Acoustic-based rule out of stable coronary artery disease: the FILTER-SCAD trial.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Overtesting of low-risk patients with suspect chronic coronary syndrome (CCS) is widespread. The acoustic-based coronary artery disease (CAD) score has superior rule-out capabilities when added to pre-test probability (PTP). FILTER-SCAD tested whether providing a CAD score and PTP to cardiologists was superior to PTP alone in limiting testing. METHODS: At six Danish and Swedish outpatient clinics, patients with suspected new-onset CCS were randomised to either standard diagnostic examination (SDE) with PTP, or SDE plus CAD score, and cardiologists provided with corresponding recommended diagnostic flowcharts. The primary endpoint was cumulative number of diagnostic tests at one year and key safety endpoint major adverse cardiac events (MACE). RESULTS: In total 2008 patients (46% male, median age 63 years) were randomised from October 2019 to September 2022. When randomised to CAD score (n=1002), it was successfully measured in 94.5%. Overall, 13.5% had PTP ≤5%, and 39.5% had CAD score ≤20. Testing was deferred in 22% with no differences in diagnostic tests between groups (p for superiority =0.56). In the PTP ≤5% subgroup, the proportion with deferred testing increased from 28% to 52% (p<0.001). Overall MACE was 2.4 per 100 person-years. Non-inferiority regarding safety was established, absolute risk difference 0.4% (95% CI -1.85 to 1.06) (p for non-inferiority = 0.005). No differences were seen in angina-related health status or quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: The implementation strategy of providing cardiologists with a CAD score alongside SDE did not reduce testing overall but indicated a possible role in patients with low CCS likelihood. Further strategies are warranted to address resistance to modifying diagnostic pathways in this patient population.

Applying the Cognitive Walkthrough for Implementation Strategies Methodology to Inform the Redesign of a Selection-Quality Implementation Toolkit for Use in Schools.

Background: Implementation strategies are key to enhancing translation of new innovations but there is a need to systematically design and tailor strategies to match the targeted implementation context and address determinants. There are increasing methods to inform the redesign and tailoring of implementation strategies to maximize their usability, feasibility, and appropriateness in new settings such as the Cognitive Walkthrough for Implementation Strategies (CWIS) approach. The aim of the current project is to apply the CWIS approach to inform the redesign of a multifaceted selection-quality implementation toolkit entitled ACT SMARTS for use in middle and high schools. Methods: We systematically applied CWIS as the second part of a community-partnered iterative redesign of ACT SMARTS for schools to evaluate the usability and inform further toolkit redesign areas. We conducted three CWIS user testing sessions with key end users of school district administrators, school principals, and educators. Results: Our CWIS application revealed that end users found ACT SMARTS acceptable and relevant but anticipate usability issues engaging in the ACT SMARTS process. Results informed the identification of eleven usability issues and corresponding redesign solutions to enhance the usability of ACT SMARTS for use in middle and high schools. Conclusions: Results indicated the utility of CWIS in assessing implementation strategy usability in service of informing strategy tailoring and redesign to improve alignment with user and setting needs. Recommendations regarding the use of this participatory approach are discussed.

Relationship among group learning, individuals' and groups' internalization of evidence-based practice, and nurses' sustainment of the practice: a cross-sectional study.

