Opportunities to Advance Equity Through Implementation Strategy Design.

BACKGROUND: Implementation strategies are potential tools for advancing equity goals in healthcare. Implementation scientists have increased attention to the integration of equity considerations into implementation research, but limited concrete guidance is available for developing implementation strategies to improve equity. Main : In parallel to an active hybrid effectiveness-implementation trial in two large health systems, our research team explored potential inequities in implementation across four non-study clinics, developed equity focused audit and feedback procedures, examined the feasibility of our approach, and identified design insights that could be tested in future work to inform equitable program scale-up. Based on our experiences deploying these strategies in pilot format, our research team identified key complexities meriting further examination in future work. These considerations are vital given the dearth of guidance on delivering feedback to clinicians in efforts to improve equity. Key takeaways include the importance of understanding local data culture, engaging constituents in co-design for the full feedback cycle, leveraging feedback for shared discourse, and centering multi-level strategies as part of robust implementation approaches. CONCLUSION: Prioritizing health equity in implementation science requires that research teams probe, interrogate, and innovate - and in doing so, grapple with central conceptual and pragmatic considerations that arise in the design of implementation strategies. Our work emphasizes the value of bidirectional and continuous learning.

Insurance acceptance and cash pay rates for psychotherapy in the US.

Cost and insurance coverage remain important barriers to mental health care, including psychotherapy and mental health counseling services ("psychotherapy"). While data are scant, psychotherapy services are often delivered in private practice settings, where providers frequently do not take insurance and instead rely on direct pay. In this cross-sectional analysis, we use a large national online directory of 175 083 psychotherapy providers to describe characteristics of private practice psychotherapy providers who accept and do not accept insurance, and assess self-reported private pay rates. Overall, about one-third of private practice psychotherapists did not accept insurance, with insurance acceptance varying substantially across states. We also found significant session rate differentials, with Medicaid rates being on average 40% lower than reported cash pay rates, which averaged $143.26 a session. Taken together, low insurance acceptance across a broad swath of mental health provider types means that access to care is disproportionately reliant on patients' ability to afford out-of-pocket payments-even when covered by insurance. While our findings are descriptive and may not be representative of all US psychotherapists, they add to scant existing knowledge about the cash pay market for an important mental health service that has experienced increased use and demand over time.

Differential impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on mental health service access among Medicaid-enrolled individuals.

The COVID-19 public health emergency (PHE) caused significant disruptions in the delivery of care, with in-person visits decreasing and telehealth use increasing. We investigated the impact of these changes on mental health services for Medicaid-enrolled adults and youth in Washington State. Among enrollees with existing mental health conditions, the first year of the PHE was associated with a surge in specialty outpatient mental health visits (13% higher for adults and 7% higher for youth), returning to pre-PHE levels in the second year. Conversely, youth with new mental health needs experienced a decline in specialty outpatient visit rates by ∼15% and 37% in the first and second years of the PHE, respectively. These findings indicate that while mental health service use was maintained or improved for established patients, these patterns did not extend to Medicaid-enrolled youth with new mental health needs, potentially due to barriers such as difficulty in finding providers and establishing new patient-provider relationships remotely. To bridge this gap, there is a need for a multi-faceted approach that includes improving service accessibility, enhancing provider availability, and optimizing initial care encounters, whether in-person or virtual, to better support new patients.

Preparation for implementation of evidence-based practices in urban schools: A shared process with implementing partners.

