Breast and cervical cancer programs' success in maintaining screening during periods of high COVID-19: A qualitative multi-case study analysis.

Objective: During the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, most of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)'s National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program (NBCCEDP) funded programs (recipients) experienced significant declines in breast and cervical cancer screening volume. However, 6 recipients maintained breast and/or cervical cancer screening volume during July-December 2020 despite their states' high COVID-19 test percent positivity. We led a qualitative multi-case study to explore these recipients' actions that may have contributed to screening volume maintenance. Methods: We conducted 22 key informant interviews with recipients, screening provider sites, and partner organizations. Interviews explored organizational and operational changes; screening barriers; actions taken to help maintain screening volume; and support for provider sites to continue screening. We documented contextual factors that may have influenced these actions, including program structures; clinic capacity; and state COVID-19 policies. Results: Thematic analysis revealed crosscutting themes at the recipient, provider site, and partner levels. Recipients made changes to administrative processes to reduce burden on provider sites and delivered tailored technical assistance to support safe screening. Provider sites modified clinic protocols to increase patient safety, enhanced patient reminders for upcoming appointments, and increased patient education on the importance of timely screening during the pandemic. Partners worked with provider sites to identify and reduce patients' structural barriers to screening. Conclusion: Study findings provide lessons learned to inform emergency preparedness-focused planning and operations, as well as routine operations for NBCCEDP recipient programs, other cancer screening initiatives, primary care clinics, and chronic disease prevention programs.

Exploring the Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Employees' Workplace Health Promotion Preferences.

PURPOSE: The COVID-19 pandemic has led to profound changes in the workplace as well as increases in stress, missed preventive care, and other health concerns. There is limited research since the onset of the pandemic on employees' primary health concerns and their willingness to engage with workplace health promotion (WHP) programs to address these needs. We conducted this survey about employees' current health priorities as a first step to exploring whether WHP programs need to evolve to be responsive to employees' needs at this stage of the pandemic. DESIGN: National cross-sectional survey. SETTING: United States, April 29-May 5, 2022. SUBJECTS: 2053 Americans employed part or full time. MEASURES: 17-item online survey assessing demographics, health priorities, and impact of the pandemic on health. ANALYSIS: Descriptive statistics, SPSS Version 19. RESULTS: Employees' most common health concerns included work/life balance and stress (each cited by 55%). Nearly half (46%) said their health or well-being was affected by the pandemic; within this group, the most common concerns were stress (66%), anxiety (61%), sleep (49%), and depression (48%). Almost all (94%) indicated they would be open to receiving support from their employers. CONCLUSION: This research is a first step in learning about employees' current health priorities and how they may have changed. WHP researchers and practitioners can determine how their programs align with current priorities. Our future research will explore employees' preferences, heath behaviors, and their current workplace environments in more depth.

Bridging Culture and Language: Encouraging Bilingual/Multicultural Individuals to Act as Information Navigators for Their Loved-Ones and Communities during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Linguistically diverse communities face barriers to receiving appropriate health information. COVID-19 exacerbated these health-communication inequities. University of Washington researchers surveyed bilingual staff, students, and medical interpreters - desiring training to become effective communicators of COVID-19 information to their social networks and language communities. In response, the COVID-19 Information Navigator Training was developed and pre-tested with professional networks and members of the target audience. The final training comprised three interactive modules and short quizzes. Evaluation surveys measured Information Navigators' confidence in providing COVID-19 information to their social networks. Surveys included questions on the participants' language or cultural community, the perceived value of the training, and their ability to communicate COVID-19 information. Among 393 participants who enrolled in the training, 284 completed the survey. Significant differences in confidence before and after the course were found in detecting COVID misinformation in the news and social media (pre-course mean: 3.83, post-course mean: 4.63; absolute mean difference was 0.82 points higher in the post-evaluation on the 5-point likert scale, 95% CI: 0.70-0.93, p < .01). Training multicultural volunteers to disseminate information to their social networks is a promising strategy for reaching linguistically diverse communities with up-to-date information during health emergencies.

Integrating a focus on health equity in implementation science: Case examples from the national cancer institute's implementation science in cancer control centers (ISC3) network.

