Organizational Capacity for Sexual Assault Prevention Within a U.S. Army Installation.

INTRODUCTION: Preventing military sexual assault (SA) is a DoD priority. Building prevention capacity could strengthen the impact of prevention programs and improve outcomes. Capacity was conceptualized as implementation knowledge and skills using the Getting To Outcomes (GTO) process and organizational-level capacities using the Prevention Evaluation Framework, a framework that applies best practices in prevention and implementation science to prevention at the program and organizational level. The present study assesses implementation knowledge and skills currently possessed by SA prevention personnel in one U.S. Army installation with the goal of identifying preexisting proficiencies and potential gaps. The study uses the Prevention Evaluation Framework organizational-level domains to identify organizational capacities that could be improved. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifteen SA prevention program personnel were recruited for individual 1-hour interviews from one U.S. Army installation. A semi-structured interview guide was developed by the study team to assess knowledge and skills within the GTO framework. Applied thematic analysis guided data coding and analysis. RESULTS: Participants reported a range of proficiencies and gaps in capacity for SA prevention. Within the prevention workforce capacity, proficiencies were skill in tailoring training, and an existing train-the-trainer model. Gaps were training to facilitate difficult conversations, and an inability to tailor trainings to audience needs. Two proficiencies related to the comprehensive approach were having a victim advocate present during trainings, and providing training across leadership levels. The final proficiency involved data. Existing data sources were viewed as useful for identifying the nature and extent of local problems. However, participants reported a lack of confidence and skill in selecting appropriate outcome measures and collecting and using primary data. Gaps in leadership capacity were cultural norms, lack of trust, leader investment, logistical difficulty working with leaders, and comfort engaging with leaders. Gaps in collaborative relationships were the lack of informal networking within the SA prevention area to include civilians. CONCLUSIONS: The GTO-specific knowledge and skills of SA prevention personnel at one U.S. Army installation revealed proficiencies and gaps in organizational capacities influencing the prevention mission. Findings indicate that GTO support could be useful for improving the quality of program activities. However, results also indicate that GTO support would be more effective if they were paired with sufficient prevention infrastructure at the organizational level.

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.

Receipt of Medications for Alcohol Use Disorder in the Veterans Health Administration: Comparison of Rates at the Intersections of Racialized and Ethnic Identity With Both Sex and Transgender Status.

OBJECTIVES: Medications for alcohol use disorder (MAUDs) are recommended for patients with alcohol use disorder yet are underprescribed. Consistent with Minority Stress and Intersectionality theories, persons with multiple sociodemographically marginalized identities (eg, Black women) often experience greater barriers to care and have poorer health outcomes. We use data from the Veterans Health Administration to assess disparities in Federal Drug Administration (FDA)-approved MAUDs and all effective MAUDs between the following groups: racialized and ethnic identity, sex, transgender status, and their intersections. METHODS: Among all Veterans Health Administration outpatients between August 1, 2015, and July 31, 2017, with documented alcohol screenings and an International Classification of Diseases diagnosis for alcohol use disorder in the 0-365 days prior (N = 308,238), we estimated the prevalence and 95% confidence intervals of receiving FDA-approved MAUDs and any MAUDs in the following year and compared them using χ2 or Fisher's exact test. Analyses are unadjusted to present true prevalence and group differences. RESULTS: The overall prevalence for MAUDs was low (FDA-MAUDs = 8.7%, any MAUDs = 20.0%). Within sex, Black males had the lowest rate of FDA-MAUDs (7.3%, [7.1-7.5]), whereas American Indian/Alaskan Native females had the highest (18.4%, [13.8-23.0]). Among those identified as transgender, Asian and Black transgender persons had the lowest rates of FDA-MAUDs (0%; 4.3%, [1.8-8.5], respectively), whereas American Indian/Alaskan Native transgender patients had the highest (33.3%, [2.5-64.1]). Similar patterns were observed for any MAUDs, with higher rates overall. CONCLUSIONS: Substantial variation exists in MAUD prescribing, with marginalized veterans disproportionately receiving MAUDs at lower and higher rates than average. Implementation and quality improvement efforts are needed to improve MAUD prescribing practices and reduce disparities.

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.