PURPOSE: This study, by applying the feedback process of the organizational learning model, examined the relationships among group learning, individuals' and groups' internalization of institutionalized evidence-based practice (I-EBP), and nurses' sustainment of I-EBP. DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: Twelve hospitals were included in this cross-sectional study, with 1,741 nurses from 59 wards. Anonymous questionnaires were administered from October to December 2021. Participants self-reported their wards' group learning, internalization of I-EBP, sustainment of I-EBP, EBP beliefs, intra-hospital transfers, and nursing research experiences. The number of nurses and I-EBP introduction length and type of I-EBP were assessed. Internalization of I-EBP of nurses and groups was considered the mediating variable, while group learning and nurses' sustainment of I-EBP were the independent and dependent variables, respectively. Significant variables in bivariate analyses were used as control variables. Multi-level Mediation Analysis and a significance test of indirect effect using the bootstrap method were conducted. FINDINGS: Responses from 360 nurses in 48 wards from 12 hospitals were analyzed. Groups' internalization of I-EBP significantly mediated the relationship between group learning and nurses' sustainment of I-EBP. In contrast, no significant mediating effect of nurses' internalization of I-EBP was observed. ORIGINALITY/VALUE: In the feedback process of organizational learning, group learning and its subsequent effects on individuals and groups have not been previously examined. Regardless of the nurses' degree of internalization of I-EBP, those who belong to the ward with a high degree of internalization of I-EBP are more likely to sustain it. Conducting group learning may prevent superficial practice, resulting in its sustainability.

Benchmarking for healthy food stores: protocol for a randomised controlled trial with remote Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities in Australia to enhance adoption of health-enabling store policy and practice.

BACKGROUND: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities in remote Australia have initiated bold policies for health-enabling stores. Benchmarking, a data-driven and facilitated 'audit and feedback' with action planning process, provides a potential strategy to strengthen and scale health-enabling best-practice adoption by remote community store directors/owners. We aim to co-design a benchmarking model with five partner organisations and test its effectiveness with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander community stores in remote Australia. METHODS: Study design is a pragmatic randomised controlled trial with consenting eligible stores (located in very remote Northern Territory (NT) of Australia, primary grocery store for an Aboriginal community, and serviced by a Nutrition Practitioner with a study partner organisation). The Benchmarking model is informed by research evidence, purpose-built best-practice audit and feedback tools, and co-designed with partner organisation and community representatives. The intervention comprises two full benchmarking cycles (one per year, 2022/23 and 2023/24) of assessment, feedback, action planning and action implementation. Assessment of stores includes i adoption status of 21 evidence-and industry-informed health-enabling policies for remote stores, ii implementation of health-enabling best-practice using a purpose-built Store Scout App, iii price of a standardised healthy diet using the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Healthy Diets ASAP protocol; and, iv healthiness of food purchasing using sales data indicators. Partner organisations feedback reports and co-design action plans with stores. Control stores receive assessments and continue with usual retail practice. All stores provide weekly electronic sales data to assess the primary outcome, change in free sugars (g) to energy (MJ) from all food and drinks purchased, baseline (July-December 2021) vs July-December 2023. DISCUSSION: We hypothesise that the benchmarking intervention can improve the adoption of health-enabling store policy and practice and reduce sales of unhealthy foods and drinks in remote community stores of Australia. This innovative research with remote Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities can inform effective implementation strategies for healthy food retail more broadly. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ACTRN12622000596707, Protocol version 1.

A systematic review of experimentally tested implementation strategies across health and human service settings: evidence from 2010-2022.

BACKGROUND: Studies of implementation strategies range in rigor, design, and evaluated outcomes, presenting interpretation challenges for practitioners and researchers. This systematic review aimed to describe the body of research evidence testing implementation strategies across diverse settings and domains, using the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) taxonomy to classify strategies and the Reach Effectiveness Adoption Implementation and Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework to classify outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of studies examining implementation strategies from 2010-2022 and registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021235592). We searched databases using terms "implementation strategy", "intervention", "bundle", "support", and their variants. We also solicited study recommendations from implementation science experts and mined existing systematic reviews. We included studies that quantitatively assessed the impact of at least one implementation strategy to improve health or health care using an outcome that could be mapped to the five evaluation dimensions of RE-AIM. Only studies meeting prespecified methodologic standards were included. We described the characteristics of studies and frequency of implementation strategy use across study arms. We also examined common strategy pairings and cooccurrence with significant outcomes. FINDINGS: Our search resulted in 16,605 studies; 129 met inclusion criteria. Studies tested an average of 6.73 strategies (0-20 range). The most assessed outcomes were Effectiveness (n=82; 64%) and Implementation (n=73; 56%). The implementation strategies most frequently occurring in the experimental arm were Distribute Educational Materials (n=99), Conduct Educational Meetings (n=96), Audit and Provide Feedback (n=76), and External Facilitation (n=59). These strategies were often used in combination. Nineteen implementation strategies were frequently tested and associated with significantly improved outcomes. However, many strategies were not tested sufficiently to draw conclusions. CONCLUSION: This review of 129 methodologically rigorous studies built upon prior implementation science data syntheses to identify implementation strategies that had been experimentally tested and summarized their impact on outcomes across diverse outcomes and clinical settings. We present recommendations for improving future similar efforts.

