Providing HIV-assisted partner services to partners of partners in western Kenya: an implementation science study.

INTRODUCTION: Assisted partner services (APS), or exposure notification and HIV testing for sexual partners of persons diagnosed HIV positive (index clients), is recommended by the World Health Organization. Most APS literature focuses on outcomes among index clients and their partners. There is little data on the benefits of providing APS to partners of partners diagnosed with HIV. METHODS: We utilized data from a large-scale APS implementation project across 31 facilities in western Kenya from 2018 to 2022. Females testing HIV positive at facilities were offered APS; those who consented provided contact information for all male sexual partners in the last 3 years. Male partners were notified of their potential HIV exposure and offered HIV testing services (HTS). Males newly testing positive were also offered APS and asked to provide contact information for their female partners in the last 3 years. Female partners of male partners (FPPs) were provided exposure notification and HTS. All participants with HIV were followed up at 12 months post-enrolment to assess linkage-to antiretroviral treatment (ART) and viral suppression. We compared HIV positivity, demographics and linkage outcomes among female index clients and FPPs. RESULTS: Overall, 5708 FPPs were elicited from male partners, of whom 4951 received HTS through APS (87% coverage); 291 FPPs newly tested HIV positive (6% yield), an additional 1743 (35.2%) reported a prior HIV diagnosis, of whom 99% were on ART at baseline. At 12 months follow-up, most FPPs were taking ART (92%) with very few adverse events: <1% reported intimate partner violence or reported relationship dissolution. FPPs were more likely than female index clients to report HIV risk behaviours including no condom use at last sex (45% vs. 30%) and multiple partners (38% vs. 19%). CONCLUSIONS: Providing HIV testing via APS to FPP is a safe and effective strategy to identify newly diagnosed females and achieve high linkage and retention to ART and can be an efficient means of identifying HIV cases in the era of declining HIV incidence. The high proportion of FPPs reporting HIV risk behaviours suggests APS may help interrupt community HIV transmission via increased knowledge of HIV status and linkage to treatment.

Understanding adaptive responses in PrEP service delivery in Belgian HIV clinics: a multiple case study using an implementation science framework.

INTRODUCTION: In Belgium, oral HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is primarily provided in specialized clinical settings. Optimal implementation of PrEP services can help to substantially reduce HIV transmission. However, insights into implementation processes, and their complex interactions with local context, are limited. This study examined factors that influence providers' adaptive responses in the implementation of PrEP services in Belgian HIV clinics. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative multiple case study on PrEP care implementation in eight HIV clinics. Thirty-six semi-structured interviews were conducted between January 2021 and May 2022 with a purposive sample of PrEP care providers (e.g. physicians, nurses, psychologists), supplemented by 50 hours of observations of healthcare settings and clinical interactions. Field notes from observations and verbatim interview transcripts were thematically analysed guided by a refined iteration of extended Normalisation Process Theory. RESULTS: Implementing PrEP care in a centralized service delivery system required considerable adaptive capacity of providers to balance the increasing workload with an adequate response to PrEP users' individual care needs. As a result, clinic structures were re-organized to allow for more efficient PrEP care processes, compatible with other clinic-level priorities. Providers adapted clinical and policy norms on PrEP care (e.g. related to PrEP prescribing practices and which providers can deliver PrEP services), to flexibly tailor care to individual clients' situations. Interprofessional relationships were reconfigured in line with organizational and clinical adaptations; these included task-shifting from physicians to nurses, leading them to become increasingly trained and specialized in PrEP care. As nurse involvement grew, they adopted a crucial role in responding to PrEP users' non-medical needs (e.g. providing psychosocial support). Moreover, clinicians' growing collaboration with sexologists and psychologists, and interactions with PrEP users' family physician, became crucial in addressing complex psychosocial needs of PrEP clients, while also alleviating the burden of care on busy HIV clinics. CONCLUSIONS: Our study in Belgian HIV clinics reveals that the implementation of PrEP care presents a complex-multifaceted-undertaking that requires substantial adaptive work to ensure seamless integration within existing health services. To optimize integration in different settings, policies and guidelines governing PrEP care implementation should allow for sufficient flexibility and tailoring according to respective local health systems.

Fostering citizen-engaged HIV implementation science.

