpose of this article is to enhance efforts to integrate DMHIs in health care settings by proposing implementation strategies, selected and operationalized based on the discrete strategies established in the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change project, that align to DMHI-specific barriers in these settings. Guidance is offered in how these strategies can be applied to DMHI implementation across four phases commonly distinguished in implementation science using the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, Sustainment Framework. Next steps to advance research in this area and improve the research-to-practice gap for implementing DMHIs are recommended. Applying implementation strategies to DMHI implementation will enable psychologists to systematically evaluate this process, which can yield an enhanced understanding of the factors that facilitate implementation success and improve the translation of DMHIs from controlled trials to real-world settings. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).
| S-EPMC7709140 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe number of older people dying in long-term care facilities is increasing; however, care at the end of life can be suboptimal. Interventions to improve palliative care delivery within these settings have been shown to be effective in improving care, but little is known about their implementation.AimThe aim of this study was to describe the nature of implementation strategies and to identify facilitators and/or barriers to implementing palliative care interventions in long-term care facilities.DesignScoping review with a thematic synthesis, following the ENTREQ guidelines.Data sourcesPublished literature was identified from electronic databases, including MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO and CINAHL. Controlled, non-controlled and qualitative studies and evaluations of interventions to improve palliative care in long-term care facilities were included. Studies that met the inclusion criteria were sourced and data extracted on the study characteristics, the implementation of the intervention, and facilitators and/or barriers to implementation.ResultsThe review identified 8902 abstracts, from which 61 studies were included in the review. A matrix of implementation was developed with four implementation strategies (facilitation, education/training, internal engagement and external engagement) and three implementation stages (conditions to introduce the intervention, embedding the intervention within day-to-day practice and sustaining ongoing change).ConclusionIncorporating an implementation strategy into the development and delivery of an intervention is integral in embedding change in practice. The review has shown that the four implementation strategies identified varied considerably across interventions; however, similar facilitators and barriers were encountered across the studies identified. Further research is needed to understand the extent to which different implementation strategies can facilitate the uptake of palliative care interventions in long-term care facilities.
| S-EPMC7222696 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background Heterogeneity amongst palliative care interventions in the intensive care unit (ICU) and their outcomes has meant that, even when found to be effective, translation of evidence into practice is hindered. Previous evidence reviews have suggested that the field of ICU-based palliative care would benefit from well-designed, targeted interventions, with explicit knowledge translation research demonstrating valid implementation strategies. Reviewing effectiveness studies alongside process evaluations for these interventions will give insight into the implementation barriers or constraints identified, and the implementation strategies adopted. Methods A systematic review to identify and synthesise knowledge on how models of integrating palliative care into the ICU have been implemented and provide critical recommendations for successful future development and implementation of complex interventions in the field. The search will be carried out using MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane, CINAHL, and PsycINFO. The search strategy will combine terms related to palliative care, intensive care, and implementation. Only full-text articles will be considered and conference abstracts excluded. There will be no date or language restrictions. The Implementation Research Logic Model will be used as a framework for synthesis. Findings will be reported following the Preferred Reporting Items of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Discussion This review will provide understanding of implementation facilitators, barriers, and strategies, when employing palliative care interventions within the ICU. This will provide valuable recommendations for successful future development of complex interventions using implementation frameworks or theories. This can increase the potential for sustained change in practice, reduce heterogeneity in interventions, and therefore help produce measurable and comparable outcomes. Systematic review registration International Prospective Register of Systematic reviews PROSPERO (CRD42022311052) Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13643-022-02054-8.
| S-EPMC9438136 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionFalls are common among older people in long-term care facilities (LCFs). Falls lead to significant morbidity, mortality and reduced quality of life among residents. Fall prevention interventions have been shown to reduce falls in LCFs. However, this may not always translate to effectiveness in real-world situations. We will conduct a systematic review (SR) to identify the implementation strategies used in fall prevention interventions in LCF, describing the effectiveness of strategies in terms of key implementation outcomes and fall reduction.Methods and analysisThe search will include scientific papers in electronic databases, including PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, PsycINFO, Scopus and Web of Science, and published theses. The SR will consider all original research that empirically evaluated or tested implementation strategies to support fall prevention interventions in LCF, published in English or Arabic between 1 January 2001 and 31 December 2021, where data are presented on the implementation strategy (eg, audit and feedback, champions) and/or implementation outcome (eg, fidelity). Clinical trials, quasi-experimental studies and quality improvement studies will be eligible for inclusion. Two researchers will complete abstract screening, data abstraction and quality assessments independently. The screening process will be presented using a Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses flow diagram. Data will be extracted into a standardised table, including the country, year, authors, type of study, primary clinical outcome (falls rate and/or risk reduction as available), implementation strategy and implementation outcomes. Implementation strategies will be defined and categorised using the Expert Recommendation for Implementing Change Taxonomy. Implementation outcomes will be defined and categorised using the Implementation Outcomes Taxonomy, and clinical outcomes of the intervention effectiveness for falls preventions will be reported as formulated in each study, with a final narrative synthesis of data.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval is not required for this study, and the results will be disseminated via peer-reviewed journals and presented at international conferences.Prospero registration numberCRD42021239604.