Background: A Health Equity Task Force (HETF) of members from seven Centers funded by the National Cancer Institute's (NCI) Implementation Science in Cancer Control Centers (ISC3) network sought to identify case examples of how Centers were applying a focus on health equity in implementation science to inform future research and capacity-building efforts. Methods: HETF members at each ISC3 collected information on how health equity was conceptualized, operationalized, and addressed in initial research and capacity-building efforts across the seven ISC3 Centers funded in 2019-2020. Each Center completed a questionnaire assessing five health equity domains central to implementation science (e.g., community engagement; implementation science theories, models, and frameworks (TMFs); and engaging underrepresented scholars). Data generated illustrative examples from these five domains. Results: Centers reported a range of approaches focusing on health equity in implementation research and capacity-building efforts, including (1) engaging diverse community partners/settings in making decisions about research priorities and projects; (2) applying health equity within a single TMF applied across projects or various TMFs used in specific projects; (3) evaluating health equity in operationalizing and measuring health and implementation outcomes; (4) building capacity for health equity-focused implementation science among trainees, early career scholars, and partnering organizations; and (5) leveraging varying levels of institutional resources and efforts to engage, include, and support underrepresented scholars. Conclusions: Examples of approaches to integrating health equity across the ISC3 network can inform other investigators and centers' efforts to build capacity and infrastructure to support growth and expansion of health equity-focused implementation science.

Development and maturation of the occupational health services research field in the United States over the past 25 years: Challenges and opportunities for the future.

Work is an important social determinant of health; unfortunately, work-related injuries remain prevalent, can have devastating impact on worker health, and can impose heavy economic burdens on workers and society. Occupational health services research (OHSR) underpins occupational health services policy and practice, focusing on health determinants, health services, healthcare delivery, and health systems affecting workers. The field of OHSR has undergone tremendous expansion in both definition and scope over the past 25 years. In this commentary, focusing on the US, we document the historical development and evolution of OHSR as a research field, describe current doctoral-level OHSR training, and discuss challenges and opportunities for the OHSR field. We also propose an updated definition for the OHSR field: Research and evaluation related to the determinants of worker health and well-being; to occupational injury and illness prevention and surveillance; to healthcare, health programs, and health policy affecting workers; and to the organization, access, quality, outcomes, and costs of occupational health services and related health systems. Researchers trained in OHSR are essential contributors to improvements in healthcare, health systems, and policy and programs to improve worker health and productivity, as well as equity and justice in job and employment conditions. We look forward to the continued growth of OHSR as a field and to the expansion of OHSR academic training opportunities.

Opportunities to Improve Tobacco Control for State Agency Employees.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study is to explore tobacco-related knowledge and perceptions at Washington State (WA) agencies. METHODS: The study used a cross-sectional employee survey and qualitative focus groups with managers/supervisors. We produced descriptive statistics to examine differences in awareness and perceptions of tobacco-control efforts among employees and conducted a rapid thematic analysis of focus group data. RESULTS: Of employees, only 18% with a history of tobacco use had used their agency's cessation benefits. Employees who did not use tobacco and who had higher education had more favorable attitudes toward tobacco-control efforts. In the focus groups, manager/supervisors described limited tobacco cessation promotion at their agency, barriers to tobacco control implementation, and concerns about the perceived effectiveness of additional tobacco-control efforts. CONCLUSIONS: State agencies should increase promotion of tobacco control policies and programs to increase awareness and reduce disparities in tobacco use.

The special sauce of the Cancer Prevention and Control Research Network: 20 years of lessons learned in developing the evidence base, building community capacity, and translating research into practice.