Randomized trial of the leadership and organizational change for implementation (LOCI) strategy in substance use treatment clinics.

INTRODUCTION: Evidence-based practice (EBP) implementation represents a strategic change that requires alignment of leadership and support throughout organizations. Leadership and Organizational Change for Implementation (LOCI) is a multifaceted implementation strategy that aims to improve implementation leadership and climate within organizations through iterative cycles of leadership and climate assessment and feedback, leadership training and coaching, and strategic planning with upper-level leaders. This study tested the effects of LOCI on transformational and implementation leadership, implementation climate, implementation citizenship behavior, and EBP reach. METHODS: A multiple cohort, cluster randomized trial tests the effect of LOCI in 60 clinics across nine behavioral health organizations in California and Arizona, USA. The study randomized clinics within organizations to either LOCI or a leadership training webinar control condition in three consecutive cohorts. Repeated web-based surveys of direct service providers (nLOCI = 201, nControl = 179) assessed leadership, implementation climate, and implementation citizenship over time. Multilevel autoregressive modeling was the primary statistical analysis such that providers (level-1) were nested within clinics (level-2). The study predicted between-condition differences at 4-, 8-, and 12-month follow-up assessments. Provider engagement in a fidelity monitoring process assessed reach of motivational interviewing (i.e., number of sessions recorded/submitted for fidelity coding). An independent sample t-test explored between condition differences in motivational interviewing reach. RESULTS: Results indicated between condition differences at 4 months for implementation leadership, implementation climate, and implementation citizenship behavior such that greater improvements were evidenced in the LOCI condition compared to the control condition. Reach of MI was significantly greater in the LOCI vs control condition such that LOCI providers were significantly more likely to engage in the fidelity monitoring process (chi-square (1, n = 370) = 5.59, p = .018). CONCLUSIONS: LOCI was developed based on organizational theories of strategic leadership and climate to affect organizational change processes that communicate that innovation implementation is expected, supported, and recognized as a value of the organization. The LOCI implementation strategy resulted in more positive hypothesized outcomes compared to the control condition. Organizational change strategies have utility for implementing health innovations in complex, multilevel contexts and for greater sustainment of facilitative leader behaviors, strategic implementation climate, and improved implementation outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study is registered with Clinicaltrials.gov gov (NCT03042832, 2 February 2017; retrospectively registered).

Getting to Fidelity: Consensus Development Process to Identify Core Activities of Implementation Facilitation.

Transferring successful implementation strategies from research to practice requires approaches for assessing fidelity to the strategy's core components. Implementation facilitation (IF) is a strategy involving an interactive process of problem-solving, enabling, and supporting individuals in efforts to implement clinical innovations that occurs in the context of a recognized need for improvement and supportive interpersonal relationships. Because IF is a dynamic strategy involving numerous activities, our objective was to conduct a rigorous consensus development process to identify core activities for monitoring fidelity to IF when applied in clinical settings. We first conducted a scoping literature review to identify the range of activities used when IF has been applied in clinical settings, searching multiple citation databases for English-language articles including "facilitation" or other commonly-used terms for the strategy published from 1996-2015. Through multi-stage screening, 135 articles (from 94 studies) were identified for data extraction on IF activities, frequency with which IF activities were identified as 'core' by study authors, and study outcomes. From the literature review, we identified 32 distinct IF activities and developed definitions/examples for each. Next, we conducted a 3-stage, modified-Delphi expert panel consensus development process to identify core IF activities across three implementation phases (i.e., Pre-Implementation, Implementation, Sustainment). The expert panel identified 8 core activities for the Pre-Implementation Phase, 8 core activities for the Implementation Phase, and 4 core activities for the Sustainment Phase. This work provides an important foundation for developing measures/tools to assess use of core IF activities to ensure the strategy is delivered with fidelity.