INTRODUCTION: Successful implementation of evidence-based practices depends on contextual factors like stakeholder engagement, the socio-political environment, resource availability, and stakeholders' felt needs and preferences. Nevertheless, inequities in implementation exist and undermine efforts to address HIV in marginalized key populations. Implementation science shows promise in addressing such inequities in the HIV response, but can be limited without meaningful engagement from citizens or communities. DISCUSSION: We define the concept of a citizen-engaged HIV implementation science as one that involves citizens and communities deeply in HIV implementation science activities. In this commentary, we discuss how citizen science approaches can be leveraged to spur equity in HIV implementation science. Drawing on three areas previously defined by Geng and colleagues that serve to drive impactful implementation science in the HIV response, we discuss how citizens can be engaged when considering "whose perspectives?", "what questions are being asked?" and "how are questions asked?". With respect to "whose perspectives?" a citizen-engaged HIV implementation science would leverage participatory methods and tools, such as co-creation, co-production and crowdsourcing approaches, to engage the public in identifying challenges, solve health problems and implement solutions. In terms of "what questions are being asked?", we discuss how efforts are being made to synthesize citizen or community-led approaches with existing implementation science frameworks and approaches. This also means that we ensure communities have a say in interrogating and deconstructing such frameworks and adapting them to local contexts through participatory approaches. Finally, when considering "how are questions asked?", we argue for the development and adoption of broad, guiding principles and frameworks that account for dynamic contexts to promote citizen-engaged research in HIV implementation science. This also means avoiding narrow definitions that limit the creativity, innovation and ground-up wisdom of local citizens. CONCLUSIONS: By involving communities and citizens in the development and growth of HIV implementation science, we can ensure that our implementation approaches remain equitable and committed to bridging divides and ending AIDS as a public health threat. Ultimately, efforts should be made to foster a citizen- and community-engaged HIV implementation science to spur equity in our global HIV response.

Using Implementation Science to Improve Short Peripheral Intravenous Catheter Outcomes.

Short peripheral intravenous catheters (short PIVCs) are commonly used in acute care, guided by evidence-based policy with interventions to limit premature failure. Research on how nurses use evidence and change processes to optimize outcomes is needed. The study objective was to use a theory-based implementation science approach to evaluate and improve short PIVC insertion and care processes and reduce removals for adverse outcomes in acute care. This mixed-methods study was conducted with inpatient nursing units (n = 23) at a large urban quaternary medical center. Units identified and implemented one PIVC care intervention that could lower catheter removals for adverse outcomes over 3 months. Data from multiple sources were convergently analyzed to evaluate process and outcomes postintervention. Although overall frequency of PIVC removals for adverse outcomes was unchanged, several units improved their outcomes using implementation strategies. The determinant framework provides a plausible explanation for the study results. While adverse outcome rates remained below published rates, some units had limited success improving outcomes with traditional change strategies. Implementation strategies and readily accessible data can offer nursing units a new approach to effectively deploy, monitor, and maintain interventions to achieve improved outcomes.

How is tailored implementation undertaken using a self-guided toolkit? Qualitative study of the ItFits-toolkit in the ImpleMentAll project.

BACKGROUND: The process of tailored implementation is ill-defined and under-explored. The ItFits-toolkit was developed and subsequently tested as a self-guided online platform to facilitate implementation of tailored strategies for internet-based cognitive behavioural therapy (iCBT) services. In ImpleMentAll, ItFits-toolkit had a small but positive effect on the primary outcome of iCBT normalisation. This paper investigates, from a qualitative perspective, how implementation teams developed and undertook tailored implementation using the toolkit within the trial. METHODS: Implementation teams in thirteen sites from nine countries (Europe and Australia) used the ItFits-toolkit for six months minimum, consistent with the trial protocol. A qualitative process evaluation was conducted. Descriptive data regarding goals, barriers, strategies, and implementation plans collected within the toolkit informed qualitative data collection in real time. Qualitative data included remote longitudinal interviews (n = 55) with implementation team members (n = 30) and observations of support calls (n = 19) with study sites. Qualitative data were analysed thematically, using a team-based approach. RESULTS: Implementation teams developed and executed tailored implementation projects across all steps in the toolkit process. Working in a structured way but with room for flexibility, decisions were shaped by team members' ideas and goals, iterative stakeholder engagement, internal and external influences, and the context of the ImpleMentAll project. Although teams reported some positive impacts of their projects, 'time', both for undertaking the work, and for seeing project impacts, was described as a key factor in decisions about implementation strategies and assessments of success. CONCLUSION: This study responds directly to McHugh et al.'s (2022) call for empirical description of what implementation tailoring looks like in action, in service settings. Self-guided facilitation of tailored implementation enables implementers in service settings to undertake tailoring within their organisations. Implementation tailoring takes considerable time and involves detailed work but can be supported through the provision of implementation science informed guidance and materials, iterative and ongoing stakeholder engagement, and working reflectively in response to external influencing factors. Directions for advancement of tailored implementation are suggested.