Background: Shifting organizational priorities can negatively affect the sustainment of innovations in community settings. Shifting priorities can present barriers to conducting clinical research in schools if a misalignment occurs between school district priorities and the aims of the study. Often this misalignment occurs due to a shift during the period between when the study is submitted for funding and when research activities begin. Participatory research approaches can be employed to restore alignment between study processes and school district priorities. The purpose of the study is to describe data from a shared process with district partners. The shared process resulted in modifications to the main study's implementation processes and strategies in order to restore alignment with evolving school priorities while remaining faithful to the aims of the study. Method: Data originated from qualitative interviews conducted with 20 school district and school personnel in a large urban school district. Qualitative themes were organized into categories based on a social-ecological school implementation framework. Data from team meetings, meetings with school district administrators, and emails served to supplement and verify findings from interview analyses. Results: Themes included barriers and facilitators at the macro-, school-, individual-, team-, and implementation quality levels. Adaptations were made to address barriers and facilitators and restore alignment with school district priorities. Most adaptations to study processes and implementation strategies focused on re-training and providing more information to school district coaches and school-based staff. New procedures were created, and resources were re-allocated for the larger study. Conclusions: Findings were discussed in relation to the implementation literature in schools. Recommendations for sustaining strong collaboration among researchers and school partners are provided.

Preparation for Implementation of Evidence-Based Practices in Urban Schools: A Shared Process with Implementing Partners Plain Language Summary School-based implementation research requires a strong partnership between schools and researchers to ensure that the processes and implementation strategies of the study align with evolving school district priorities and processes. The article describes a stakeholder engagement process conducted during the preparation phase of implementation. The process resulted in the re-alignment of study processes and implementation strategies, and goals and priorities of the school district.

Implementation of a Secure Firearm Storage Program in Pediatric Primary Care: A Cluster Randomized Trial.

Importance: Increased secure firearm storage can reduce youth firearm injury and mortality, a leading cause of death for children and adolescents in the US. Despite the availability of evidence-based secure firearm storage programs and recommendations from the American Academy of Pediatrics, few pediatric clinicians report routinely implementing these programs. Objective: To compare the effectiveness of an electronic health record (EHR) documentation template (nudge) and the nudge plus facilitation (ie, clinic support to implement the program; nudge+) at promoting delivery of a brief evidence-based secure firearm storage program (SAFE Firearm) that includes counseling about secure firearm storage and free cable locks during all pediatric well visits. Design, Setting, and Participants: The Adolescent and Child Suicide Prevention in Routine Clinical Encounters (ASPIRE) unblinded parallel cluster randomized effectiveness-implementation trial was conducted from March 14, 2022, to March 20, 2023, to test the hypothesis that, relative to nudge, nudge+ would result in delivery of the firearm storage program to an additional 10% or more of the eligible population, and that this difference would be statistically significant. Thirty pediatric primary care clinics in 2 US health care systems (in Michigan and Colorado) were included, excluding clinics that were not the primary site for participating health care professionals and a subset selected at random due to resource limitations. All pediatric well visits at participating clinics for youth ages 5 to 17 years were analyzed. Interventions: Clinics were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either the nudge or nudge+. Main Outcomes and Measures: Patient-level outcomes were modeled to estimate the primary outcome, reach, which is a visit-level binary indicator of whether the parent received both components of the firearm storage program (counseling and lock), as documented by the clinician in the EHR. Secondary outcomes explored individual program component delivery. Results: A total of 47 307 well-child visits (median [IQR] age, 11.3 [8.1-14.4] years; 24 210 [51.2%] male and 23 091 [48.8%] female) among 46 597 children and 368 clinicians were eligible to receive the firearm storage program during the trial and were included in analyses. Using the intention-to-treat principle, a higher percentage of well-child visits received the firearm storage program in the nudge+ condition (49%; 95% CI, 37-61) compared to nudge (22%; 95% CI, 13-31). Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, the EHR strategy combined with facilitation (nudge+) was more effective at increasing delivery of an evidence-based secure firearm storage program compared to nudge alone. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04844021.

A Mixed Methods Examination of Session Planning Among Public Mental Health Therapists.

