Factors influencing pediatric transfusion: A complex decision impacting quality of care.

BACKGROUND: The risks of red blood cell transfusion may outweigh the benefits for many patients in pediatric intensive care units (PICUs), but guidelines from the Transfusion and Anemia eXpertise Initiative (TAXI) have not been consistently adopted. We sought to identify factors that influenced transfusion decision-making in PICUs to explore potential barriers and facilitators to implementing the guidelines. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: A total of 50 ICU providers working in eight US ICUs of different types (non-cardiac PICUs, cardiovascular ICUs, combined units) and variable sizes (11-32 beds) completed semi-structured interviews. Providers included ICU attendings and trainees, nurse practitioners, nurses, and subspecialty physicians. Interviews examined factors that influenced transfusion decisions, transfusion practices, and provider beliefs. Qualitative analysis utilized a Framework Approach. Summarized data was compared between provider roles and units with consideration to identify patterns and unique informative statements. RESULTS: Providers cited clinical, physiologic, anatomic, and logistic factors they considered in making transfusion decisions. Improving oxygen carrying capacity, hemodynamics and perfusion, respiratory function, volume deficits, and correcting laboratory values were among the reasons given for transfusion. Other sought-after benefits included alleviating symptoms of anemia, improving ICU throughput, and decreasing blood waste. Providers in different roles approached transfusion decisions differently, with the largest differences noted between nurses and subspecialists as compared with other ICU providers. While ICU attendings most often made the decision to transfuse, all providers influenced the decision-making. DISCUSSION: Implementation of transfusion guidelines requires multi-professional approaches that emphasize the known risks of transfusion, its limited benefits, and highlight evidence around the safety and benefit of restrictive approaches.

Implementation of a Low-Cost, Multi-component, Web-Based Training for Trauma-Focused Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy.

Effective, interactive trainings in evidence-based practices remain expensive and largely inaccessible to most practicing clinicians. To address this need, the current study evaluated the impact of a low-cost, multi-component, web-based training for Trauma-Focused Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy (TF-CBT) on clinicians' TF-CBT knowledge, strategy use, adherence and skill. Clinician members of a practice-based research network were recruited via email and randomized to either an immediate training group (N = 89 assigned) or waitlist control group (N = 74 assigned) that was offered access to the same training after six months, with half of each group further randomized to receive or not receive incentives for participation. Clinicians completed assessments at baseline, 6 months, and 12 months covering TF-CBT knowledge, strategy use, and for a subset of clinicians (n = 28), TF-CBT adherence and skill. Although significant differences in overall TF-CBT skillfulness and readiness were found, there were no significant differences between the training and waitlist control group on TF-CBT knowledge and strategy use at six months. However, there was considerable variability in the extent of training completed by clinicians. Subsequent post-hoc analyses indicated a significant, positive association between the extent of training completed by clinicians and clinician TF-CBT knowledge, strategy use, demonstrated adherence and skill across the three TF-CBT components, and overall TF-CBT readiness. We also explored whether incentives predicted training participation and found no differences in training activity participation between clinicians who were offered an incentive and those who were not. Findings highlight the limitations of self-paced web-based trainings. Implications for web-based trainings are discussed.

Scaling-up Child and Youth Mental Health Services: Assessing Coverage of a County-Wide Prevention and Early Intervention Initiative During One Fiscal Year.