PURPOSE: The Cancer Prevention and Control Research Network (CPCRN) is a national network focused on accelerating the translation of cancer prevention and control research evidence into practice through collaborative, multicenter projects in partnership with diverse communities. From 2003 to 2022, the CPCRN included 613 members. METHODS: We: (1) characterize the extent and nature of collaborations through a bibliometric analysis of 20 years of Network publications; and (2) describe key features and functions of the CPCRN as related to organizational structure, productivity, impact, and focus on health equity, partnership development, and capacity building through analysis of 22 in-depth interviews and review of Network documentation. RESULTS: Searching Scopus for multicenter publications among the CPCRN members from their time of Network engagement yielded 1,074 collaborative publications involving two or more members. Both the overall number and content breadth of multicenter publications increased over time as the Network matured. Since 2004, members submitted 123 multicenter grant applications, of which 72 were funded (59%), totaling more than $77 million secured. Thematic analysis of interviews revealed that the CPCRN's success-in terms of publication and grant productivity, as well as the breadth and depth of partnerships, subject matter expertise, and content area foci-is attributable to: (1) its people-the inclusion of members representing diverse content-area interests, multidisciplinary perspectives, and geographic contexts; (2) dedicated centralized structures and processes to enable and evaluate collaboration; and (3) focused attention to strategically adapting to change. CONCLUSION: CPCRN's history highlights organizational, strategic, and practical lessons learned over two decades to optimize Network collaboration for enhanced collective impact in cancer prevention and control. These insights may be useful to others seeking to leverage collaborative networks to address public health problems.

Implementing Mailed Colorectal Cancer Fecal Screening Tests in Real-World Primary Care Settings: Promising Implementation Practices and Opportunities for Improvement.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening reduces morbidity and mortality, but screening rates in the USA remain suboptimal. The Colorectal Cancer Control Program (CRCCP) was established in 2009 to increase screening among groups disproportionately affected. The CRCCP utilizes implementation science to support health system change as a strategy to reduce disparities in CRC screening by directing resources to primary care clinics to implement evidence-based interventions (EBIs) proven to increase CRC screening. As COVID-19 continues to impede in-person healthcare visits and compel the unpredictable redirection of clinic priorities, understanding clinics' adoption and implementation of EBIs into routine care is crucial. Mailed fecal testing is an evidence-based screening approach that offers an alternative to in-person screening tests and represents a promising approach to reduce CRC screening disparities. However, little is known about how mailed fecal testing is implemented in real-world settings. In this retrospective, cross-sectional analysis, we assessed practices around mailed fecal testing implementation in 185 clinics across 62 US health systems. We sought to (1) determine whether clinics that do and do not implement mailed fecal testing differ with respect to characteristics (e.g., type, location, and proportion of uninsured patients) and (2) identify implementation practices among clinics that offer mailed fecal testing. Our findings revealed that over half (58%) of clinics implemented mailed fecal testing. These clinics were more likely to have a CRC screening policy than clinics that did not implement mailed fecal testing (p = 0.007) and to serve a larger patient population (p = 0.004), but less likely to have a large proportion of uninsured patients (p = 0.01). Clinics that implemented mailed fecal testing offered it in combination with EBIs, including patient reminders (92%), provider reminders (94%), and other activities to reduce structural barriers (95%). However, fewer clinics reported having the leadership support (58%) or funding stability (29%) to sustain mailed fecal testing. Mailed fecal testing was widely implemented alongside other EBIs in primary care clinics participating in the CRCCP, but multiple opportunities for enhancing its implementation exist. These include increasing the proportion of community health centers/federally qualified health centers offering mailed screening; increasing the proportion that provide pre-paid return mail supplies with the screening kit; increasing the proportion of clinics monitoring both screening kit distribution and return; ensuring patients with abnormal tests can obtain colonoscopy; and increasing sustainability planning and support.

Creating research-ready partnerships: the initial development of seven implementation laboratories to advance cancer control.