Session planning is a core activity for implementing evidence-based practices (EBPs), yet it is unknown whether public mental health settings provide the support for therapists to session plan. This two-part study conducted in collaboration with EBP leaders in Philadelphia's public mental health system deployed mixed methods to examine therapists' session planning practices and preferences. In Study 1, 61 public mental health therapists completed an online survey to identify session planning barriers and facilitators, current practices, and desired planning supports. In Study 2, nine therapists who ranked a session planning tool as a top choice support in Study 1 participated in two focus groups to elaborate on their survey responses and provide feedback on three session planning tool prototypes. Study 1 survey respondents cited multi-level barriers and facilitators to session planning. In both closed- and open-ended responses, analyzed descriptively and via content analysis respectively, therapists described wanting more time, lower caseloads, financial incentives for session planning, and additional clinical resources and guidance from trainings, peers, and supervisors to support session planning. Study 2 focus group participants, whose responses were analyzed using content analysis, reiterated the need for these multi-level supports and expressed the need for a "one-stop" database of session planning tools that would be free, easily searchable, and modifiable for varied clinical needs. All three session planning tool prototypes reviewed were acceptable; two were also considered feasible and appropriate. This investigation of an under-studied aspect of the EBP implementation process reveals the need for multi-level session planning supports.

A formative evaluation to inform integration of psychiatric care with other gender-affirming care.

BACKGROUND: Transgender, non-binary, and/or gender expansive (TNG) individuals experience disproportionately high rates of mental illness and unique barriers to accessing psychiatric care. Integrating TNG-specific psychiatric care with other physical health services may improve engagement, but little published literature describes patient and clinician perspectives on such models of care. Here we present a formative evaluation aiming to inform future projects integrating psychiatric care with physical health care for TNG individuals. METHODS: In this qualitative pre-implementation study, semi-structured interview guides were developed informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research to ensure uniform inclusion and sequencing of topics and allow for valid comparison across interviews. We elicited TNG patient (n = 11) and gender-affirming care clinician (n = 10) needs and preferences regarding integrating psychiatric care with other gender-affirming clinical services. We conducted a rapid analysis procedure, yielding a descriptive analysis for each participant group, identifying challenges of and opportunities in offering integrated gender-affirming psychiatric care. RESULTS: Participants unanimously preferred integrating psychiatry within primary care instead of siloed service models. All participants preferred that patients have access to direct psychiatry appointments (rather than psychiatrist consultation with care team only) and all gender-affirming care clinicians wanted increased access to psychiatric consultations. The need for flexible, tailored care was emphasized. Facilitators identified included taking insurance, telehealth, clinician TNG-competence, and protecting time for clinicians to collaborate and obtain consultation. CONCLUSIONS: This health equity pre-implementation project engaged TNG patients and gender-affirming care clinicians to inform future research exploring integration of mental health care with primary care for the TNG community and suggests utility of such a model of care.

Change in suicidal ideation, depression, and anxiety following collaborative care in the community.

BACKGROUND: The Collaborative Care Model (CoCM) increases access to mental health treatment and improves outcomes among patients with mild to moderate psychopathology; however, it is unclear how effective CoCM is for patients with elevated suicide risk. METHODS: We examined data from the Penn Integrated Care program, a CoCM program including an intake and referral management center plus traditional CoCM services implemented in primary care clinics within a large, diverse academic medical system. In this community setting, we examined: (1) characteristics of patients with and without suicidal ideation who initiated CoCM, (2) changes in suicidal ideation (Patient Health Questionnaire-9 [PHQ-9] item 9), depression (PHQ-9 total scores), and anxiety (Generalized Anxiety Disorder Scale-7 scores) from the first to last CoCM visit overall and across demographic subgroups, and (3) the relationship between amount of CoCM services provided and degree of symptom reduction. RESULTS: From 2018 to 2022, 3,487 patients were referred to CoCM, initiated treatment for at least 15 days, and had completed symptom measures at the first and last visit. Patients were 74% female, 45% Black/African American, and 45% White. The percentage of patients reporting suicidal ideation declined 11%-7% from the first to last visit. Suicidal ideation severity typically improved, and very rarely worsened, during CoCM. Depression and anxiety declined significantly among patients with and without suicidal ideation and across demographic subgroups; however, the magnitude of these declines differed across race, ethnicity, and age. Patients with suicidal ideation at the start of CoCM had higher depression scores than patients without suicidal ideation at the start and end of treatment. Longer CoCM episodes were associated with greater reductions in depression severity. CONCLUSIONS: Suicidal ideation, depression, and anxiety declined following CoCM among individuals with suicidal ideation in a community setting. Findings are consistent with emerging evidence from clinical trials suggesting CoCM's potential for increasing access to mental healthcare and improving outcomes among patients at risk for suicide.