PURPOSE: In the U.S., the percentage of youth in need of evidence-based mental health practices (EBPs) who receive them (i.e., coverage rate) is low. We know little about what influences coverage rates. In 2010, the Los Angeles County Department of Mental Health (LACDMH) launched a reimbursement-driven implementation of multiple EBPs in youth mental health care. This study examines two questions: (1) What was the coverage rate of EBPs delivered three years following initial implementation? (2) What factors are associated with the coverage rates? METHODS: To assess coverage rates of publicly insured youth, we used LACDMH administrative claims data from July 1, 2013 to June 30, 2014 and estimates of the size of the targeted eligible youth population from the 2014 American Community Survey (ACS). The unit of analysis was clinic service areas (n = 254). We used Geographic Information Systems and an OLS regression to assess community and clinic characteristics related to coverage. RESULTS: The county coverage rate was estimated at 17%, much higher than national estimates. The proportion of ethnic minorities, individuals who are foreign-born, adults with a college degree within a geographic area were negatively associated with clinic service area coverage rates. Having more therapists who speak a language other than English, providing care outside of clinics, and higher proportion of households without a car were associated with higher coverage rates. CONCLUSION: Heterogeneity in municipal mental health record type and availability makes it difficult to compare the LACDMH coverage rate with other efforts. However, the LACDMH initiative has higher coverage than published national rates. Having bilingual therapists and providing services outside the clinic was associated with higher coverage. Even with higher coverage, inequities persisted.

Role-Play Assessment of Therapist Adherence and Skill in Implementation of Trauma-Focused Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy.

Numerous efforts are underway to train clinicians in evidence-based practices. Unfortunately, the field has few practical measures of therapist adherence and skill with which to judge the success of these training and implementation efforts. One possible assessment method is using behavioral rehearsal, or role-play, as an analogue for therapist in-session behavior. The current study describes aspects of reliability, validity and utility of a behavioral role-play assessment developed to evaluate therapist adherence and skill in implementing Trauma-Focused Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy (TF-CBT). TF-CBT role-play assessments were conducted with a sample of 43 therapists as part of a larger training study. The TF-CBT role-play assessments were independently coded for TF-CBT adherence and skill by a certified TF-CBT trainer and three clinical psychology doctoral students. Findings indicated good interrater reliability for the individual items (ICC: M = .71, SD = .15). Regarding utility, 67.19% (n = 43/64) of contacted therapists completed the role-play assessment, which took an average of 30 min (M = 31.42, SD = 5.65) to complete and 60 min (M = 62.84, SD = 11.31) to code. Therapists with a master's degree were more likely to complete the role-play assessment than those with other degrees but no other differences in demographic variables, practice characteristics, or TF-CBT knowledge or training were found between participants and nonparticipants. Role-play assessments may offer an alternative to observational coding for assessing therapist adherence and skill, particularly in contexts where session recordings are not feasible.

Improvement Science and Implementation Science in Cancer Care: Identifying Areas of Synergy and Opportunities for Further Integration.

Efforts to improve cancer care primarily come from two fields: improvement science and implementation science. The two fields have developed independently, yet they have potential for synergy. Leveraging that synergy to enhance alignment could both reduce duplication and, more importantly, enhance the potential of both fields to improve care. To better understand potential for alignment, we examined 20 highly cited cancer-related improvement science and implementation science studies published in the past 5 years, characterizing and comparing their objectives, methods, and approaches to practice change. We categorized studies as improvement science or implementation science based on authors' descriptions when possible; otherwise, we categorized studies as improvement science if they evaluated efforts to improve the quality, value, or safety of care, or implementation science if they evaluated efforts to promote the implementation of evidence-based interventions into practice. All implementation studies (10/10) and most improvement science studies (6/10) sought to improve uptake of evidence-based interventions. Improvement science and implementation science studies employed similar approaches to change practice. For example, training was employed in 8/10 implementation science studies and 4/10 improvement science studies. However, improvement science and implementation science studies used different terminology to describe similar concepts and emphasized different methodological aspects in reporting. Only 4/20 studies (2 from each category) described using a formal theory or conceptual framework to guide program development. Most studies were multi-site (10/10 implementation science and 6/10 improvement science) and a minority (2 from each category) used a randomized design. Based on our review, cancer-related improvement science and implementation science studies use different terminology and emphasize different methodological aspects in reporting but share similarities in purpose, scope, and methods, and are at similar levels of scientific development. The fields are well-positioned for alignment. We propose that next steps include harmonizing language and cross-fertilizing methods of program development and evaluation.