Suicide Prevention by Peers Offering Recovery Tactics (SUPPORT) for US Veterans With Serious Mental Illness: Community Engagement Approach.

BACKGROUND: Peer specialists are hired, trained, and accredited to share their lived experience of psychiatric illness to support other similar individuals through the recovery process. There are limited data on the role of peer specialists in suicide prevention, including their role in intervention development. OBJECTIVE: To better understand peer specialists within the Veterans Health Administration (VHA), we followed partnership community engagement and a formative research approach to intervention development to (1) identify barriers, facilitators, and perceptions of VHA peer specialists delivering a suicide prevention service and (2) develop and refine an intervention curriculum based on an evidence-informed preliminary intervention framework for veterans with serious mental illness (SMI). METHODS: Following the community engagement approach, VHA local and national peer support and mental health leaders, veterans with SMI, and veteran peer specialists met to develop a preliminary intervention framework. Next, VHA peer specialist advisors (n=5) and scientific advisors (n=6) participated in respective advisory boards and met every 2-4 months for more than 18 months via videoconferencing to address study objectives. The process used was a reflexive thematic analysis after each advisory board meeting. RESULTS: The themes discussed included (1) the desire for suicide prevention training for peer specialists, (2) determining the role of VHA peer specialists in suicide prevention, (3) integration of recovery themes in suicide prevention, and (4) difficulties using safety plans during a crisis. There were no discrepancies in thematic content between advisory boards. Advisor input led to the development of Suicide Prevention by Peers Offering Recovery Tactics (SUPPORT). SUPPORT includes training in general suicide prevention and a peer specialist-delivered intervention for veterans with SMI at an increased suicide risk. This training aims to increase the competence and confidence of peer specialists in suicide prevention and the intervention supports veterans with SMI at an increased suicide risk through their recovery process. CONCLUSIONS: This paper intends to document the procedures taken in suicide prevention intervention development, specifically those led by peer specialists, and to be a source for future research developing and evaluating similar interventions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05537376; https://classic.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05537376.

Model for Doctor of Nursing Practice Projects Based on Cross-Fertilization Between Improvement and Implementation Sciences: Protocol for Quality Improvement and Program Evaluation Studies.

BACKGROUND: Hundreds of nursing professionals graduate each year from Doctor of Nursing Practice (DNP) programs, entrusted with roles as practice scholars and leaders. Graduates are tasked to lead multidisciplinary knowledge implementation projects to improve safety, quality, and key performance metrics. Nevertheless, there is a continued lack of agreement and faculty dissatisfaction with the format, focus, and results of the DNP graduation projects. The use of a wide range of models and methodologies from different sciences for knowledge implementation introduces challenges to DNP students; affects the scientific rigor of the projects; and results in the overuse, superficial use, or misuse of the models. Quality improvement (QI) and program evaluation studies are substantial investments that may lead to waste and even harm if not well conducted. Traditional QI methodologies, commonly used in DNP projects, were found to be uncertain in improving health care outcomes. The complexity of health care systems calls for cross-fertilization between improvement and implementation sciences to improve health care outcomes. OBJECTIVE: This study describes the development, implementation, and evaluation of a hybrid model for QI and program evaluation studies to guide scholarship in the DNP program. METHODS: The hybrid model was based on cross-fertilization between improvement and implementation sciences. The model adapted the Getting to Outcome (GTO) and Knowledge to Action (KTA) models as the overarching process models for knowledge implementation. Within each phase of the GTO and KTA models, expected barriers and facilitators for the implementation and adoption of innovation were identified based on the CFIR (Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research). Accordingly, strategies to facilitate the implementation and adoption of innovations were identified based on a refined list of implementation strategies and QI tools. The choice of these models was based on the top 5 criteria for selecting implementation science theories and frameworks. Seven DNP students used the hybrid model to conduct QI projects. Students evaluated their experiences by responding to a Qualtrics survey. RESULTS: The hybrid model encouraged a comprehensive systematic way of thinking, provided tools essential to implementation success, emphasized the need for adaptability in implementation, maintained rigor in QI, and guided the sustainability of change initiatives. Some of the challenges faced by students included finding reliable and valid measures, attaining and maintaining staff buy-in, and competing organizational priorities. CONCLUSIONS: Cross-fertilization between improvement and implementation sciences provided a roadmap and systematic thinking for successful QI projects in the DNP program. The integration of the CFIR with the GTO or KTA process models, enforced by the use of evidence-based implementation strategies and QI tools, reflected the complexity of health care systems and emphasized the need for adaptability in implementation. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR1-10.2196/54213.