Defining Levels of US Hospitals' Pediatric Capabilities.

Importance: Classifying hospitals across a wide range of pediatric capabilities, including medical, surgical, and specialty services, would improve understanding of access and outcomes. Objective: To develop a classification system for hospitals' pediatric capabilities. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study included data from 2019 on all acute care hospitals with emergency departments in 10 US states that treated at least 1 child per day. Statistical analysis was performed from September 2023 to February 2024. Exposure: Pediatric hospital capability level, defined using latent class analysis. The latent class model parameters were the presence or absence of 26 functional capabilities, which ranged from performing laceration repairs to performing organ transplants. A simplified approach to categorization was derived and externally validated by comparing each hospital's latent class model classification with its simplified classification using data from 3 additional states. Main Outcomes and Measures: Health care utilization and structural characteristics, including inpatient beds, pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) beds, and referral rates (proportion of patients transferred among patients unable to be discharged). Results: Using data from 1061 hospitals (716 metropolitan [67.5%]) with a median of 2934 pediatric ED encounters per year (IQR, 1367-5996), the latent class model revealed 4 pediatric levels, with a median confidence of hospital assignment to level of 100% (IQR, 99%-100%). Of 26 functional capabilities, level 1 hospitals had a median of 24 capabilities (IQR, 21-25), level 2 hospitals had a median of 13 (IQR, 11-15), level 3 hospitals had a median of 8 (IQR, 6-9), and level 4 hospitals had a median of 3 (IQR, 2-3). Pediatric level 1 hospitals had a median of 66 inpatient beds (IQR, 42-86), level 2 hospitals had a median of 16 (IQR, 9-22), level 3 hospitals had a median of 0 (IQR, 0-6), and level 4 hospitals had a median of 0 (IQR, 0-0) (P < .001). Level 1 hospitals had a median of 19 PICU beds (IQR, 10-28), level 2 hospitals had a median of 0 (IQR, 0-5), level 3 hospitals had a median of 0 (IQR, 0-0), and level 4 hospitals had a median of 0 (IQR, 0-0) (P < .001). Level 1 hospitals had a median referral rate of 1% (IQR, 1%-3%), level 2 hospitals had a median of 25% (IQR, 9%-45%), level 3 hospitals had a median of 70% (IQR, 52%-84%), and level 4 hospitals had a median of 100% (IQR, 98%-100%) (P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study of hospitals from 10 US states, a system to classify hospitals' pediatric capabilities in 4 levels was developed and was associated with structural and health care utilization characteristics. This system can be used to understand and track national pediatric acute care access and outcomes.