Improving medication adherence among persons with cardiovascular disease through m-health and community health worker-led interventions in Kerala; protocol for a type II effectiveness-implementation research-(SHRADDHA-ENDIRA).

BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the leading cause of mortality worldwide, and at present, India has the highest burden of acute coronary syndrome and ST-elevation myocardial infarction (MI). A key reason for poor outcomes is non-adherence to medication. METHODS: The intervention is a 2 × 2 factorial design trial applying two interventions individually and in combination with 1:1 allocation ratio: (i) ASHA-led medication adherence initiative comprising of home visits and (ii) m-health intervention using reminders and self-reporting of medication use. This design will lead to four potential experimental conditions: (i) ASHA-led intervention, (ii) m-health intervention, (iii) ASHA and m-health intervention combination, (iv) standard of care. The cluster randomized trial has been chosen as it randomizes communities instead of individuals, avoiding contamination between participants. Subcenters are a natural subset of the health system, and they will be considered as the cluster/unit. The factorial cluster randomized controlled trial (cRCT) will also incorporate a nested health economic evaluation to assess the cost-effectiveness and return on investment (ROI) of the interventions on medication adherence among patients with CVDs. The sample size has been calculated to be 393 individuals per arm with 4-5 subcenters in each arm. A process evaluation to understand the effect of the intervention in terms of acceptability, adoption (uptake), appropriateness, costs, feasibility, fidelity, penetration (integration of a practice within a specific setting), and sustainability will be done. DISCUSSION: The effect of different types of intervention alone and in combination will be assessed using a cluster randomized design involving 18 subcenter areas. The trial will explore local knowledge and perceptions and empower people by shifting the onus onto themselves for their medication adherence. The proposal is aligned to the WHO-NCD aims of improving the availability of the affordable basic technologies and essential medicines, training the health workforce and strengthening the capacity of at the primary care level, to address the control of NCDs. The proposal also helps expand the use of digital technologies to increase health service access and efficacy for NCD treatment and may help reduce cost of treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial has been registered with the Clinical Trial Registry of India (CTRI), reference number CTRI/2023/10/059095.

Assessing LLIN distribution implementation using evidence-informed intervention core elements: a qualitative study in a resource-constrained setting.

BACKGROUND: The National Malaria Elimination Programme implements the mass LLIN Distribution Campaigns in Ghana. Implementation science promotes the systematic study of social contexts, individual experiences, real-world environments, partnerships, and stakeholder consultations regarding the implementation of evidence-informed interventions. In this paper, we assess the core elements of the mass LLIN distribution campaign in a resource constrained setting to learn best implementation practices. Three core domains were assessed through the application of Galbraith's taxonomy (i.e., implementation, content, and pedagogy) for evidence-informed intervention implementation. METHODS: Six districts in two regions (Eastern and Volta) in Ghana participated in this study. Fourteen Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) were conducted across these communities. Eligible participants were purposively sampled considering age, occupation, gender, and care giving for children under 5 years and household head roles. All audio-recorded FGDs were transcribed verbatim, data was assessed and coded through deductive and inductive processes. NVivo software version 13 was used for the coding process. Themes were refined, legitimized, and the most compelling extracts selected to produce the results. RESULTS: Sixty-nine (69) caregivers of children under 5 years and sixty (60) household heads participated in the FGDs. All caregivers were females (69), whilst household heads included more males (41). Core elements identified under implementation domain of the LLIN distribution campaign in Ghana include the registration and distribution processes, preceded by engagement with traditional authorities and continuous involvement of community health volunteers during implementation. For pedagogy domain, core elements include delivery of intervention through outreaches, illustrations, demonstrations, and the use of multiple communication channels. Core elements realized within the content domain include information on effective malaria prevention, and provision of information to enhance their self-efficacy. Yet, participants noted gaps (e.g., misuse) in the desired behavioural outcome of LLIN use and a heavy campaign focus on women. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS: Although the implementation of the mass LLIN distribution campaigns exhibit components of core elements of evidence informed interventions (implementation, content and pedagogy), it has not achieved its desired behavioural change intentions (i.e. continuous LLIN use). Future campaigns may consider use of continuous innovative pedagogical approaches at the community level and lessons learnt from this study to strengthen the implementation process of evidence-based health interventions. There is also the need for standardization of core elements to identify the number of core elements required within each domain to achieve efficacy. ETHICAL APPROVAL: Ethical clearance was obtained from the Ghana Health Service Ethics Review Committee (GHS-ERC: 002/06/21) before the commencement of all data collection.