Integrating stakeholder feedback into the design of a peer-delivered primary care wellness program: A rapid qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Individuals seen in Primary Care with behavioral health concerns who decline behavioral health treatment may benefit from the support of peers (consumers in recovery from behavioral health concerns employed to support other consumers). Whole Health STEPS is a new intervention for Veterans in Primary Care with behavioral health concerns which combines essential elements of peers' role and the Whole Health model using a stepped-care design. We incorporated stakeholder feedback in the Whole Health STEPS design to improve fit with Veterans, peers, and primary care settings. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews with VA staff using questions derived from the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Participants were recruited via a maximum variation strategy across a national sample and interviewed between January 2021-April 2021. The analytic design was a rapid qualitative analysis. Interviews addressed design decisions and potential barriers and facilitators to future implementation. Then, we made adaptations to Whole Health STEPS and catalogued changes using the Framework for Adaptations and Modifications-Enhanced (FRAME). A VA peer conducted the interviews, participated in analyses, assisted with design modifications, and co-wrote this paper. RESULTS: Sixteen staff members from 9 VA primary care peer programs participated (8 peers and 8 supervisors/administrators). Feedback themes included: capitalizing on peer skills (e.g., navigation), ensuring patient-centered and flexible design, and making it easy and efficient (e.g., reducing session length). Understanding the structure of primary care peers' roles and their interactions with other programs helped us identify role conflicts (e.g., overlap with Whole Health Coaches and Health Behavior Coordinators), which led to design modifications to carve out a unique role for Whole Health STEPS. Staff also made recommendations about marketing materials and training tools to support Whole Health STEPS roll out. CONCLUSIONS: Feedback from frontline staff, including peers, in the design process was crucial to identifying essential modifications that would not have been possible after initial trials without re-evaluating efficacy due to the extent of the changes. Whole Health STEPS was adapted to fit within a range of program structures, emphasize peers' unique contributions, and streamline delivery. Lessons learned can be applied to other interventions.

Adaptive Designs in Implementation Science and Practice: Their Promise and the Need for Greater Understanding and Improved Communication.

The promise of adaptation and adaptive designs in implementation science has been hindered by the lack of clarity and precision in defining what it means to adapt, especially regarding the distinction between adaptive study designs and adaptive implementation strategies. To ensure a common language for science and practice, authors reviewed the implementation science literature and found that the term adaptive was used to describe interventions, implementation strategies, and trial designs. To provide clarity and offer recommendations for reporting and strengthening study design, we propose a taxonomy that describes fixed versus adaptive implementation strategies and implementation trial designs. To improve impact, (a) future implementation studies should prespecify implementation strategy core functions that in turn can be taught to and replicated by health system/community partners, (b) funders should support exploratory studies that refine and specify implementation strategies, and (c) investigators should systematically address design requirements and ethical considerations (e.g., randomization, blinding/masking) with health system/community partners. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Public Health, Volume 45 is April 2024. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.

Comparing the CFIR-ERIC matching tool recommendations to real-world strategy effectiveness data: a mixed-methods study in the Veterans Health Administration.