Teamwork and implementation of innovations in healthcare and human service settings: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Implementation of new practices in team-based settings requires teams to work together to respond to new demands and changing expectations. However, team constructs and team-based implementation approaches have received little attention in the implementation science literature. This systematic review summarizes empirical research examining associations between teamwork and implementation outcomes when evidence-based practices and other innovations are implemented in healthcare and human service settings. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, CINAHL, APA PsycINFO and ERIC for peer-reviewed empirical articles published from January 2000 to March 2022. Additional articles were identified by searches of reference lists and a cited reference search for included articles (completed in February 2023). We selected studies using quantitative, qualitative, or mixed methods to examine associations between team constructs and implementation outcomes in healthcare and human service settings. We used the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool to assess methodological quality/risk of bias and conducted a narrative synthesis of included studies. GRADE and GRADE-CERQual were used to assess the strength of the body of evidence. RESULTS: Searches identified 10,489 results. After review, 58 articles representing 55 studies were included. Relevant studies increased over time; 71% of articles were published after 2016. We were unable to generate estimates of effects for any quantitative associations because of very limited overlap in the reported associations between team variables and implementation outcomes. Qualitative findings with high confidence were: 1) Staffing shortages and turnover hinder implementation; 2) Adaptive team functioning (i.e., positive affective states, effective behavior processes, shared cognitive states) facilitates implementation and is associated with better implementation outcomes; Problems in team functioning (i.e., negative affective states, problematic behavioral processes, lack of shared cognitive states) act as barriers to implementation and are associated with poor implementation outcomes; and 3) Open, ongoing, and effective communication within teams facilitates implementation of new practices; poor communication is a barrier. CONCLUSIONS: Teamwork matters for implementation. However, both team constructs and implementation outcomes were often poorly specified, and there was little overlap of team constructs and implementation outcomes studied in quantitative studies. Greater specificity and rigor are needed to understand how teamwork influences implementation processes and outcomes. We provide recommendations for improving the conceptualization, description, assessment, analysis, and interpretation of research on teams implementing innovations. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This systematic review was registered in PROSPERO, the international prospective register of systematic reviews. REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020220168.

"Right now, it's kind of haphazard"-Pediatric emergency care coordinators and quality of emergency care for children: A qualitative study.

Objectives: Pediatric readiness varies widely among emergency departments (EDs). The presence of a pediatric emergency care coordinator (PECC) has been associated with improved pediatric readiness and decreased mortality, but adoption of PECCs has been limited. Our objective was to understand factors associated with PECC implementation in general EDs. Methods: We conducted semistructured qualitative interviews with a purposively sampled set of EDs with and without PECCs. Interviews were completed, transcribed, and coded until thematic saturation was reached. Themes were identified through a consensus process and mapped to the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Results: Twenty-four interviews were conducted and mapped to themes related to innovation, individuals and implementation process, outer setting (health system), and inner setting (hospital/ED). Addressing innovation, individuals, and implementation process, the primary theme was variability in how the PECC role was defined and who was responsible for implementing it. Regarding the outer setting, participants reported that limited system resources affected their ability to implement the PECC role. Key inner setting themes included concerns about limited visit volume, a lack of systems for measuring pediatric quality of care, and significant tension around change. Conclusions: Implementation of the PECC role appears to be limited by heterogeneous interpretations of the PECC, de-prioritization of pediatrics, and limited system resources. However, many participants described motivation to improve pediatric care and implement the PECC role in context of increasing pediatric visits; they offered strategies for future implementation efforts.

Digital Engagement Strategy and Health Care Worker Mental Health: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: The health care workforce continues to experience high rates of depression and anxiety. Finding ways to effectively support the mental health and well-being of health care workers is challenging. Objective: To test the effectiveness of remote, pushed digital assessments and engagement to improve depression and anxiety among health care workers compared with usual care. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a 9-month randomized clinical trial with a 6-month intervention period. Participants were health care workers with self-reported daily access to a smartphone and at least 4 clinical hours per week. Participants were randomized to usual care or the intervention between January 2022 and March 2023. Data analyses were conducted between May and July 2023. Interventions: All participants completed baseline, 6-month, and 9-month mental health, well-being, and burnout assessments. The control group had open access to a web-based mental health platform. Participants in the intervention group received monthly text messaging about mental health, mental health assessments, and linkages to care. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcomes were mean change in depression and anxiety scores at 6 months from baseline. Secondary outcomes include mean change in well-being, burnout, and self-reported workplace productivity. Results: In this study, 1275 participants were randomized (642 [50.4%] to the intervention group and 633 [49.6%] to control group). Participants had a mean (SD) age of 38.6 (10.9) years, 1063 participants (83.4%) were female, 320 (25.1%) self-identified as Black, and 793 (62.2%) self-identified as White. Across the groups, the mean difference in depression score was significantly different at 6 months (-0.96 [95% CI, -1.52 to -0.40]) and at 9 months (-1.14 [95% CI, -1.69 to -0.58]). The mean difference in anxiety score from baseline to 6 months was statistically significantly larger for those in the intervention group vs usual care (-0.71 [95% CI, -1.25 to -0.17]) and held true at 9 months (-1.06 [95% CI, -1.59 to -0.52]). Conclusions and Relevance: In a trial of health care workers, a proactive digital engagement strategy, including pushed text messaging, mobile mental health assessments, and connection to care, improved depression and anxiety over a 6-month period compared with simply making the same resources available for individuals to find and use. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05028075.