Strategy Configurations Directly Linked to Higher Hepatitis C Virus Treatment Starts: An Applied Use of Configurational Comparative Methods.

BACKGROUND: The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) cares for more patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV) than any other US health care system. We tracked the implementation strategies that VA sites used to implement highly effective new treatments for HCV with the aim of uncovering how combinations of implementation strategies influenced the uptake of the HCV treatment innovation. We applied Configurational Comparative Methods (CCMs) to uncover causal dependencies and identify difference-making strategy configurations, and to distinguish higher from lower HCV treating sites. METHODS: We surveyed providers to assess VA sites' use of 73 implementation strategies to promote HCV treatment in the fiscal year 2015. CCMs were used to identify strategy configurations that uniquely distinguished higher HCV from lower HCV treating sites. RESULTS: From the 73 possible implementation strategies, CCMs identified 5 distinct strategy configurations, or "solution paths." These were comprised of 10 individual strategies that collectively explained 80% of the sites with higher HCV treatment starts with 100% consistency. Using any one of the following 5 solution paths was sufficient to produce higher treatment starts: (1) technical assistance; (2) engaging in a learning collaborative AND designating leaders; (3) site visits AND outreach to patients to promote uptake and adherence; (4) developing resource sharing agreements AND an implementation blueprint; OR (5) creating new clinical teams AND sharing quality improvement knowledge with other sites AND engaging patients. There was equifinality in that the presence of any one of the 5 solution paths was sufficient for higher treatment starts. CONCLUSIONS: Five strategy configurations distinguished higher HCV from lower HCV treating sites with 100% consistency. CCMs represent a methodological advancement that can help inform high-yield implementation strategy selection and increase the efficiency and effectiveness of future implementation efforts.

From Research Training to Scientific Advancement-Contributions from the Implementation Research Institute: An Introduction to the Special Issue.

The special series is designed to provide examples of funded implementation research conducted by alumni of the first four cohorts of the Implementation Research Institute (IRI). The introduction links the six substantive papers to the conceptual and methodological challenges laid out in a 2009 publication in this journal which led to the IRI training program in the emerging science of implementation with a special focus on behavior health settings. The 7th paper in the series illustrates an innovative evaluative approach to design and measurement of IRI fellow publications and grants informed by the training program such as bibliometrics. The introduction also notes some elements identified in the 2009 foundational paper not represented in these papers such as costs as well as important developments and foci in the decade since 2009 such as de-implementation, sustainability, dynamic adaptation processes, and hybrid designs that need to be an integral part of training programs in implementation research.

Assessing Implementation Strategy Reporting in the Mental Health Literature: A Narrative Review.

Inadequate implementation strategy reporting restricts research synthesis and replicability. We explored the implementation strategy reporting quality of a sample of mental health articles using Proctor et al.'s (Implement Sci 8:139, 2013) reporting recommendations. We conducted a narrative review to generate the sample of articles and assigned a reporting quality score to each article. The mean article reporting score was 54% (range 17-100%). The most reported domains were: name (100%), action (82%), target (80%), and actor (67%). The least reported domains included definition (6%), temporality (26%), justification (34%), and outcome (37%). We discuss limitations and provide recommendations to improve reporting.

Evaluation of the Implementation Research Institute: Trainees' Publications and Grant Productivity.