Getting cozy with causality: Advances to the causal pathway diagramming method to enhance implementation precision.

Background: Implementation strategies are theorized to work well when carefully matched to implementation determinants and when factors-preconditions, moderators, etc.-that influence strategy effectiveness are prospectively identified and addressed. Existing methods for strategy selection are either imprecise or require significant technical expertise and resources, undermining their utility. This article outlines refinements to causal pathway diagrams (CPDs), a method for articulating the causal process through which implementation strategies work and offers illustrations of their use. Method: CPDs are a visualization tool to represent an implementation strategy, its mechanism(s) (i.e., the processes through which a strategy is thought to operate), determinants it is intended to address, factors that may impede or facilitate its effectiveness, and the series of outcomes that should be expected if the strategy is operating as intended. We offer principles for constructing CPDs and describe their key functions. Results: Applications of the CPD method by study teams from two National Institute of Health-funded Implementation Science Centers and a research grant are presented. These include the use of CPDs to (a) match implementation strategies to determinants, (b) understand the conditions under which an implementation strategy works, and (c) develop causal theories of implementation strategies. Conclusions: CPDs offer a novel method for implementers to select, understand, and improve the effectiveness of implementation strategies. They make explicit theoretical assumptions about strategy operation while supporting practical planning. Early applications have led to method refinements and guidance for the field.

Advances to the Causal Pathway Diagramming Method to Enhance Implementation Precision Plain Language Summary Implementation strategies often fail to produce meaningful improvements in the outcomes we hope to impact. Better tools for choosing, designing, and evaluating implementation strategies may improve their performance. We developed a tool, causal pathway diagrams (CPD), to visualize and describe how implementation strategies are expected to work. In this article, we describe refinements to the CPD tool and accompanying approach. We use real illustrations to show how CPDs can be used to improve how to match strategies to barriers, understand the conditions in which those strategies work best, and develop generalizable theories describing how implementation strategies work. CPDs can serve as both a practical and scientific tool to improve the planning, deployment, and evaluation of implementation strategies. We demonstrate the range of ways that CPDs are being used, from a highly practical tool to improve implementation practice to a scientific approach to advance testing and theorizing about implementation strategies.

Application of the FRAME-IS to a multifaceted implementation strategy.

BACKGROUND: Research demonstrates the importance of documenting adaptations to implementation strategies that support integration of evidence-based interventions into practice. While studies have utilized the FRAME-IS [Framework for Reporting Adaptations and Modifications for Implementation Strategies] to collect structured adaptation data, they are limited by a focus on discrete implementation strategies (e.g., training), which do not reflect the complexity of multifaceted strategies like practice facilitation. In this paper, we apply the FRAME-IS to our trial evaluating the effectiveness of PF on implementation fidelity of an evidence-based technology-facilitated team care model for improved hypertension control within a federally qualified health center (FQHC). METHODS: Three data sources are used to document adaptations: (1) implementation committee meeting minutes, (2) narrative reports completed by practice facilitators, and (3) structured notes captured on root cause analysis and Plan-Do-Study-Act worksheets. Text was extracted from the data sources according to the FRAME-IS modules and inputted into a master matrix for content analysis by two authors; a third author conducted member checking and code validation. RESULTS: We modified the FRAME-IS to include part 2 of module 2 (what is modified) to add greater detail of the modified strategy, and a numbering system to track adaptations across the modules. This resulted in identification of 27 adaptations, of which 88.9% focused on supporting practices in identifying eligible patients and referring them to the intervention. About half (52.9%) of the adaptations were made to modify the context of the PF strategy to include a group-based format, add community health workers to the strategy, and to shift the implementation target to nurses. The adaptations were often widespread (83.9%), affecting all practices within the FQHC. While most adaptations were reactive (84.6%), they resulted from a systematic process of reviewing data captured by multiple sources. All adaptations included the FQHC in the decision-making process. CONCLUSION: With modifications, we demonstrate the ability to document our adaptation data across the FRAME-IS modules, attesting to its applicability and value for a range of implementation strategies. Based on our experiences, we recommend refinement of tracking systems to support more nimble and practical documentation of iterative, ongoing, and multifaceted adaptations. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT03713515, Registration date: October 19, 2018.