BACKGROUND: Practical and feasible methods for matching implementation strategies to diagnosed barriers of evidence-based interventions in real-world contexts are lacking. This evaluation compared actual implementation strategies applied with those recommended by an expert opinion-based tool to improve guideline-concordant cirrhosis care in a Veterans Health Administration national learning collaborative effort. METHODS: This convergent parallel mixed-methods study aimed to (1) identify pre-implementation Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) barriers to cirrhosis care through focus groups with frontline providers, (2) generate 20 recommended strategies using focus group identified barriers entered into the CFIR-Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) Implementation Strategy Matching Tool, (3) survey providers over two consecutive years on the actual use of 73 ERIC strategies and determine strategy effectiveness, (4) compare actual versus recommended strategy use, and (5) compare actual versus expected barriers by reverse applying the CFIR-ERIC Matching Tool. RESULTS: Eighteen semi-structured focus groups were conducted with 197 providers representing 95 VA sites to identify barriers to quality improvement, including cirrhosis care complexity, clarity of national goals, and local leadership support. The CFIR-ERIC Matching Tool recommended strategies such as assessing for readiness and needs, promoting adaptability, building local groups, preparing champions, and working with opinion leaders and early adopters. Subsequent strategy surveys found that sites used the top 20 "recommended" strategies no more frequently than other strategies. However, 14 (70%) of the top recommended strategies were significantly positively associated with cirrhosis care compared to 48% of actual strategies. Reverse CFIR-ERIC matching found that the strategies most used in the first year corresponded to the following barriers: opinion leaders, access to knowledge and information, and resources. The strategies most frequently employed in the second year addressed barriers such as champions, cosmopolitanism, readiness for implementation, relative priority, and patient needs and resources. Strategies used in both years were those that addressed adaptability, trialability, and compatibility. CONCLUSIONS: This study is among the first to empirically evaluate the relationship between CFIR-ERIC Matching Tool recommended strategies and actual strategy selection and effectiveness in the real world. We found closer connections between recommended strategies and strategy effectiveness compared to strategy frequency, suggesting validity of barrier identification, and application of the expert-informed tool.

Improving Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Prevention from the Bottom-up: a Pilot of Getting To Outcomes in the US Military.

While the Department of Defense (DoD) has given increased attention and priority to preventing sexual assault and sexual harassment (SA/SH), it remains a problem. To build its prevention capacity, DoD piloted Getting To Outcomes® (GTO®) from 2019 to 2022 at 10 military installations. GTO is an evidence-based planning and implementation support that has been used in many civilian contexts but has only recently been adapted for military SA/SH. The purpose of this study was to describe GTO use, identify its benefits and challenges, and discuss lessons the GTO effort yielded for prevention more broadly using a framework of organizational and program-level capacities needed for successful prevention in the military context, called the Prevention Evaluation Framework (PEF). GTO was piloted with 10 military installations ("sites") representing all Military Services, plus the Coast Guard and National Guard. GTO is comprised of a written guide, training, and ongoing coaching. The pilot's goal was for each site to use GTO to implement a SA/SH prevention program twice. Participants from each site were interviewed and data was collected on GTO steps completed, whether GTO spurred new evaluation activities and collaborations, and the degree of leadership support for GTO. Most sites completed all GTO steps at least once. Interviews showed that DoD participants believe GTO improved prevention understanding, planning, and evaluation capacity; strengthened confidence in chosen programs; and helped sites tailor programs to the military context. Barriers were the complexity of GTO, DoD personnel turnover, and the disruption that the COVID pandemic caused in sexual assault prevention program delivery. Many respondents were unsure if they would continue all of GTO after the coaching ended, but many believed they would continue at least some parts. According to the PEF, the GTO pilot revealed several additional prevention system gaps (e.g., need for leadership support) and changes needed to GTO (e.g., stronger leader and champion engagement), to support quality prevention. The military and other large organizations will need to focus on these issues to ensure prevention implementation and evaluation are conducted with quality.

Implementing Peer Specialists in Suicide Prevention Efforts in the Veterans Health Administration.

OBJECTIVE: The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) recognizes peer support as an underused intervention in suicide prevention. PREVAIL is a peer-based suicide prevention intervention that was designed and piloted with non-veteran patients recently hospitalized for suicidal thoughts or behaviors. The purpose of this study was to elicit veteran and stakeholder feedback to inform the adaptation of PREVAIL for piloting with veterans flagged for high suicide risk. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with multiple stakeholders from a VHA medical center in the northeast. Interviews focused on the perceived benefits and concerns of peer specialists directly addressing suicide risk with veterans. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using rapid qualitative analysis. RESULTS: Interviewees included clinical directors (n = 3), suicide prevention coordinators (n = 1), outpatient psychologists (n = 2), peer specialists (n = 1), and high-risk veterans (n = 2). Overall, peer specialists were viewed as possessing many distinct strengths in engaging and helping high-risk veterans as part of a team approach. Concerns included liability, adequate training, clinical supervision and support, and self-care for peer specialists. CONCLUSIONS: Findings indicated support and confidence that peer support specialists would be a valuable addition and could help fill existing gap in VHA's suicide prevention efforts.