BACKGROUND: In 2019-2020, with National Cancer Institute funding, seven implementation laboratory (I-Lab) partnerships between scientists and stakeholders in 'real-world' settings working to implement evidence-based interventions were developed within the Implementation Science Centers in Cancer Control (ISC3) consortium. This paper describes and compares approaches to the initial development of seven I-Labs in order to gain an understanding of the development of research partnerships representing various implementation science designs. METHODS: In April-June 2021, members of the ISC3 Implementation Laboratories workgroup interviewed research teams involved in I-Lab development in each center. This cross-sectional study used semi-structured interviews and case-study-based methods to collect and analyze data about I-Lab designs and activities. Interview notes were analyzed to identify a set of comparable domains across sites. These domains served as the framework for seven case descriptions summarizing design decisions and partnership elements across sites. RESULTS: Domains identified from interviews as comparable across sites included engagement of community and clinical I-Lab members in research activities, data sources, engagement methods, dissemination strategies, and health equity. The I-Labs use a variety of research partnership designs to support engagement including participatory research, community-engaged research, and learning health systems of embedded research. Regarding data, I-Labs in which members use common electronic health records (EHRs) leverage these both as a data source and a digital implementation strategy. I-Labs without a shared EHR among partners also leverage other sources for research or surveillance, most commonly qualitative data, surveys, and public health data systems. All seven I-Labs use advisory boards or partnership meetings to engage with members; six use stakeholder interviews and regular communications. Most (70%) tools or methods used to engage I-Lab members such as advisory groups, coalitions, or regular communications, were pre-existing. Think tanks, which two I-Labs developed, represented novel engagement approaches. To disseminate research results, all centers developed web-based products, and most (n = 6) use publications, learning collaboratives, and community forums. Important variations emerged in approaches to health equity, ranging from partnering with members serving historically marginalized populations to the development of novel methods. CONCLUSIONS: The development of the ISC3 implementation laboratories, which represented a variety of research partnership designs, offers the opportunity to advance understanding of how researchers developed and built partnerships to effectively engage stakeholders throughout the cancer control research lifecycle. In future years, we will be able to share lessons learned for the development and sustainment of implementation laboratories.

The Potential for Total Worker Health® Approaches in State and Territorial Health Departments : A National Mixed-Methods Study.

OBJECTIVE: To document the extent to which state and territorial health departments (SHDs) integrate their occupational safety and health (OSH) and workplace health promotion (WHP) activities consistent with a Total Worker Health (TWH) approach. METHODS: Nationally representative survey of OSH and WHP practitioners at 56 SHDs followed by in-depth interviews. RESULTS: Despite reporting limited awareness of the TWH initiative and TWH resources, most respondents (57% OSH, 64% WHP) reported collaboration between OSH and WHP staff in their departments. Collaborations were described in-depth. Barriers to OSH-WHP collaborations included resource insufficiencies, organizational structure in the SHD, and conflicting practices. Facilitators included knowledge of TWH approaches, proximity to TWH Centers of Excellence, proximity between OSH/WHP programs, and leadership initiative. Motivations for collaboration were enumerated. CONCLUSIONS: Strategies for building TWH capacity and activity among SHDs are discussed.

Development of a Field Guide for Assessing Readiness to Implement Evidence-Based Cancer Screening Interventions in Primary Care Clinics.

Evidence-based interventions, including provider assessment and feedback, provider reminders, patient reminders, and reduction of structural barriers, improve colorectal cancer screening rates. Assessing primary care clinics' readiness to implement these interventions can help clinics use strengths, identify barriers, and plan for success. However, clinics may lack tools to assess readiness and use findings to plan for successful implementation. To address this need, we developed the Field Guide for Assessing Readiness to Implement Evidence-Based Cancer Screening Interventions (Field Guide) for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC's) Colorectal Cancer Control Program (CRCCP). We conducted a literature review of evidence and existing tools to measure implementation readiness, reviewed readiness tools from selected CRCCP award recipients (n = 35), and conducted semi-structured interviews with key informants (n = 8). We sought feedback from CDC staff and recipients to inform the final document. The Field Guide, which is publicly available online, outlines 4 assessment phases: 1) convene team members and determine assessment activities, 2) design and administer the readiness assessment, 3) evaluate assessment data, and 4) develop an implementation plan. Assessment activities and tools are included to facilitate completion of each phase. The Field Guide integrates implementation science and practical experience into a relevant tool to bolster clinic capacity for implementation, increase potential for intervention sustainability, and improve colorectal cancer screening rates, with a focus on patients served in safety net clinic settings. Although this tool was developed for use in primary care clinics for cancer screening, the Field Guide may have broader application for clinics and their partners for other chronic diseases.

Worksite tobacco control - a qualitative study on perspectives from employers and employees at small worksites.