| S-EPMC9150148 | biostudies-literature
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 ).
| S-EPMC6429753 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionChronic kidney disease (CKD) is widely prevalent, associated with morbidity and mortality, but may be lessened with timely implementation of evidence-based strategies including blood pressure (BP) control. Nonetheless, an evidence-practice gap persists. We synthesize the evidence for clinician-facing interventions to improve hypertension management in CKD patients in primary care.MethodsElectronic databases and related publications were queried for relevant studies. We used a conceptual model to address heterogeneity of interventions. We conducted a quantitative synthesis of interventions on blood pressure (BP) outcomes and a narrative synthesis of other CKD relevant clinical outcomes. Planned subgroup analyses were performed by (1) study design (randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or nonrandomized studies (NRS)); (2) intervention type (guideline-concordant decision support, shared care, pharmacist-facing); and (3) use of behavioral/implementation theory.ResultsOf 2704 manuscripts screened, 73 underwent full-text review; 22 met inclusion criteria. BP target achievement was reported in 15 and systolic BP reduction in 6 studies. Among RCTs, all interventions had a significant effect on BP control, (pooled OR 1.21; 95% CI 1.07 to 1.38). Subgroup analysis by intervention type showed significant effects for guideline-concordant decision support (pooled OR 1.19; 95% CI 1.12 to 1.27) but not shared care (pooled OR 1.71; 95% CI 0.96 to 3.03) or pharmacist-facing interventions (pooled OR 1.04; 95% CI 0.82 to 1.34). Subgroup analysis finding was replicated with pooling of RCTs and NRS. The five contributing studies showed large and significant reduction in systolic BP (pooled WMD - 3.86; 95% CI - 7.2 to - 0.55). Use of a behavioral/implementation theory had no impact, while RCTs showed smaller effect sizes than NRS.DiscussionProcess-oriented implementation strategies used with guideline-concordant decision support was a promising implementation approach. Better reporting guidelines on implementation would enable more useful synthesis of the efficacy of CKD clinical interventions integrated into primary care.Prospero registration numberCRD42018102441.
| S-EPMC7652970 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundHospitals affiliated with Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs) may have a greater capacity to collaborate with providers across the care continuum to coordinate care, due to formal risk sharing and payment arrangements. However, little is known about the extent to which ACO affiliated hospitals implement care coordination strategies.ObjectivesTo compare the implementation of care coordination strategies between ACO affiliated hospitals (n=269) and unaffiliated hospitals (n=502) and examine whether the implementation of care coordination strategies varies by hospital payment model types.MeasuresWe constructed a care coordination index (CCI) comprised of 12 indicators that describe evidence-based care coordination strategies. Each indicator was scored on a 5-point Likert scale from 1="not used at all" to 5="used widely" by qualified representatives from each hospital. The CCI aggregates scores from each of the 12 individual indicators to a single summary score for each hospital, with a score of 12 corresponding to the lowest and 60 the highest use of care coordination strategies.Research designWe used state-fixed effects multivariable linear regression models to estimate the relationship between ACO affiliation, payment model type, and the use care coordination strategies.ResultsWe found ACO affiliated hospitals reported greater use of care coordination strategies compared to unaffiliated hospitals. Fee-for-service shared savings and partial or global capitation payment models were associated with a greater use of care coordination strategies among ACO affiliated hospitals.ConclusionOur findings suggest ACO affiliation and multiple payment model types are associated with the increased use of care coordination strategies.
| S-EPMC6417934 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate the effectiveness of feedback reports and feedback reports + external facilitation on completion of life-sustaining treatment (LST) note the template and durable medical orders. This quality improvement program supported the national roll-out of the Veterans Health Administration (VA) LST Decisions Initiative (LSTDI), which aims to ensure that seriously-ill veterans have care goals and LST decisions elicited and documented.Data sourcesPrimary data from national databases for VA nursing homes (called Community Living Centers [CLCs]) from 2018 to 2020.Study designIn one project, we distributed monthly feedback reports summarizing LST template completion rates to 12 sites as the sole implementation strategy. In the second involving five sites, we distributed similar feedback reports and provided robust external facilitation, which included coaching, education, and learning collaboratives. For each project, principal component analyses matched intervention to comparison sites, and interrupted time series/segmented regression analyses evaluated the differences in LSTDI template completion rates between intervention and comparison sites.Data collection methodsData were extracted from national databases in addition to interviews and surveys in a mixed-methods process evaluation.Principal findingsLSTDI template completion rose from 0% to about 80% throughout the study period in both projects' intervention and comparison CLCs. There were small but statistically significant differences for feedback reports alone (comparison sites performed better, coefficient estimate 3.48, standard error 0.99 for the difference between groups in change in trend) and feedback reports + external facilitation (intervention sites performed better, coefficient estimate -2.38, standard error 0.72).ConclusionsFeedback reports + external facilitation was associated with a small but statistically significant improvement in outcomes compared with comparison sites. The large increases in completion rates are likely due to the well-planned national roll-out of the LSTDI. This finding suggests that when dissemination and support for widespread implementation are present and system-mandated, significant enhancements in the adoption of evidence-based practices may require more intensive support.
| S-EPMC9264454 | biostudies-literature