With growth in the field of dissemination and implementation (D&I) research, there has been growth in capacity building, with many training opportunities. As such, it is important to continue to evaluate D&I research training programs. This paper reports the results of an evaluation of the Implementation Research Institute (IRI), a R25 funded by the National Institute of Mental Health with additional funding by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). The fourth cohort also had a supplement from the National Institute on Drug Abuse. Using bibliometrics data, we report on a quasi-experimental retrospective cohort study assessing whether the rates of scholarly productivity in D&I science of IRI fellows (those who applied and were accepted to the training) were greater than those who applied but were not accepted to IRI. Our findings show that Selected Applicants' odds of publishing in implementation science were higher for earlier alumni, starting at 12% 1 year out and increasing to 94% for those who were 4 years out from starting training. Chances for Non-Selected Applicants remained relatively stable, starting at 47% at 1 year and going to 33% at 4 years since their application, a pattern that was stable even after controlling for demographic characteristics. These results support the hypothesis that IRI is increasing the D&I research productivity of those selected to the program, and that our fellows are advancing the field of D&I compared to those investigators not selected to our institute. Our finding also indicates the importance of a 2-year training.

Implementation research: new imperatives and opportunities in global health.

Implementation research is important in global health because it addresses the challenges of the know-do gap in real-world settings and the practicalities of achieving national and global health goals. Implementation research is an integrated concept that links research and practice to accelerate the development and delivery of public health approaches. Implementation research involves the creation and application of knowledge to improve the implementation of health policies, programmes, and practices. This type of research uses multiple disciplines and methods and emphasises partnerships between community members, implementers, researchers, and policy makers. Implementation research focuses on practical approaches to improve implementation and to enhance equity, efficiency, scale-up, and sustainability, and ultimately to improve people's health. There is growing interest in the principles of implementation research and a range of perspectives on its purposes and appropriate methods. However, limited efforts have been made to systematically document and review learning from the practice of implementation research across different countries and technical areas. Drawing on an expert review process, this Health Policy paper presents purposively selected case studies to illustrate the essential characteristics of implementation research and its application in low-income and middle-income countries. The case studies are organised into four categories related to the purposes of using implementation research, including improving people's health, informing policy design and implementation, strengthening health service delivery, and empowering communities and beneficiaries. Each of the case studies addresses implementation problems, involves partnerships to co-create solutions, uses tacit knowledge and research, and is based on a shared commitment towards improving health outcomes. The case studies reveal the complex adaptive nature of health systems, emphasise the importance of understanding context, and highlight the role of multidisciplinary, rigorous, and adaptive processes that allow for course correction to ensure interventions have an impact. This Health Policy paper is part of a call to action to increase the use of implementation research in global health, build the field of implementation research inclusive of research utilisation efforts, and accelerate efforts to bridge the gap between research, policy, and practice to improve health outcomes.

State Legislators' Support for Behavioral Health Parity Laws: The Influence of Mutable and Fixed Factors at Multiple Levels.

Policy Points When communicating with state legislators, advocates for state behavioral health parity laws should emphasize that the laws do not increase insurance premiums. Legislators' opinions about the impacts of state behavioral health parity laws and the effectiveness of behavioral health treatment have more influence on support for the laws than do their political party affiliation or state-level contextual factors. Reducing legislators' stigma toward people with mental illness could increase their support for state behavioral health parity laws CONTEXT: Comprehensive state behavioral health parity legislation (C-SBHPL) is an evidence-based policy that improves access and adherence to behavioral health treatments. However, adoption of C-SBHPL by state legislators is low. Little is known about how C-SBHPL evidence might be most effectively disseminated to legislators or how legislators' fixed characteristics (eg, ideology), mutable characteristics (eg, beliefs about the policy's impact), and state-level contextual factors might influence their support for behavioral health policies. The purpose of our study is (1) to describe the associations between legislators' fixed and mutable characteristics, state-level contextual factors, and support for C-SBHPL; and (2) to identify the mutable characteristics of legislators independently associated with C-SBHPL support. METHODS: We conducted a multimodal (post mail, email, telephone) survey of US state legislators in 2017 (N = 475). The dependent variable was strong support for C-SBHPL, and the independent variables included legislators' fixed and mutable characteristics and state-level contextual factors. We conducted multivariable, multilevel (legislator, state) logistic regression. FINDINGS: Thirty-nine percent of the legislators strongly supported C-SBHPL. After adjustment, the strongest predictors of C-SBHPL support were beliefs that C-SBHPL increases access to behavioral health treatments (aOR = 5.85; 95% CI = 2.41, 14.20) and does not increase insurance premiums (aOR = 2.70; 95% CI = 1.24, 5.90). Stigma toward people with mental illness was inversely associated with support (aOR = 0.86; 95% CI = 0.78, 0.95). After adjustment, ideology was the only fixed characteristic significantly associated with support for C-SBHPL. State-level contextual factors did not moderate associations between mutable characteristics and support for C-SBHPL. CONCLUSIONS: Legislators' mutable characteristics are stronger predictors of C-SBHPL support than are most of their fixed characteristics and all state-level contextual factors, and thus should be targeted by dissemination efforts.