Safety planning intervention and follow-up: A telehealth service model for suicidal individuals in emergency department settings: Study design and protocol.

BACKGROUND: The Safety Planning Intervention with follow-up services (SPI+) is a promising suicide prevention intervention, yet many Emergency Departments (EDs) lack the resources for adequate implementation. Comprehensive strategies addressing structural and organizational barriers are needed to optimize SPI+ implementation and scale-up. This protocol describes a test of one strategy in which ED staff connect at-risk patients to expert clinicians from a Suicide Prevention Consultation Center (SPCC) via telehealth. METHOD: This stepped wedge, cluster-randomized trial compares the effectiveness, implementation, cost, and cost offsets of SPI+ delivered by SPCC clinicians versus ED-based clinicians (enhanced usual care; EUC). Eight EDs will start with EUC and cross over to the SPCC phase. Blocks of two EDs will be randomly assigned to start dates 3 months apart. Approximately 13,320 adults discharged following a suicide-related ED visit will be included; EUC and SPCC samples will comprise patients from before and after SPCC crossover, respectively. Effectiveness data sources are electronic health records, administrative claims, and the National Death Index. Primary effectiveness outcomes are presence of suicidal behavior and number/type of mental healthcare visits and secondary outcomes include number/type of suicide-related acute services 6-months post-discharge. We will use the same data sources to assess cost offsets to gauge SPCC scalability and sustainability. We will examine preliminary implementation outcomes (reach, adoption, fidelity, acceptability, and feasibility) through patient, clinician, and health-system leader interviews and surveys. CONCLUSION: If the SPCC demonstrates clinical effectiveness and health system cost reduction, it may be a scalable model for evidence-based suicide prevention in the ED.

Getting Started With Multi-site Research: Lessons From the Eliminating Monitor Overuse (EMO) Study.

Research in Pediatric Hospital Medicine is growing and expanding rapidly, and with this comes the need to expand single-site research projects into multisite research studies within practice-based research networks. This expansion is crucial to ensure generalizable findings in diverse populations; however, expanding Pediatric Hospital Medicine research projects from single to multisite can be daunting. We provide an overview of major logistical steps and challenges in project management, regulatory approvals, data use agreements, training, communication, and financial management that are germane to hospitalist researchers launching their first multisite project by sharing processes and lessons learned from running multisite research projects in the Pediatric Research in Inpatient Settings Network within the Eliminating Monitor Overuse study portfolio. This description is relevant to hospitalist researchers transitioning from single-site to multisite research or those considering serving as site lead for a multisite project.

Evaluating the implementation of a community health worker-delivered intervention integrating asthma care in West Philadelphia public schools.