Predictors of the sustainability for an evidence-based eating disorder prevention program delivered by college peer educators.

BACKGROUND: Despite ongoing efforts to introduce evidence-based interventions (EBIs) into mental health care settings, little research has focused on the sustainability of EBIs in these settings. College campuses are a natural place to intervene with young adults who are at high risk for mental health disorders, including eating disorders. The current study tested the effect of three levels of implementation support on the sustainability of an evidence-based group eating disorder prevention program, the Body Project, delivered by peer educators. We also tested whether intervention, contextual, or implementation process factors predicted sustainability. METHODS: We recruited 63 colleges with peer educator programs and randomly assigned them to (a) receive a 2-day Train-the-Trainer (TTT) training in which peer educators were trained to implement the Body Project and supervisors were taught how to train future peer educators (TTT), (b) TTT training plus a technical assistance (TA) workshop (TTT + TA), or (c) TTT plus the TA workshop and quality assurance (QA) consultations over 1-year (TTT + TA + QA). We tested whether implementation support strategies, perceived characteristics of the intervention and attitudes towards evidence-based interventions at baseline and the proportion of completed implementation activities during the implementation year predicted three school-level dichotomous sustainability outcomes (offering Body Project groups, training peer educators, training supervisors) over the subsequent two-year sustainability period using logistic regression models. RESULTS: Implementation support strategies did not significantly predict any sustainability outcomes, although a trend suggested that colleges randomized to the TTT + TA + QA strategy were more likely to train new supervisors (OR = 5.46, 95% CI [0.89-33.38]). Colleges that completed a greater proportion of implementation activities were more likely to offer Body Project groups (OR = 1.53, 95% CI [1.19-1.98]) and train new peer educators during the sustainability phase (OR = 1.39, 95% CI [1.10-1.74]). Perceived positive characteristics of the Body Project predicted training new peer educators (OR = 18.42, 95% CI [1.48-299.66]), which may be critical for sustainability in routine settings with high provider turnover. CONCLUSIONS: Helping schools complete more implementation activities and increasing the perceived positive characteristics of a prevention program may result in greater sustainment of prevention program implementation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was preregistered on 12/07/17 with ClinicalTrials.gov, ID NCT03409809, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03409809 .

De-implementation strategy to reduce unnecessary antibiotic prescriptions for ambulatory HIV-infected patients with upper respiratory tract infections in Mozambique: a study protocol of a cluster randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Antibiotics are globally overprescribed for the treatment of upper respiratory tract infections (URTI), especially in persons living with HIV. However, most URTIs are caused by viruses, and antibiotics are not indicated. De-implementation is perceived as an important area of research that can lead to reductions in unnecessary, wasteful, or harmful practices, such as excessive or inappropriate antibiotic use for URTI, through the employment of evidence-based interventions to reduce these practices. Research into strategies that lead to successful de-implementation of unnecessary antibiotic prescriptions within the primary health care setting is limited in Mozambique. In this study, we propose a protocol designed to evaluate the use of a clinical decision support algorithm (CDSA) for promoting the de-implementation of unnecessary antibiotic prescriptions for URTI among ambulatory HIV-infected adult patients in primary healthcare settings. METHODS: This study is a multicenter, two-arm, cluster randomized controlled trial, involving six primary health care facilities in Maputo and Matola municipalities in Mozambique, guided by an innovative implementation science framework, the Dynamic Adaption Process. In total, 380 HIV-infected patients with URTI symptoms will be enrolled, with 190 patients assigned to both the intervention and control arms. For intervention sites, the CDSAs will be posted on either the exam room wall or on the clinician´s exam room desk for ease of reference during clinical visits. Our sample size is powered to detect a reduction in antibiotic use by 15%. We will evaluate the effectiveness and implementation outcomes and examine the effect of multi-level (sites and patients) factors in promoting the de-implementation of unnecessary antibiotic prescriptions. The effectiveness and implementation of our antibiotic de-implementation strategy are the primary outcomes, whereas the clinical endpoints are the secondary outcomes. DISCUSSION: This research will provide evidence on the effectiveness of the use of the CDSA in promoting the de-implementation of unnecessary antibiotic prescribing in treating acute URTI, among ambulatory HIV-infected patients. Findings will bring evidence for the need to scale up strategies for the de-implementation of unnecessary antibiotic prescription practices in additional healthcare sites within the country. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN, ISRCTN88272350. Registered 16 May 2024, https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN88272350.