Unhealthy alcohol use and brief intervention rates among high and low complexity veterans seeking primary care services in the Veterans Health Administration.

INTRODUCTION: Brief intervention (BI) is recommended for all primary care (PC) patients who screen positive for unhealthy alcohol use; however, patients with multiple chronic health conditions who are at high-risk of hospitalization (i.e., "high complexity" patients) may face disparities in receiving BIs in PC. The current study investigated whether high complexity and low complexity patients in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) differed regarding screening positive for unhealthy alcohol use, alcohol-use severity, and receipt of BI for those with unhealthy alcohol use. METHODS: Patients were veterans receiving PC services at the VHA in a mid-Atlantic region of the United States. The study extracted VHA administrative and clinical data for a total of 282,242 patients who had ≥1 PC visits between 1/1/2014 and 12/31/2014, during which they were screened for unhealthy alcohol use by the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test-Consumption (AUDIT-C). The study defined high complexity patients as those within and above the 90th percentile of risk for hospitalization per the VHA's Care Assessment Need Score. Logistic regression models assessed if being a high complexity patient was associated with screening positive for unhealthy alcohol use (AUDIT-C ≥ 5), severity of unhealthy alcohol use in those who screened positive (AUDIT-C score range 5-12), and receipt of BI in those who screened positive. RESULTS: Our sample was 94.5% male, 83% White, 13% Black, 4% other race, and 1.7% Hispanic. A total of 10,813 (3.8%) patients screened positive for unhealthy alcohol use from which we identified 569 (5.3%) high complexity and 10,128 (93.6%) low complexity patients (n = 116 removed due to missing complexity data). Relative to low complexity patients, high complexity patients were less likely to screen positive for unhealthy alcohol use (3.3% vs. 4.1%, AOR = 0.59, p < .001); however, in patients who screened positive, high complexity patients had higher AUDIT-C scores (Mean AUDIT-C = 7.75 vs. 6.87, AOR = 1.46, p < .001) and were less likely to receive a BI (78.0% vs. 92.6%, AOR = 0.42, p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Disparities in BI exist for highly complex patients despite having more severe unhealthy alcohol use. Future research should examine the specific patient- and/or clinic-level factors impeding BI delivery for complex patients.

Outcomes of a peer-led navigation program, PARTNER-MH, for racially minoritized Veterans receiving mental health services: a pilot randomized controlled trial to assess feasibility and acceptability.

This pilot study explored the feasibility and acceptability of PARTNER-MH, which aimed to engage racially diverse Veterans in mental health services, facilitate their active participation in care, and improve their communication with providers. Fifty participants were randomized to the intervention or a waitlist control group. For primary outcomes, we assessed the feasibility of the study design and PARTNER-MH's feasibility and acceptability. For secondary outcomes, we explored preliminary effects on patient engagement, patient activation, shared decision-making, and health-related outcomes. The study had a recruitment rate of 68%, enrollment rate of 91%, and a follow-up retention rate of 72%. For intervention feasibility and acceptability, fidelity scores were satisfactory and improved over time, session attendance was modest with 33% of participants completing ≥6 sessions, and 89% of participants were satisfied with the intervention. For secondary outcomes, patients in the intervention arm showed significant improvement on self-reported mental health and depression, compared with those in the control group at both 6- and 9-month follow-ups. However, there were no significant differences between study arms on the other measures. Pilot results provide support for future testing of PARTNER-MH in a larger trial, although modifications are needed to increase session attendance and follow-up retention rate. CLINICAL TRIAL INFORMATION: The study was preregistered at Clinical Trials.gov. The study Trial registration number is ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04515771.

This study tested whether a peer-led navigation program, PARTNER-MH, can be delivered effectively by peer specialists in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) healthcare system to racially minoritized Veterans who are receiving mental healthcare. The study evaluated our ability to recruit and retain participants, deliver the intervention, and examined satisfaction with the program. We also explored preliminary effects of the program. Participants were successfully recruited for the study and peers were able to deliver the program effectively. Participants reported high satisfaction with the program and significant improvements in mental health outcomes, although completion rate of the program was low. Results provide support for future testing of PARTNER-MH in a larger trial, with modifications to increase program session attendance and retention.