Technology-Based Alcohol Interventions in Primary Care: Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Primary care settings are uniquely positioned to reach individuals at risk of alcohol use disorder through technology-delivered behavioral health interventions. Despite emerging effectiveness data, few efforts have been made to summarize the collective findings from these delivery approaches. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to review recent literature on the use of technology to deliver, enhance, or support the implementation of alcohol-related interventions in primary care. We focused on addressing questions related to (1) categorization or target of the intervention, (2) descriptive characteristics and context of delivery, (3) reported efficacy, and (4) factors influencing efficacy. METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive search and systematic review of completed studies at the intersection of primary care, technology, and alcohol-related problems published from January 2000 to December 2018 within EBSCO databases, ProQuest Dissertations, and Cochrane Reviews. Of 2307 initial records, 42 were included and coded independently by 2 investigators. RESULTS: Compared with the years of 2000 to 2009, published studies on technology-based alcohol interventions in primary care nearly tripled during the years of 2010 to 2018. Of the 42 included studies, 28 (64%) were randomized controlled trials. Furthermore, studies were rated on risk of bias and found to be predominantly low risk (n=18), followed by moderate risk (n=16), and high risk (n=8). Of the 24 studies with primary or secondary efficacy outcomes related to drinking and drinking-related harms, 17 (71%) reported reduced drinking or harm in all primary and secondary efficacy outcomes. Furthermore, of the 31 studies with direct comparisons with treatment as usual (TAU), 13 (42%) reported that at least half of the primary and secondary efficacy outcomes of the technology-based interventions were superior to TAU. High efficacy was associated with provider involvement and the reported use of an implementation strategy to deliver the technology-based intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Our systematic review has highlighted a pattern of growth in the number of studies evaluating technology-based alcohol interventions in primary care. Although these interventions appear to be largely beneficial in primary care, outcomes may be enhanced by provider involvement and implementation strategy use. This review enables better understanding of the typologies and efficacy of these interventions and informs recommendations for those developing and implementing technology-based alcohol interventions in primary care settings.

Differences in Transitional Care Provided to Patients With and Without Dementia.

Older adults with dementia experience more care transitions than those without dementia yet are routinely excluded from transitional care studies. The purpose of the current study was to understand the transitional care delivered to older adults with dementia compared to those without dementia. The medical charts of 210 patients (126 with dementia, 84 without dementia) 70 years and older hospitalized at a single hospital were reviewed for evidence of transitional care, including discharge planning, patient education, and follow-up appointments. Patients with dementia were significantly less likely to receive education related to their follow-up needs, whom to contact after discharge, medication regimens after discharge, and symptoms after discharge than patients without dementia. Caregivers to patients with dementia have previously reported a desire for more education and information from hospital providers so they can advocate for patients in aftercare; therefore, nurses and social workers should consider providing education regardless of a patient's dementia diagnosis. [Journal of Gerontological Nursing, 45(8), 15-22.].

Letting Go: Conceptualizing Intervention De-implementation in Public Health and Social Service Settings.