Adaptability, Scalability and Sustainability (ASaS) of complex health interventions: a systematic review of theories, models and frameworks.

BACKGROUND: Complex health interventions (CHIs) are increasingly used in public health, clinical research and education to reduce the burden of disease worldwide. Numerous theories, models and frameworks (TMFs) have been developed to support implementation of CHIs. This systematic review aims to identify and critique theoretical frameworks concerned with three features of implementation; adaptability, scalability and sustainability (ASaS). By dismantling the constituent theories, analysing their component concepts and then exploring factors that influence each theory the review team hopes to offer an enhanced understanding of considerations when implementing CHIs. METHODS: This review searched PubMed MEDLINE, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Google Scholar for research investigating the TMFs of complex health interventions. Narrative synthesis was employed to examine factors that may influence the adaptability, scalability and sustainability of complex health interventions. RESULTS: A total of 9763 studies were retrieved from the five databases (PubMed, MEDLINE, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Google Scholar). Following removal of duplicates and application of the eligibility criteria, 35 papers were eligible for inclusion. Influencing factors can be grouped within outer context (socio-political context; leadership funding, inter-organisational networks), inner context; (client advocacy; organisational characteristics), intervention characteristics (supervision, monitoring and evaluation), and bridging factors (individual adopter or provider characteristics). CONCLUSION: This review confirms that identified TMFS do not typically include the three components of adaptability, scalability, and sustainability. Current approaches focus on high income countries or generic "whole world" approaches with few frameworks specific to low- and middle-income countries. The review offers a starting point for further exploration of adaptability, scalability and sustainability, within a low- and middle-income context. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Not registered.

Closing the gap: advancing implementation science through training and capacity building.

In their article on "Navigating the Field of Implementation Science Towards Maturity: Challenges and Opportunities," Chambers and Emmons describe the rapid growth of implementation science along with remaining challenges. A significant gap remains in training and capacity building. Formats for capacity building include university degree programs, summer training institutes, workshops, and conferences. In this letter, we describe and amplify on five key areas, including the need to (1) identify advanced competencies, (2) increase the volume and reach of trainings, (3) sustain trainings, (4) build equity focused trainings, and (5) develop global capacity. We hope that the areas we highlight will aid in addressing several key challenges to prioritize in future efforts to build greater capacity in implementation science.

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.

Establishing evidence criteria for implementation strategies in the US: a Delphi study for HIV services.

BACKGROUND: There are no criteria specifically for evaluating the quality of implementation research and recommending implementation strategies likely to have impact to practitioners. We describe the development and application of the Best Practices Tool, a set of criteria to evaluate the evidence supporting HIV-specific implementation strategies. METHODS: We developed the Best Practices Tool from 2022-2023 in three phases. (1) We developed a draft tool and criteria based on a literature review and key informant interviews. We purposively selected and recruited by email interview participants representing a mix of expertise in HIV service delivery, quality improvement, and implementation science. (2) The tool was then informed and revised through two e-Delphi rounds using a survey delivered online through Qualtrics. The first and second round Delphi surveys consisted of 71 and 52 open and close-ended questions, respectively, asking participants to evaluate, confirm, and make suggestions on different aspects of the rubric. After each survey round, data were analyzed and synthesized as appropriate; and the tool and criteria were revised. (3) We then applied the tool to a set of research studies assessing implementation strategies designed to promote the adoption and uptake of evidence-based HIV interventions to assess reliable application of the tool and criteria. RESULTS: Our initial literature review yielded existing tools for evaluating intervention-level evidence. For a strategy-level tool, additions emerged from interviews, for example, a need to consider the context and specification of strategies. Revisions were made after both Delphi rounds resulting in the confirmation of five evaluation domains - research design, implementation outcomes, limitations and rigor, strategy specification, and equity - and four evidence levels - best, promising, more evidence needed, and harmful. For most domains, criteria were specified at each evidence level. After an initial pilot round to develop an application process and provide training, we achieved 98% reliability when applying the criteria to 18 implementation strategies. CONCLUSIONS: We developed a tool to evaluate the evidence supporting implementation strategies for HIV services. Although specific to HIV in the US, this tool is adaptable for evaluating strategies in other health areas.