OBJECTIVE: Schools are an important setting because students spend much of their time in school and engage in physical activity during the school day that could exacerbate asthma symptoms. Our objective is to understand the barriers and facilitators to implementing an experimental community health worker-delivered care coordination program for students with asthma within the context of the West Philadelphia Controls Asthma study. METHODS: Surveys (n = 256) and semi-structured interviews (n = 41) were completed with principals, teachers, nurses, and community health workers from 21 public and charter schools in West Philadelphia between January 2019 and September 2021. Survey participants completed the Evidence Based Practice Attitudes Scale, the Implementation Leadership Scale, and Organizational Climate Index. Semi-structured qualitative interview guides were developed, informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. RESULTS: Participant responses indicate that they perceived benefits for schools and students related to the community health worker-based care coordination program. Several barriers and facilitators to implementing the program were noted, including challenges associated with incorporating the program into school nurse workflow, environmental triggers in the school environment, and challenges communicating with family members. An important facilitator that was identified was having supportive school administrators and staff who were engaged and saw the benefits of the program. CONCLUSIONS: This work can inform implementation planning for other locales interested in implementing community-based pediatric asthma control programs delivered by community health workers in schools.

Treating individuals with suicidal ideation in primary care: Patient-level characteristics associated with follow-up in the Collaborative Care Model.

INTRODUCTION: The Collaborative Care Model (CoCM) is an evidence-based approach which embeds behavioral health providers (BHPs) into primary care. Whether patients with suicidal ideation (SI) are willing to engage in CoCM is unclear. METHODS: Using Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) administrative data from primary care practices within an urban academic health system, we identified patients with and without SI who were referred to a CoCM BHP. We compared engagement, defined as attendance at ≥1 CoCM visit, across groups. RESULTS: Between 2018 and 2022, 7391 primary care patients were referred to a CoCM BHP. Eight hundred and ninety-two of these patients reported SI on the PHQ-9 (754 on "several days" during the previous 2 weeks and 138 on "more than half or most days"). Across groups, most patients engaged in CoCM. Patients reporting SI on several days engaged at a lower rate (61.4%) than those reporting SI on more than half or most days (65.9%). Both SI groups engaged at a lower rate than the 6499 patients who did not report SI (67.5%). CONCLUSION: Most patients referred to a CoCM BHP engaged in ≥1 visit. Rates were lower for patients with SI, with the lowest rate among those reporting SI on several days.

Increased Risks for Suicide, Self-Harm, Substance Use, and Psychiatric Disorders in Adults With Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Nationwide Study in the United States From 2007 to 2017.

In an analysis of over 260 million emergency department visits across the United States from 2007 to 2017, inflammatory bowel disease conferred >10-fold risk for suicide deaths, self-harm, substance use, and psychiatric disorders, though the overall self-harm rates were low (<1% of all-cause inflammatory bowel disease emergency department visits; total 56 suicide deaths).

Evaluation of a brief virtual implementation science training program: the Penn Implementation Science Institute.

BACKGROUND: To meet the growing demand for implementation science expertise, building capacity is a priority. Various training opportunities have emerged to meet this need. To ensure rigor and achievement of specific implementation science competencies, it is critical to systematically evaluate training programs. METHODS: The Penn Implementation Science Institute (PennISI) offers 4 days (20 h) of virtual synchronous training on foundational and advanced topics in implementation science. Through a pre-post design, this study evaluated the sixth PennISI, delivered in 2022. Surveys measures included 43 implementation science training evaluation competencies grouped into four thematic domains (e.g., items related to implementation science study design grouped into the "design, background, and rationale" competency category), course-specific evaluation criteria, and open-ended questions to evaluate change in knowledge and suggestions for improving future institutes. Mean composite scores were created for each of the competency themes. Descriptive statistics and thematic analysis were completed. RESULTS: One hundred four (95.41% response rate) and 55 (50.46% response rate) participants completed the pre-survey and post-survey, respectively. Participants included a diverse cohort of individuals primarily affiliated with US-based academic institutions and self-reported as having novice or beginner-level knowledge of implementation science at baseline (81.73%). In the pre-survey, all mean composite scores for implementation science competencies were below one (i.e., beginner-level). Participants reported high value from the PennISI across standard course evaluation criteria (e.g., mean score of 3.77/4.00 for overall quality of course). Scores for all competency domains increased to a score between beginner-level and intermediate-level following training. In both the pre-survey and post-survey, competencies related to "definition, background, and rationale" had the highest mean composite score, whereas competencies related to "design and analysis" received the lowest score. Qualitative themes offered impressions of the PennISI, didactic content, PennISI structure, and suggestions for improvement. Prior experience with or knowledge of implementation science influenced many themes. CONCLUSIONS: This evaluation highlights the strengths of an established implementation science institute, which can serve as a model for brief, virtual training programs. Findings provide insight for improving future program efforts to meet the needs of the heterogenous implementation science community (e.g., different disciplines and levels of implementation science knowledge). This study contributes to ensuring rigorous implementation science capacity building through the evaluation of programs.