Technical Assistance for Systemic Change: Lessons Learned From a National Technical Assistance Center.

Despite the millions of dollars awarded annually by the United States Department of Education to build implementation capacity through technical assistance (TA), data on TA effectiveness are severely lacking. Foundational to the operationalization and consistent research on TA effectiveness is the development and use of standardized TA core competencies, practices, and structures. Despite advances toward a consistent definition of TA, a gap still exists in understanding how these competencies are used within an operationalized set of TA practices to produce targeted outcomes at both individual and organizational levels to facilitate implementation of evidence-based practices. The current article describes key insights derived from the evaluation of an operationalized set of TA practices used by a nationally funded TA center, the State Implementation & Scaling Up of Evidence Based Practices (SISEP) Center. The TA provided by the Center supports the uptake of evidence-based practices in K-12 education for students with disabilities. Lessons learned include: (1) the need to understand the complexities and dependencies of operationalizing TA both longitudinally and at multiple levels of the system (state, regional, local); (2) the relative importance of building general and innovation-specific capacity for implementation success; (3) the value of using a co-design and participatory approach for effective TA delivery; (4) the need to develop TA providers' educational and implementation fluency across areas and levels of the system receiving TA; and (5) the need to ensure coordination and alignment of TA providers from different centers. Gaining an understanding into optimal TA practices will not only provide clarity of definition fundamental to TA research, but it will also inform the conceptual framing and practice of TA.

Implementation of Food is Medicine Programs in Healthcare Settings: A Narrative Review.

Food is Medicine (FIM) programs to improve the accessibility of fruits and vegetables (FVs) or other healthy foods among patients with low income and diet-related chronic diseases are promising to improve food and nutrition security in the United States (US). However, FIM programs are relatively new and implementation guidance for healthcare settings using an implementation science lens is lacking. We used a narrative review to describe the evidence base on barriers and facilitators to FIM program integration in US healthcare settings following the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, and Sustainment (EPIS) Framework. Evidence surrounding the EPIS Inner Context was a focus, including constructs Leadership, Organizational Characteristics, Quality and Fidelity Monitoring and Support, Organizational Staffing Processes, and Individual Characteristics. Peer-reviewed and grey literature about barriers and facilitators to FIM programs were of interest, defined as programs that screen and refer eligible patients with diet-related chronic disease experiencing food insecurity to healthy, unprepared foods. Thirty-one sources were included in the narrative review, including 22 peer-reviewed articles, four reports, four toolkits, and one thesis. Twenty-eight sources (90%) described EPIS Inner Context facilitators and 26 sources (84%) described FIM program barriers. The most common barriers and facilitators to FIM programs were regarding Quality and Fidelity Monitoring and Support (e.g., use of electronic medical records for tracking and evaluation, strategies to support implementation) and Organizational Staffing Processes (e.g., clear delineation of staff roles and capacity); although, barriers and facilitators to FIM programs were identified among all EPIS Inner Context constructs. We synthesized barriers and facilitators to create an EPIS-informed implementation checklist for healthcare settings for use among healthcare organizations/providers, partner organizations, and technical assistance personnel. We discuss future directions to align FIM efforts with implementation science terminology and theories, models, and frameworks to improve the implementation evidence base and support FIM researchers and practitioners.