Multimethods study to develop tools for competency-based assessments of implementation research training programmes in low and middle-income countries.

INTRODUCTION: Methods and validated tools for evaluating the performance of competency-based implementation research (IR) training programmes in low-middle-income countries (LMICs) are lacking. In this study, we developed tools for assessing the performance of IR training programmes based on a framework of IR core competencies in LMICs. METHODS: We developed self-assessment and objective-assessment tools drawing on the IR competency framework. We used exploratory factor analyses and a one-parameter logistic model to establish construct validity and internal consistency of the tools drawing on a survey conducted in 2020 with 166 trainees before and after an index IR course across five universities and LMICs under the Special Program for Research and Training in Tropical Diseases postgraduate IR training scheme. We conducted key informant interviews (KII) with 20 trainees and five trainers to reflect on the usefulness of the tools and framework for guiding IR training in LMICs. RESULTS: Two 16-item tools for self-assessment of IR knowledge and self-efficacy and a 40-item objective assessment tool were developed. The factor loadings of items in the self-assessment tools were 0.65-0.87 with Cronbach's alpha (α) of 0.97, and 0.77-0.91 with α of 0.98 for the IR knowledge and self-efficacy tools, respectively. The distribution of item difficulty in the objective-assessment tool was consistent before and after the index IR course. Pearson correlation coefficient (r) between the self-assessed and objectively assessed IR knowledge before the index IR course was low, r=0.27 (p value: <0.01), with slight improvements after the index IR course, r=0.43 (p value: <0.01). All KII respondents reported the assessment tools and framework were valid for assessing IR competencies. CONCLUSION: The IR competency framework and tools developed for assessing IR competencies and performance of IR training programmes in LMICs are reliable and valid. Self-assessment methods alone may not suffice to yield a valid assessment of performance in these settings.

Re-Purposing the Ordering of Routine Laboratory Tests in Hospitalized Medical Patients (RePORT): protocol for a multicenter stepped-wedge cluster randomised trial to evaluate the impact of a multicomponent intervention bundle to reduce laboratory test over-utilization.

BACKGROUND: Laboratory test overuse in hospitals is a form of healthcare waste that also harms patients. Developing and evaluating interventions to reduce this form of healthcare waste is critical. We detail the protocol for our study which aims to implement and evaluate the impact of an evidence-based, multicomponent intervention bundle on repetitive use of routine laboratory testing in hospitalized medical patients across adult hospitals in the province of British Columbia, Canada. METHODS: We have designed a stepped-wedge cluster randomized trial to assess the impact of a multicomponent intervention bundle across 16 hospitals in the province of British Columbia in Canada. We will use the Knowledge to Action cycle to guide implementation and the RE-AIM framework to guide evaluation of the intervention bundle. The primary outcome will be the number of routine laboratory tests ordered per patient-day in the intervention versus control periods. Secondary outcome measures will assess implementation fidelity, number of all common laboratory tests used, impact on healthcare costs, and safety outcomes. The study will include patients admitted to adult medical wards (internal medicine or family medicine) and healthcare providers working in these wards within the participating hospitals. After a baseline period of 24 weeks, we will conduct a 16-week pilot at one hospital site. A new cluster (containing approximately 2-3 hospitals) will receive the intervention every 12 weeks. We will evaluate the sustainability of implementation at 24 weeks post implementation of the final cluster. Using intention to treat, we will use generalized linear mixed models for analysis to evaluate the impact of the intervention on outcomes. DISCUSSION: The study builds upon a multicomponent intervention bundle that has previously demonstrated effectiveness. The elements of the intervention bundle are easily adaptable to other settings, facilitating future adoption in wider contexts. The study outputs are expected to have a positive impact as they will reduce usage of repetitive laboratory tests and provide empirically supported measures and tools for accomplishing this work. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was prospectively registered on April 8, 2024, via ClinicalTrials.gov Protocols Registration and Results System (NCT06359587). https://classic. CLINICALTRIALS: gov/ct2/show/NCT06359587?term=NCT06359587&recrs=ab&draw=2&rank=1.