Advancing research on teams and team effectiveness in implementation science: An application of the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, Sustainment (EPIS) framework.

Background: Effective teams are essential to high-quality healthcare. However, teams, team-level constructs, and team effectiveness strategies are poorly delineated in implementation science theories, models, and frameworks (TMFs), hindering our understanding of how teams may influence implementation. The Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, Sustainment (EPIS) framework is a flexible and accommodating framework that can facilitate the application of team effectiveness approaches in implementation science. Main Text: We define teams and provide an overview of key constructs in team effectiveness research. We describe ways to conceptualize different types of teams and team constructs relevant to implementation within the EPIS framework. Three case examples illustrate the application of EPIS to implementation studies involving teams. Within each study, we describe the structure of the team and how team constructs influenced implementation processes and outcomes. Conclusions: Integrating teams and team constructs into the EPIS framework demonstrates how TMFs can be applied to advance our understanding of teams and implementation. Implementation strategies that target team effectiveness may improve implementation outcomes in team-based settings. Incorporation of teams into implementation TMFs is necessary to facilitate application of team effectiveness research in implementation science.

Teams and team-level constructs are neglected in implementation theories, models, and frameworks (TMFs). This paper calls attention to the importance of teams in implementation research and practice and provides an overview of team effectiveness research for implementation science. We illustrate how the EPIS framework can be applied to advance our understanding of how teams influence implementation processes and outcomes. We identify future directions for research on teams and implementation, including developing and testing implementation strategies that focus on team effectiveness.

Eliminating Monitor Overuse (EMO) type III effectiveness-deimplementation cluster-randomized trial: Statistical analysis plan.

Background: Deimplementing overused health interventions is essential to maximizing quality and value while minimizing harm, waste, and inefficiencies. Three national guidelines discourage continuous pulse oximetry (SpO2) monitoring in children who are not receiving supplemental oxygen, but the guideline-discordant practice remains prevalent, making it a prime target for deimplementation. This paper details the statistical analysis plan for the Eliminating Monitor Overuse (EMO) SpO2 trial, which compares the effect of two competing deimplementation strategies (unlearning only vs. unlearning plus substitution) on the sustainment of deimplementation of SpO2 monitoring in children with bronchiolitis who are in room air. Methods: The EMO Trial is a hybrid type 3 effectiveness-deimplementation trial with a longitudinal cluster-randomized design, conducted in Pediatric Research in Inpatient Settings Network hospitals. The primary outcome is deimplementation sustainment, analyzed as a longitudinal difference-in-differences comparison between study arms. This analysis will use generalized hierarchical mixed-effects models for longitudinal clustering outcomes. Secondary outcomes include the length of hospital stay and oxygen supplementation duration, modeled using linear mixed-effects regressions. Using the well-established counterfactual approach, we will also perform a mediation analysis of hospital-level mechanistic measures on the association between the deimplementation strategy and the sustainment outcome. Discussion: We anticipate that the EMO Trial will advance the science of deimplementation by providing new insights into the processes, mechanisms, and likelihood of sustained practice change using rigorously designed deimplementation strategies. This pre-specified statistical analysis plan will mitigate reporting bias and support data-driven approaches. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05132322. Registered on 24 November 2021.