Refining Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) strategy surveys using cognitive interviews with frontline providers.

BACKGROUND: The Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) compilation includes 73 defined implementation strategies clustered into nine content areas. This taxonomy has been used to track implementation strategies over time using surveys. This study aimed to improve the ERIC survey using cognitive interviews with non-implementation scientist clinicians. METHODS: Starting in 2015, we developed and fielded annual ERIC surveys to evaluate liver care in the Veterans Health Administration (VA). We invited providers who had completed at least three surveys to participate in cognitive interviews (October 2020 to October 2021). Before the interviews, participants reviewed the complete 73-item ERIC survey and marked which strategies were unclear due to wording, conceptual confusion, or overlap with other strategies. They then engaged in semi-structured cognitive interviews to describe the experience of completing the survey and elaborate on which strategies required further clarification. RESULTS: Twelve VA providers completed surveys followed by cognitive interviews. The "Engage Consumer" and "Support Clinicians" clusters were rated most highly in terms of conceptual and wording clarity. In contrast, the "Financial" cluster had the most wording and conceptual confusion. The "Adapt and Tailor to Context" cluster strategies were considered to have the most redundancy. Providers outlined ways in which the strategies could be clearer in terms of wording (32%), conceptual clarity (51%), and clarifying the distinction between strategies (51%). CONCLUSIONS: Cognitive interviews with ERIC survey participants allowed us to identify and address issues with strategy wording, combine conceptually indistinct strategies, and disaggregate multi-barreled strategies. Improvements made to the ERIC survey based on these findings will ultimately assist VA and other institutions in designing, evaluating, and replicating quality improvement efforts.

Development and Pilot Test of the Competency Assessment for Sexual Assault Prevention Practitioners.

Sexual assault is a preventable problem that is widespread and particularly prevalent for certain populations (e.g., female college students, Native American women). Despite the gravity of this public health priority, most individuals tasked with the primary prevention of sexual assault are not adequately trained for the job (e.g., professionals often trained solely in sexual assault response). To achieve optimal outcomes, professionals responsible for implementing sexual assault prevention must possess certain core competencies, or knowledge and skills essential for job performance, which include those needed for any primary prevention effort in addition to those specific to sexual assault prevention. The purpose of this study was to develop and assess the construct validity of a competency assessment tool for sexual assault prevention practitioners. An existing assessment tool, which was designed for injury and violence prevention practitioners, was tailored to reflect competencies needed by sexual assault prevention practitioners as informed by the literature. The newly tailored measure was pilot tested with 33 individuals with varying levels of expertise with sexual assault prevention. These individuals were categorized into three groups based on self-rated sexual assault prevention expertise (low, medium, or high) to assess group differences. As expected, the high expertise group rated higher knowledge in all the competencies than the medium and low expertise groups (except for the competency pertaining to developing and maintaining competency). Data collection and analyses were conducted in 2020. Implications for how the assessment tool can be used to identify gaps among individual practitioners and teams of practitioners are discussed.

Scaling Up Implementation Support for Violence Prevention and Resilience Promotion in the Air Force.

Closing the gap between research and practice requires that organizations can consistently incorporate new ideas and best practices. The Department of the Air Force (DAF) Integrated Resilience Directorate is leading a coordinated effort to increase the adoption of evidence-based violence prevention and resilience promotion programs across the entire Department. To support this effort, DAF is using Getting To Outcomes (GTO), an evidence-based implementation support that helps organizations plan, implement, and self-evaluate programs. Thus, the DAF is not only scaling up prevention programs but is also embarking on the largest scale-up of GTO to date. The study team trained personnel from every Air Force installation across the world to use GTO for their programs. Quantitative findings from training questionnaires and ratings of implementation plans as well as qualitative results from resilience personnel interviews suggest some lessons learned for scaling up implementation support. This study builds on established implementation science frameworks for scaling up interventions by identifying critical tasks and unique supports needed to scale up evidence-based prevention. Results suggest GTO helped DAF scale-up prevention across the Department, and that establishing leadership buy-in, simplifying evidence-based program selection and adaptation, monitoring implementation and outcomes, and creating dedicated prevention practitioner roles are critical tasks to support scale-up of evidence-based prevention. Unique supports needed to scale-up evidence-based prevention include multitiered learning systems; integrated tools that improve access to data and evolving evidence; prevention personnel with skills in program management, adaptation, and evaluation; timely crosscutting data; continuous learning to support sustainability; and leadership buy-in.