The discontinuation of interventions that should be stopped, or de-implementation, has emerged as a novel line of inquiry within dissemination and implementation science. As this area grows in human services research, like public health and social work, theory is needed to help guide scientific endeavors. Given the infancy of de-implementation, this conceptual narrative provides a definition and criteria for determining if an intervention should be de-implemented. We identify three criteria for identifying interventions appropriate for de-implementation: (a) interventions that are not effective or harmful, (b) interventions that are not the most effective or efficient to provide, and (c) interventions that are no longer necessary. Detailed, well-documented examples illustrate each of the criteria. We describe de-implementation frameworks, but also demonstrate how other existing implementation frameworks might be applied to de-implementation research as a supplement. Finally, we conclude with a discussion of de-implementation in the context of other stages of implementation, like sustainability and adoption; next steps for de-implementation research, especially identifying interventions appropriate for de-implementation in a systematic manner; and highlight special ethical considerations to advance the field of de-implementation research.

Implementation strategies in pediatric neurocritical care.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Brain-directed critical care for children is a relatively new area of subspecialization in pediatric critical care. Pediatric neurocritical care teams combine the expertise of neurology, neurosurgery, and critical care medicine. The positive impact of delivering specialized care to pediatric patients with acute neurological illness is becoming more apparent, but the optimum way to implement and sustain the delivery of this is complicated and poorly understood. We aim to provide emerging evidence supporting that effective implementation of pediatric neurocritical care pathways can improve patient survival and outcomes. We also provide an overview of the most effective strategies across the field of implementation science that can facilitate deployment of neurocritical care pathways in the pediatric ICU. RECENT FINDINGS: Implementation strategies can broadly be grouped according to six categories: planning, educating, restructuring, financing, managing quality, and attending to the policy context. Using a combination of these strategies in the last decade, several institutions have improved patient morbidity and mortality. Although much work remains to be done, emerging evidence supports that implementation of evidence-based care pathways for critically ill children with two common neurological diagnoses - status epilepticus and traumatic brain injury - improves outcomes. SUMMARY: Pediatric and neonatal neurocritical care programs that support evidence-based care can be effectively structured using appropriately sequenced implementation strategies to improve outcomes across a variety of patient populations and in a variety of healthcare settings.

Infusing Science into Politics and Policy: The Importance of Legislators as an Audience in Mental Health Policy Dissemination Research.

Legislators (i.e., elected Senators and House Representatives at the federal- and state-level) are a critically important dissemination audience because they shape the architecture of the US mental health system through budgetary and regulatory decisions. In this Point of View, we argue that legislators are a neglected audience in mental health dissemination research. We synthesize relevant research, discuss its potential implications for dissemination efforts, identify challenges, and outline areas for future study.

Rethinking funding priorities in mental health research.

Mental health research funding priorities in high-income countries must balance longer-term investment in identifying neurobiological mechanisms of disease with shorter-term funding of novel prevention and treatment strategies to alleviate the current burden of mental illness. Prioritising one area of science over others risks reduced returns on the entire scientific portfolio.

Mental Health Clinicians' Participation in Web-Based Training for an Evidence Supported Intervention: Signs of Encouragement and Trouble Ahead.

Comprehensive scalable clinician training is needed to increase the impact of evidence-supported psychotherapies. This study was designed to ascertain clinician participation in different low-cost training activities, what predicts their training participation, and how participation can be increased. The study enrolled 163 clinicians. Of these, 105 completed a follow-up survey and 20 completed a more in-depth qualitative interview. Some activities (web training) attracted greater participation than others (e.g., discussion boards, role playing). Key findings include the desirability of self-paced learning and the flexibility it afforded practicing clinicians. However, some found the lack of accountability insurmountable. Many desired in-person training as a way to introduce accountability and motivation. While low-cost, relevant, self-paced learning appeals to practicing clinicians, it may need to be combined with opportunities for in-person training and accountability mechanisms in order to encourage large numbers of clinicians to complete training.