Applying Implementation Science to Identify Primary Care Providers' Enablers and Barriers to Using Survivorship Care Plans.

Primary care providers (PCPs) have been given the responsibility of managing the follow-up care of low-risk cancer survivors after they are discharged from the oncology center. Survivorship Care Plans (SCPs) were developed to facilitate this transition, but research indicates inconsistencies in how they are implemented. A detailed examination of enablers and barriers that influence their use by PCPs is needed to understand how to improve SCPs and ultimately facilitate cancer survivors' transition to primary care. An interview guide was developed based on the second version of the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF-2). PCPs participated in semi-structured interviews. Qualitative content analysis was used to develop a codebook to code text into each of the 14 TDF-2 domains. Thematic analysis was also used to generate themes and subthemes. Thirteen PCPs completed the interview and identified the following barriers to SCP use: unfamiliarity with the side effects of cancer treatment (Knowledge), lack of clarity on the roles of different healthcare professionals (Social Professional Role and Identity), follow-up tasks being outside of scope of practice (Social Professional Role and Identity), increased workload, lack of options for psychosocial support for survivors, managing different electronic medical records systems, logistical issues with liaising with oncology (Environmental Context and Resources), and patient factors (Social Influences). PCPs value the information provided in SCPs and found the follow-up guidance provided to be most helpful. However, SCP use could be improved through streamlining methods of communication and collaboration between oncology centres and community-based primary care settings.

Navigating grey areas in HIV and mental health implementation science.

INTRODUCTION: Implementation science (IS) offers methods to systematically achieve the Ending the HIV Epidemic goals in the United States, as well as the global UNAIDS targets. Federal funders such as the National Institutes of Mental Health (NIMH) have invested in implementation research to achieve these goals, including supporting the AIDS Research Centres (ARCs), which focus on high-impact science in HIV and mental health (MH). To facilitate capacity building for the HIV/MH research workforce in IS, "grey areas," or areas of IS that are confusing, particularly for new investigators, should be addressed in the context of HIV/MH research. DISCUSSION: A group of IS experts affiliated with NIMH-funded ARCs convened to identify common and challenging grey areas. The group generated a preliminary list of 19 grey areas in HIV/MH-related IS. From the list, the authors developed a survey which was distributed to all ARCs to prioritize grey areas to address in this paper. ARC members across the United States (N = 60) identified priority grey areas requiring clarification. This commentary discusses topics with 40% or more endorsement. The top grey areas that ARC members identified were: (1) Differentiating implementation strategies from interventions; (2) Determining when an intervention has sufficient evidence for adaptation; (3) Integrating recipient perspectives into HIV/MH implementation research; (4) Evaluating whether an implementation strategy is evidence-based; (5) Identifying rigorous approaches for evaluating the impact of implementation strategies in the absence of a control group or randomization; and (6) Addressing innovation in HIV/MH IS grants. The commentary addresses each grey area by drawing from the existing literature (when available), providing expert guidance on addressing each in the context of HIV/MH research, and providing domestic and global HIV and HIV/MH case examples that address these grey areas. CONCLUSIONS: HIV/MH IS is key to achieving domestic and international goals for ending HIV transmission and mitigating its impact. Guidance offered in this paper can help to overcome challenges to rigorous and high-impact HIV/MH implementation research.

Implementing the Brøset Violence Checklist in the ED.

ABSTRACT: The emerging field of implementation science (IS) facilitates the sustainment of evidence-based practice in clinical care. This article, the second in a series on applying IS, describes how a nurse-led IS team at a multisite health system implemented the Brøset Violence Checklist-a validated, evidence-based tool to predict a patient's potential to become violent-in the system's adult EDs, with the aim of decreasing the rate of violence against staff. The authors discuss how they leveraged IS concepts, methods, and tools to achieve this goal.