Barriers and Enablers to Implementing Peer Specialists in Veterans Health Administration Primary Care: a Qualitative Study.

BACKGROUND: Peer specialists (PSs) are increasingly deployed in a variety of settings to provide patient-centered care. In the Veterans Health Administration (VHA), efforts are underway to integrate PSs into primary care settings. Little is known about the barriers and enablers to implementing PS services in primary care. OBJECTIVE: To characterize barriers and enablers to implementing PSs in primary care. DESIGN: Qualitative study using semi-structured interviews. PARTICIPANTS: PSs and their supervisors from 25 VHA primary care settings. APPROACH: PSs and supervisors were interviewed about their experiences integrating PSs in primary care. Rapid analysis was conducted to identify barriers and enablers to PS integration, as well as to examine the role of external facilitation in implementation experiences. KEY RESULTS: Fifty-two interviews were completed (25 PSs from 19 sites and 27 supervisors from 24 sites). Barriers and enablers to PS integration in VHA primary care settings included PS role clarity and constraints, provider buy-in, supervision, leadership support, and primary care culture. The barriers and enablers were consistent across both external facilitation and control sites. CONCLUSIONS: Results describe how the characteristics of the innovation, the recipients, and the context impact successful implementation of PSs in primary care settings. The identification of barriers and enablers holds promise for improving future efforts to embed PSs in primary care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This project is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov with number NCT02732600 (URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02732600 ).

Getting To Implementation (GTI)-Teach: A seven-step approach for teaching the fundamentals of implementation science.

Introduction: Implementation Science (IS) is a complex and rapidly evolving discipline, posing challenges for educators. We developed, implemented, and evaluated a novel, pragmatic approach to teach IS. Methods: Getting To Implementation (GTI)-Teach was developed as a seven-step educational model to guide students through the process of developing, conducting, and sustaining an IS research project. During the four-week online course, students applied the steps to self-selected implementation problems. Students were invited to complete two online post-course surveys to assess course satisfaction and self-reported changes in IS knowledge and relevance of GTI-Teach Steps to their work. Results were summarized using descriptive statistics; self-reported post-course changes in IS knowledge were compared using paired t-tests. Results: GTI-Teach was developed to include seven Steps: 1. Define the implementation problem; 2. Conceptualize the problem; 3. Prioritize implementation barriers and facilitators; 4. Select and tailor implementation strategies; 5. Design an implementation study; 6. Evaluate implementation; 7. Sustain implementation. Thirteen students, ranging in experience from medical students to full professors, enrolled in and completed the first GTI-Teach course. Of the seven students (54%) completing an end-of course survey, six (86%) were very satisfied with the course. Ten students (77%) responded to the tailored, 6-month post-course follow-up survey. They retrospectively reported a significant increase in their knowledge across all steps of GTI-Teach (1.3-1.8 points on a 5-point Likert scale) and rated each of the Steps as highly relevant to their work. Conclusions: GTI-Teach is a seven-step model for teaching IS fundamentals that students reported increased their knowledge and was relevant to their work.

Proactive, Recovery-Oriented Treatment Navigation to Engage Racially Diverse Veterans in Mental Healthcare (PARTNER-MH), a Peer-Led Patient Navigation Intervention for Racially and Ethnically Minoritized Veterans in Veterans Health Administration Mental Health Services: Protocol for a Mixed Methods Randomized Controlled Feasibility Study.