BACKGROUND: Evidence-based interventions (EBIs) for tobacco control can be implemented in worksite settings to reduce tobacco use. Small worksites are less likely to adopt tobacco control EBIs than large worksites. The purpose of this qualitative study was to 1) explore factors that impact small employers' decisions to offer tobacco control EBIs, and 2) understand employees' perceptions of tobacco control at small worksites. METHODS: Working with staff from small worksites (20-250 employees), we analyzed data from 12 semi-structured interviews with employers (via key informants) and four focus groups with employees. We recruited employers and employees through a purchased business list and market research company, respectively. Interview and focus group topics included perceptions of worksite tobacco control; internal and external forces shaping worksite tobacco control implementation; and perceived worksite support for cessation. We conducted thematic data analysis. RESULTS: Key themes from the employer interviews included: the local environment played an important role in implementation of tobacco control EBIs; tobacco control was perceived as important but not a priority; and tobacco control decisions were driven by worksite culture. Key themes from the employee focus groups included: perceived employer support for tobacco cessation was limited although there was interest from employees; employees who currently used tobacco were stigmatized for their behavior; and incentives and coaching were considered ideal tobacco control EBIs. CONCLUSIONS: Tobacco control has not been prioritized at small worksites, despite employees welcoming additional cessation support. This study contributes important information on contextual factors and employee preferences that could be targeted to improve tobacco control EBI implementation. Worksites should implement comprehensive tobacco-free policies, minimize stigma when promoting cessation, establish equitable break policies, and involve employees in decision-making related to tobacco control.

Evaluating Uptake of Evidence-Based Interventions in 355 Clinics Partnering With the Colorectal Cancer Control Program, 2015-2018.

PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES: Colorectal cancer screening rates remain suboptimal in the US. The Colorectal Cancer Control Program (CRCCP) of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) seeks to increase screening in health system clinics through implementation of evidence-based interventions (EBIs) and supporting activities (SAs). This program provided an opportunity to assess the uptake of EBIs and SAs in 355 clinics that participated from 2015 to 2018. INTERVENTION APPROACH: The 30 funded awardees of CRCCP partnered with clinics to implement at least 2 of 4 EBIs that CDC prioritized (patient reminders, provider reminders, reducing structural barriers, provider assessment and feedback) and 4 optional strategies that CDC identified as SAs (small media, professional development and provider education, patient navigation, and community health workers). EVALUATION METHODS: Clinics completed 3 annual surveys to report uptake, implementation, and integration and perceived sustainability of the priority EBIs and SAs. RESULTS: In our sample of 355 clinics, uptake of 4 EBIs and 2 SAs significantly increased over time. By year 3, 82% of clinics implemented patient reminder systems, 88% implemented provider reminder systems, 82% implemented provider assessment and feedback, 76% implemented activities to reduce structural barriers, 51% implemented provider education, and 84% used small media. Most clinics that implemented these strategies (>90%) considered them fully integrated into the health system or clinic operations and sustainable by year 3. Fewer clinics used patient navigation (30%) and community health workers (19%), with no increase over the years of the study. IMPLICATIONS FOR PUBLIC HEALTH: Clinics participating in the CRCCP reported high uptake and perceived sustainability of EBIs that can be integrated into electronic medical record systems but limited uptake of patient navigation and community health workers, which are uniquely suited to reduce cancer disparities. Future research should determine how to promote uptake and assess cost-effectiveness of CRCCP interventions.

Partnerships to expand worksite wellness programs - A qualitative analysis of state and local health department perspectives.

Chronic diseases such as heart disease, cancer, and diabetes are the leading causes of death and disability in the U. S. Because the central mission of state and local health departments (HDs) is to protect, promote, and improve population health, these agencies are well-positioned to address risk behaviors for chronic disease. HD-employer partnerships could enhance worksite wellness programming, but few studies have explored this topic. Building upon previously published findings, the purpose of this qualitative study was to describe the context and environment for HDs' delivery of worksite wellness programs, including interest, barriers, facilitators, and decision-making processes. We conducted 12 interviews with directors of state chronic disease programs, 21 interviews with local directors, and three focus groups with local staff. We performed a thematic analysis of the data. Key themes include the following: (1) worksite wellness programs delivered by HDs were diverse in topic and scope and delivered both internally (at the HD for their agency) and externally (for other employers); (2) decisions made about chronic disease prevention were largely driven by funding priorities, with federal, state, and local entities playing roles in the decision-making process; and (3) HDs expressed potential interest in worksite wellness program delivery, dependent upon staff capacity, available funding, and employer buy-in. Our results suggest that funding should be increased for and reallocated towards chronic disease prevention, including worksite wellness. To overcome HD barriers to program delivery, key funders and stakeholders should prioritize and communicate the importance of worksite wellness.