An "Inclisiran First" Strategy vs Usual Care in Patients With Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease.

BACKGROUND: Most patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease fail to achieve guideline-directed low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) goals. Twice-yearly inclisiran lowers LDL-C by ∼50% when added to statins. OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated the effectiveness of an "inclisiran first" implementation strategy (adding inclisiran immediately upon failure to reach LDL-C <70 mg/dL despite receiving maximally tolerated statins) vs representative usual care in U.S. patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. METHODS: VICTORION-INITIATE, a prospective, pragmatically designed trial, randomized patients 1:1 to inclisiran (284 mg at days 0, 90, and 270) plus usual care (lipid management at treating physician's discretion) vs usual care alone. Primary endpoints were percentage change in LDL-C from baseline and statin discontinuation rates. RESULTS: We randomized 450 patients (30.9% women, 12.4% Black, 15.3% Hispanic); mean baseline LDL-C was 97.4 mg/dL. The "inclisiran first" strategy led to significantly greater reductions in LDL-C from baseline to day 330 vs usual care (60.0% vs 7.0%; P < 0.001). Statin discontinuation rates with "inclisiran first" (6.0%) were noninferior vs usual care (16.7%). More "inclisiran first" patients achieved LDL-C goals vs usual care (<70 mg/dL: 81.8% vs 22.2%; <55 mg/dL: 71.6% vs 8.9%; P < 0.001). Treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE) and serious TEAE rates compared similarly between treatment strategies (62.8% vs 53.7% and 11.5% vs 13.4%, respectively). Injection-site TEAEs and TEAEs causing treatment withdrawal occurred more commonly with "inclisiran first" than usual care (10.3% vs 0.0% and 2.6% vs 0.0%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: An "inclisiran first" implementation strategy led to greater LDL-C lowering compared with usual care without discouraging statin use or raising new safety concerns. (A Randomized, Multicenter, Open-label Trial Comparing the Effectiveness of an "Inclisiran First" Implementation Strategy to Usual Care on LDL Cholesterol [LDL-C] in Patients With Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease and Elevated LDL-C [≥70 mg/dL] Despite Receiving Maximally Tolerated Statin Therapy [VICTORION-INITIATE]; NCT04929249).

Strategies to improve the implementation and effectiveness of community-based psychosocial support interventions for displaced, migrant and host community women in Latin America.

As evidence supporting the effectiveness of mental health and psychosocial interventions grows, more research is needed to understand optimal strategies for improving their implementation in diverse contexts. We conducted a qualitative process evaluation of a multicomponent psychosocial intervention intended to promote well-being among refugee, migrant and host community women in three diverse contexts in Ecuador and Panamá. The objective of this study is to describe the relationships among implementation determinants, strategies and outcomes of this community-based psychosocial intervention. The five implementation strategies used in this study included stakeholder engagement, promoting intervention adaptability, group and community-based delivery format, task sharing and providing incentives. We identified 10 adaptations to the intervention and its implementation, most of which were made during pre-implementation. Participants (n = 77) and facilitators (n = 30) who completed qualitative interviews reported that these strategies largely improved the implementation of the intervention across key outcomes and aligned with the study's intervention and implementation theory of change models. Participants and facilitators also proposed additional strategies for improving reach, implementation and maintenance of this community-based psychosocial intervention.

Innovation in hospital pharmacy: Modeling the installation of automated dispensing systems based on an oncology hospital experience transfer.