BACKGROUND: Mental health care disparities are persistent and have increased in recent years. Compared with their White counterparts, members of racially and ethnically minoritized groups have less access to mental health care. Minoritized groups also have lower engagement in mental health treatment and are more likely to experience ineffective patient-provider communication, which contribute to negative mental health care experiences and poor mental health outcomes. Interventions that embrace recovery-oriented practices to support patient engagement and empower patients to participate in their mental health care and treatment decisions may help reduce mental health care disparities. Designed to achieve this goal, the Proactive, Recovery-Oriented Treatment Navigation to Engage Racially Diverse Veterans in Mental Healthcare (PARTNER-MH) is a peer-led patient navigation intervention that aims to engage minoritized patients in mental health treatment, support them to play a greater role in their care, and facilitate their participation in shared treatment decision-making. OBJECTIVE: The primary aim of this study is to assess the feasibility and acceptability of PARTNER-MH delivered to patients over 6 months. The second aim is to evaluate the preliminary effects of PARTNER-MH on patient activation, patient engagement, and shared decision-making. The third aim is to examine patient-perceived barriers to and facilitators of engagement in PARTNER-MH as well as contextual factors that may inhibit or promote the integration, sustainability, and scalability of PARTNER-MH using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. METHODS: This pilot study evaluates the feasibility and acceptability of PARTNER-MH in a Veterans Health Administration (VHA) mental health setting using a mixed methods, randomized controlled trial study design. PARTNER-MH is tested under real-world conditions using certified VHA peer specialists (peers) selected through usual VHA hiring practices and assigned to the mental health service line. Peers provide PARTNER-MH and usual peer support services. The study compares the impact of PARTNER-MH versus a wait-list control group on patient activation, patient engagement, and shared decision-making as well as other patient-level outcomes. PARTNER-MH also examines organizational factors that could impact its future implementation in VHA settings. RESULTS: Participants (N=50) were Veterans who were mostly male (n=31, 62%) and self-identified as non-Hispanic (n=44, 88%) and Black (n=35, 70%) with a median age of 45 to 54 years. Most had at least some college education, and 32% (16/50) had completed ≥4 years of college. Randomization produced comparable groups in terms of characteristics and outcome measures at baseline, except for sex. CONCLUSIONS: Rather than simply documenting health disparities among vulnerable populations, PARTNER-MH offers opportunities to evaluate a tailored, culturally sensitive, system-based intervention to improve patient engagement and patient-provider communication in mental health care for racially and ethnically minoritized individuals. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04515771; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04515771. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/37712.

Peer specialists deliver cognitive behavioral social skills training compared to social skills training and treatment as usual to veterans with serious mental illness: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Serious mental illness (SMI) affects 4.6% of the American population. While treatments are available, adherence to specific regimens is often suboptimal. Multiple organizations, such as the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), have called for more options that improve accessibility and engagement to treatment among individuals with SMI. This study protocol answers such calls by testing the effectiveness of peer specialists-individuals with SMI trained to use their experience to help others with SMI-in delivering social skills training (SST) and cognitive behavioral social skills training (CBSST), evidence-based treatments effective at engaging individuals with SMI to make behavioral and cognitive changes. Peer specialists have been shown to be adept at engaging those with SMI in treatment; however, their ability to deliver these structured treatments is unknown. METHODS: This study is a randomized, hybrid 1, research assistant-blinded, superiority trial. A total of 252 veterans with SMI will be recruited and randomized to one of three arms: CBSST-Peer vs. SST-Peer vs. treatment as usual. Participants randomized to CBSST-Peer or SST-Peer will participate in a 20-week group-based intervention that meets weekly for a 60-min class. All participants will complete 4 study assessments at baseline, 10 weeks, 20 weeks, and 32 weeks. A multidimensional battery of functional outcomes will be used with the Independent Living Skills Survey (ILSS) as the primary outcome measure. Post-study completion, veterans who participated in the CBSST-Peer or SST-Peer arms will randomly be invited to participate in focus groups, and peer specialists will complete interviews to further assess the effectiveness of each intervention. DISCUSSION: Improving care and outcomes for individuals with SMI is a national priority. To improve care, it is imperative to think about new ways to improve engagement and accessibility to care. This study provides an innovative solution to this problem by evaluating how two different types of treatment, delivered by peer specialists, compare to usual care. The results of the study will allow for the expansion of treatment options that improve access and engagement among veterans with SMI.