Workplace Wellness Program Interest and Barriers Among Workers With Work-Related Permanent Impairments.

BACKGROUND: Nearly half of U.S. workers have access to workplace wellness programs (WWPs), 58% of workers with access participate. The aim of this study was to assess interest in WWP participation and identify reasons for lack of interest among workers with work-related permanent impairments-a population at elevated risk of adverse health outcomes. METHODS: Workers who returned to work after a work-related permanent impairment were interviewed 11 to 15 months after workers' compensation claim closure. Qualitative content analysis methods were used to code open-ended responses. FINDINGS: Of 560 respondents, 51.4% expressed interest in WWP participation. Numerous adverse health and economic characteristics were associated with WWP interest, for example, interest was expressed by 63.3% of workers reporting fair/poor health status versus 47.1% reporting good/excellent; 56.9% of workers reporting moderate/severe pain versus 41.4% reporting mild/no pain; 64.7% of workers without health insurance versus 50.1% with health insurance; 69.0% of workers reporting depression versus 47.2% without depression; 70.4% of workers reporting obesity versus 48.0% without obesity; and 63.2% of workers often worried about expenses versus 46.9% reporting sometimes/never worried. Specific participation barriers were described by 34.2% of the 272 workers who were not interested. CONCLUSIONS/APPLICATIONS TO PRACTICE: A majority of workers with work-related permanent impairments-particularly those with adverse health and economic characteristics-were interested in WWPs. Many workers who reported no interest cited participation barriers. Further research is needed to determine whether addressing such barriers would enhance equitable access. Those undertaking WWP planning, implementation, and outreach should ensure that WWPs are inclusive and serve workers with disabilities.

Advancing gender equity in the academy.

Implementation science offers a rigorous set of tools to help mitigate long-standing and worsening gender disparities in academia.

By the Seat of Our Pants: the Experience of Small Businesses in the COVID-19 Pandemic, Washington State, March-October 2020.

INTRODUCTION: Most US businesses are small, yet they employ almost half of the nation's workforce. Literature is limited about how small employers (those with 20-250 employees) have made decisions about operating their businesses during the COVID-19 pandemic. We sought to learn how employers made these decisions, what information sources they used, what information they wanted, and to what extent they worked with or used information from their local health department. METHODS: We conducted qualitative, semistructured interviews with 26 employers in Washington State, from August through October 2020. Employers were recruited from 7 counties (4 urban and 3 rural) that were experiencing either higher or lower COVID-19 case rates than Washington State overall. RESULTS: Employers relied heavily on national government resources to make decisions about how to operate their businesses during the COVID-19 pandemic. Few employers had relationships with or turned to their local health departments for information or support. Employers wanted information about COVID-19 safety that was specific to their business operations and industry. Employers also described the emotional toll of COVID-19 and the challenge of trying to make high-stakes decisions with rapidly evolving information. CONCLUSION: Small employers showed little awareness of their local health departments and the information and assistance they could provide. Local health departments could increase their visibility and build relationships with small employers by partnering with them on value-added services such as workplace health promotion. Establishing these relationships could support more rapid collaboration between local health departments and small employers during future public health crises.

Clinical-community linkages as a strategy for increasing evidence-based program reach: Results of the PT-REFER randomized controlled trial with older adults and YMCA associations.

BACKGROUND: Most older adults do not meet recommended guidelines for physical activity. Referrals from physical therapists (PTs) to community- and evidence-based physical-activity programs like Enhance®Fitness have potential to address this gap. We tested an intervention intended to increase referrals of older adults to Enhance®Fitness programs offered at YMCAs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We developed a capacity-building intervention that included a structured toolkit and technical-assistance calls. From April 2016 to September 2018, using stratified randomization, we conducted a trial with 20 YMCA Associations randomized into intervention and control arms. The primary outcome was the number of new Enhance®Fitness enrollees during the trial period. Using both quantitative and qualitative methods, we also conducted process and intermediate-outcome evaluations to assess intervention implementation and Association outreach activities, barriers, and facilitators. RESULTS: The intervention was implemented as intended, but PT outreach was similar for both intervention and control YMCA Associations. The intervention arm had similar enrollment (1695 new enrollees) to the control arm (1326 new enrollees; 95% confidence interval, -47%-199%, P = 0.61). Interviews revealed that barriers, including lack of staff and time for outreach, limited capacity for Enhance®Fitness program growth, and competing priorities, outweighed facilitators, including existing partnerships, presence of an outreach team, senior leadership support, and infrastructure for referrals. CONCLUSIONS: YMCA Associations in the intervention arm were unable to increase their outreach to PTs and enrollment in Enhance®Fitness. Our evaluation findings indicate that community organizations that prioritize program growth, have support at all organizational levels, and allocate staff and time for outreach and partnership development may be more successful in creating sustainable linkages with clinical partners and increasing evidence-based-program reach.