OBJECTIVE: This study explores automated dispensing systems (ADS) implementation in hospitals, focusing on experience transfer between the National Institute of Oncology of Rabat (NIO) and the specialties hospital of Rabat (SHR) to develop a transferable ADS installation and management model. METHOD: A retrospective implementation and experience data analysis of 3 years ADS implementation at NIO and a prospective planification for SHR new implementation on 6 months were employed. Data collection included pharmacist team reports, personnel interviews, direct observations, and information system data exports. The study focused on identifying challenges a plan-do-check-act (PDCA) cycle. RESULTS: The analysis revealed overestimation in ADS needs at NIO about 42%, leading to: Resource exhaustion; Challenges in timeline installation staff training and management, Disruptions in data integration and Incident Reports. These issues underscored the importance of a phased, well-planned implementation process. DISCUSSION: The study highlighted the crucial role of many comprehensive strategies. In accordance with the results of several studies, this work demonstrates the benefits of ADS in reducing medication errors and enhancing resource management, while also pointing out the necessity for accurate system sizing, effective integration with hospital information systems, and comprehensive staff training. CONCLUSION: The experience transfer between NIO and SHR provides a valuable model for ADS implementation in hospital pharmacies, proposing optimizations on: Implementation process; Timelines and mapping; Risk management and incident reports; Staff training, sensibilization and change control.

Using Causative Methods to Determine System-Level Factors Driving the Uptake and Use of Evidence-Based Practices in a Public Early Intervention System.

Part C Early Intervention (EI) systems are an entry point to services for autistic toddlers and can be leveraged to facilitate access to autism evidence-based practices (EBPs). However, EI systems are complex and limited research has examined how an EI system's infrastructure (i.e. system-level factors) impacts the adoption and implementation of EBPs. To address this gap, 36 EI providers and 9 EI administrators completed a semi-structured interview or focus group about factors impacting the implementation of autism EBPs. Qualitative analysis included a combination of grounded theory and causative coding. Analyses were refined by input from providers, administrators, and family stakeholders in the form of round tables and presentations at the state's interagency coordinating council. Primary themes centered on: (1) the costs associated with independent contracting structures; (2) operational demands; (3) workforce stability; (4) communication consistency; and (5) implementation supports for EBP implementation. Causative coding helped to demonstrate the perceived relationships between these factors and underscored the important role of incentivization structures, collaboration opportunities, and championing in supporting the use of EBPs within a system that primarily uses independent contracting structures. The current study extends previous research by demonstrating how several system-level factors are perceived to play a role in the adoption and implementation of EBPs by independently contracted EI providers. These findings underscore the need for implementation strategies, such as incentivization strategies and social network building, to increase providers' implementation of autism EBPs within EI systems.

Who are vaccine champions and what implementation strategies do they use to improve adolescent HPV vaccination? Findings from a national survey of primary care professionals.

BACKGROUND: Implementation science researchers often cite clinical champions as critical to overcoming organizational resistance and other barriers to the implementation of evidence-based health services, yet relatively little is known about who champions are or how they effect change. To inform future efforts to identify and engage champions to support HPV vaccination, we sought to describe the key characteristics and strategies of vaccine champions working in adolescent primary care. METHODS: In 2022, we conducted a national survey with a web-based panel of 2527 primary care professionals (PCPs) with a role in adolescent HPV vaccination (57% response rate). Our sample consisted of pediatricians (26%), family medicine physicians (22%), advanced practice providers (24%), and nursing staff (28%). Our survey assessed PCPs' experience with vaccine champions, defined as health care professionals "known for helping their colleagues improve vaccination rates." RESULTS: Overall, 85% of PCPs reported currently working with one or more vaccine champions. Among these 2144 PCPs, most identified the champion with whom they worked most closely as being a physician (40%) or nurse (40%). Almost all identified champions worked to improve vaccination rates for vaccines in general (45%) or HPV vaccine specifically (49%). PCPs commonly reported that champion implementation strategies included sharing information (79%), encouragement (62%), and vaccination data (59%) with colleagues, but less than half reported that champions led quality improvement projects (39%). Most PCPs perceived their closest champion as being moderately to extremely effective at improving vaccination rates (91%). PCPs who did versus did not work with champions more often recommended HPV vaccination at the earliest opportunity of ages 9-10 rather than later ages (44% vs. 33%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Findings of our national study suggest that vaccine champions are common in adolescent primary care, but only a minority lead quality improvement projects. Interventionists seeking to identify champions to improve HPV vaccination rates can expect to find them among both physicians and nurses, but should be prepared to offer support to more fully engage them in implementing interventions.

The perspective of school leaders on the implementation of evidence-based practices: A mixed methods study.

Background: School leaders play an integral role in the use of implementation strategies, which in turn support special education teachers in the implementation of evidence-based practices (EBPs). In this convergent mixed methods study, we explored school leaders' perceptions of the facilitators and barriers to EBP implementation, particularly for students receiving special education, as well as the importance and feasibility of 15 implementation strategies. Method: School leaders (N = 22, principals, assistant principals, school psychologists, etc.) participated in a semistructured interview that included three parts-qualitative questions, quantitative ratings of strategies' importance and feasibility, and discussion of the top three implementation strategies. Data strands were analyzed independently and then integrated to generate meta-inferences. Results: The qualitative data identified facilitators such as access to resources about the intervention (e.g., professional development) and collaboration and teamwork, while barriers centered on lack of school supports, culture/climate, and organizational factors (e.g., lack of communication). The quantitative data indicated that the implementation strategy provide ongoing consultation/coaching was rated as important and feasible. Monitor the progress of the implementation effort was rated as important but less feasible, while conduct educational meetings and change the environment were rated as feasible, but less important. Build partnerships to support implementation was rated as less important and feasible. There was convergence and divergence in mixed methods findings. Conclusion: This study underscores the critical need to increase school leaders' knowledge and skills related to implementation science to better leverage implementation strategies that address the confluence of relevant implementation determinants.

School leaders, such as principals, assistant principals, and school psychologists, are responsible for supporting special education teachers in doing interventions (e.g., through teacher training). In this study, we interviewed 22 school leaders to understand what factors support or hinder teachers in doing interventions, especially for students receiving special education. We also provided school leaders with a list of 15 strategies that may be used to support teachers, to determine which strategies school leaders think are the most important and feasible in schools. Our results indicated that it is important to train school leaders on how to move research into practice settings, such as schools. It is equally important for researchers and policymakers to understand the priorities of school leaders.

Virtual facilitation best practices and research priorities: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Facilitation is an implementation strategy that supports the uptake of evidence-based practices. Recently, use of virtual facilitation (VF), or the application of facilitation using primarily video-based conferencing technologies, has become more common, especially since the COVID-19 pandemic. Thorough assessment of the literature on VF, however, is lacking. This scoping review aimed to identify and describe conceptual definitions of VF, evaluate the consistency of terminology, and recommend "best" practices for its use as an implementation strategy. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review to identify literature on VF following the PRISMA-ScR guidance. A search of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and CINAHL databases was conducted in June 2022 for English language articles published from January 2012 through May 2022 and repeated in May 2023 for articles published from January 2012 through April 2023. Identified articles, including studies and conference abstracts describing VF, were uploaded into Covidence and screened independently by two reviewers. Data extraction was done by two reviewers in Microsoft Excel; additionally, studies were evaluated based on the Proctor et al. (2013) reporting guidelines for specifying details of implementation strategies. RESULTS: The search strategy identified 19 articles. After abstract and full-text screening, eight studies described by 10 articles/abstracts were included in analysis. Best practices summarized across studies included (1) stakeholder engagement, (2) understanding the recipient's organization, (3) facilitator training, (4) piloting, (5) evaluating facilitation, (6) use of group facilitation to encourage learning, and (7) integrating novel tools for virtual interaction. Three papers reported all or nearly all components of the Proctor et al. reporting guidelines; justification for use of VF was the most frequently omitted. CONCLUSIONS: This scoping review evaluated available literature on use of VF as a primary implementation strategy and identified significant variability on how VF is reported, including inconsistent terminology, lack of details about how and why it was conducted, and limited adherence to published reporting guidelines. These inconsistencies impact generalizability of these methods by preventing replicability and full understanding of this emerging methodology. More work is needed to develop and evaluate best practices for effective VF to promote uptake of evidence-based interventions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: N/A.