Pathways to Employee Outcomes in a Workplace Health Promotion Program.

PURPOSE: This study examined the relationship between employee outcomes and employer implementation of evidence-based interventions (EBIs) for chronic disease prevention. DESIGN: Cross-sectional samples collected at 3 time points in a cluster-randomized, controlled trial of a workplace health promotion program to promote 12 EBIs. SETTING: King County, WA. SAMPLE: Employees of 63 small, low-wage workplaces. MEASURES: Employer EBI implementation; 3 types of employee outcomes: perceived implementation of EBIs; perceived employer support for health; and health-related behaviors, perceived stress, depression risk, and presenteeism. ANALYSIS: Intent-to-treat and correlation analyses using generalized estimating equations. We tested bivariate associations along potential paths from EBI implementation, through perceived EBI implementation and perceived support for health, to several employee health-related outcomes. RESULTS: The intent-to-treat analysis found similar employee health-related behaviors in intervention and control workplaces at 15 and 24 months. Workplaces implemented varying combinations of EBIs, however, and bivariate associations were significant for 4 of the 6 indicators of physical activity and healthy eating, as well as perceived stress, depression risk, and presenteeism. We did not find significant positive associations for cancer screening and tobacco cessation. CONCLUSION: Our findings support broader dissemination of EBIs for physical activity and healthy eating, as well as more focus on improving employer support for employee health. They also suggest we need better interventions for cancer screening and tobacco cessation.

Partnering with community-based organizations to improve equitable access to depression care for underserved older adults in the U.S.: Qualitative formative research.

Background: Embedding evidenced-based programs (EBPs) like PEARLS outside clinical settings can help reduce inequities in access to depression care. Trusted community-based organizations (CBOs) reach older adults who are underserved; however, PEARLS adoption has been limited. Implementation science has tried to close this know-do gap, however a more intentional focus on equity is needed to engage CBOs. We partnered with CBOs to better understand their resources and needs in order to design more equitable dissemination and implementation (D&I) strategies to support PEARLS adoption. Methods: We conducted 39 interviews with 24 current and potential adopter organizations and other partners (February-September 2020). CBOs were purposively sampled for region, type, and priority older populations experiencing poverty (communities of color, linguistically diverse, rural). Using a social marketing framework, our guide explored barriers, benefits and process for PEARLS adoption; CBO capacities and needs; PEARLS acceptability and adaptations; and preferred communication channels. During COVID-19, interviews also addressed remote PEARLS delivery and changes in priorities. We conducted thematic analysis of transcripts using the rapid framework method to describe the needs and priorities of older adults who are underserved and the CBOs that engage them, and strategies, collaborations, and adaptations to integrate depression care in these contexts. Results: During COVID-19, older adults relied on CBO support for basic needs such as food and housing. Isolation and depression were also urgent issues within communities, yet stigma remained for both late-life depression and depression care. CBOs wanted EBPs with cultural flexibility, stable funding, accessible training, staff investment, and fit with staff and community needs and priorities. Findings guided new dissemination strategies to better communicate how PEARLS is appropriate for organizations that engage older adults who are underserved, and what program components are core and what are adaptable to better align with organizations and communities. New implementation strategies will support organizational capacity-building through training and technical assistance, and matchmaking for funding and clinical support. Discussion: Findings support CBOs as appropriate depression care providers for older adults who are underserved, and suggest changes to communications and resources to better fit EBPs with the resources and needs of organizations and older adults. We are currently partnering with organizations in California and Washington to evaluate whether and how these D&I strategies increase equitable access to PEARLS for older adults who are underserved.