Influence of provider openness and leadership behaviors on adherence to motivational interviewing training implementation strategies: Considerations for evidence-based practice delivery.

Background: Adherence to intervention training implementation strategies is at the foundation of fidelity; however, few studies have linked training adherence to trainee attitudes and leadership behaviors to identify what practically matters for the adoption and dissemination of evidence-based practices. Through the conduct of this hybrid type 3 effectiveness-implementation cluster randomized controlled trial, we collected Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, and Sustainment (EPIS) data and merged it with tailored motivational interviewing training adherence data, to elucidate the relationship between provider attitudes toward evidence-based practices, leadership behaviors, and training implementation strategy (e.g., workshop attendance and participation in one-on-one coaching) adherence. Method: Our sample included data from providers who completed baseline (pre-intervention) surveys that captured inner and outer contexts affecting implementation and participated in tailored motivational interviewing training, producing a dataset that included training implementation strategies adherence and barriers and facilitators to implementation (N = 77). Leadership was assessed by two scales: the director leadership scale and implementation leadership scale. Attitudes were measured with the evidence-based practice attitude scale (EBPAS-50). Adherence to training implementation strategies was modeled as a continuous outcome with a Gaussian distribution. Analyses were conducted in SPSS. Results: Of the nine general attitudes toward evidence-based practice, openness was associated with training adherence (estimate [EST] = 0.096, p < .001; 95% CI = [0.040, 0.151]). Provider general (EST = 0.054, 95% CI = [0.007, 0.102]) and motivational interviewing-specific (EST = 0.044, 95% CI = [0.002, 0.086]) leadership behaviors were positively associated with training adherence (p < .05). Of the four motivational interviewing-specific leadership domains, knowledge and perseverant were associated with training adherence (p < .05). As these leadership behaviors increased, knowledge (EST = 0.042, 95% CI = [0.001, 0.083]) and perseverant (EST = 0.039, 95% CI = [0.004, 0.075]), so did provider adherence to training implementation strategies. Conclusions: As implementation science places more emphasis on assessing readiness prior to delivering evidence-based practices by evaluating organizational climate, funding streams, and change culture, consideration should also be given to metrics of leadership. A potential mechanism to overcome resistance is via the implementation of training strategies focused on addressing leadership prior to conducting training for the evidence-based practice of interest.

Researchers and practitioners, who aim to improve the uptake of evidence-based practices, continue to seek ways in which to improve provider participation in training implementation strategies. The persistent challenge in addressing provider disengagement, while linking this disinterest to poor patient outcomes, has been ascertaining how to quantify relevant delivery considerations, for example, provider attitudes and leadership behaviors that may influence commitment to learning or apathy to behavior change, concurrently with training adherence. Through the conduct of this study, we collected both types of data: (1) provider attitudes and leadership behaviors and (2) training adherence outcomes. We found that provider openness, general leadership behaviors, and motivational interviewing-specific leadership behaviors were associated with adherence to training implementation strategies. As more emphasis is placed on assessing clinic readiness prior to adopting new evidence-based practices, a discussion on including metrics of provider attitudes to evidence-based practice, innovation, and the specific intervention is warranted, alongside consideration for how implementation training strategies focused on addressing leadership can bolster change-supportive behaviors prior to delivery of innovations.

Adoption, implementation, and sustainability of early childhood feeding, nutrition and active play interventions in real-world settings: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Instilling healthy dietary habits and active play in early childhood is an important public health focus. Interventions supporting the establishment of nutrition and active play behaviours in the first years of life have shown positive outcomes and long-term cost-effectiveness, however, most are research trials, with limited evidence regarding real-world application. Implementation science theories, models and frameworks (TMFs) can guide the process of research translation from trial to real-world intervention. The application of TMFs within nutrition and active play intervention studies in early childhood (< 5 years) is currently unknown. This systematic review identified the use of TMFs and barriers/ enablers associated with intervention adoption, implementation, and sustainability in early childhood nutrition and active play interventions implemented under real-world conditions. METHODS: Six databases were searched for peer-reviewed publications between 2000-2021. Studies were included if primary outcomes reported improvement in diet, physical activity or sedentary behaviours amongst children aged < 5 years and interventions were delivered under real-world conditions within a community and/or healthcare setting. Two reviewers extracted and evaluated studies, cross checked by a third and verified by all authors. Quality assessment of included studies was completed by two authors using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT). RESULTS: Eleven studies comprising eleven unique interventions were included. Studies represented low, middle and high-income countries, and were conducted across a range of settings. Five TMFs were identified representing four of Nilsen's implementation model categories, predominantly 'evaluation models'. Ninety-nine barriers/facilitators were extracted across the three intervention phases-Implementation (n = 33 barriers; 33 facilitators), Sustainability (n = 19 barriers; n = 9 facilitators), Adoption (n = 2 barriers; n = 3 facilitators). Identified barriers/facilitators were mapped to the five domains of the Durlak and DuPre framework, with 'funding', 'compatibility' and 'integration of new programming' common across the three intervention phases. CONCLUSIONS: Findings demonstrate that there is no systematic application of TMFs in the planning, implementation and/or evaluation of early childhood nutrition and active play interventions in real-world settings, and selective and sporadic application of TMFs occurs across the intervention lifespan. This apparent limited uptake of TMFs is a missed opportunity to enhance real-world implementation success. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO (CRD42021243841).

Using Conjoint Analysis to Investigate Hospital Directors' Preference in Adoption of an Evidence-based Intervention.

This study used conjoint analysis, a marketing research technique, to investigate hospital stakeholders' decision-making in adoption of evidence-based interventions (EBI). An efficacious hospital-based stigma-reduction intervention was used as a "product" to study adoption of EBI. Sixty hospital directors in Fujian, China evaluated the likelihood of adopting the EBI in their hospitals by rating across eight hypothetical scenarios with preferred and non-preferred levels of seven attributes, including 1) administrative support, 2) cost, 3) personnel involvement, 4) format, 5) duration, 6) technical support, and 7) priority alignment with the hospital. A hierarchical generalized linear model was fit to the likelihood of intervention adoption for the eight scenarios, with the seven attributes served as independent variables. Monetary cost of intervention implementation (impact score=2.12) had the greatest impact on the directors' reported likelihood of adopting the EBI, followed by duration of the intervention (impact score=0.88), availability of technical support (impact score=0.69), and flexibility of format (impact score=0.36). The impact scores of other attributes were not statistically significant. Conjoint analysis was feasible in modeling hospital directors' decision-making in adoption of EBI. The findings suggested the importance of considering cost, duration, technical support, and flexibility of format in development and dissemination of interventions in healthcare settings.

The Socioecological Framework: A Multifaceted Approach to Preventing Sport-Related Deaths in High School Sports.

The socioecological framework is a multilevel conceptualization of health that includes intrapersonal, interpersonal, organizational, environmental, and public policy factors. The socioecological framework emphasizes multiple levels of influence and supports the idea that behaviors both affect and are affected by various contexts. At present, the sports medicine community's understanding and application of the socioecological framework are limited. In this article, we use the socioecological framework to describe potential avenues for interventions to reduce sport-related deaths among adolescent participants.

Costs of implementing a behavioral weight-loss and lifestyle-change program for individuals with serious mental illnesses in community settings.

Little research has examined costs of adopting a successful lifestyle intervention for people with serious mental illnesses in community clinics. The study aims to calculate the real-world costs of implementing a group-based weight-loss and lifestyle intervention in community settings. We used empirically derived costs to estimate implementation costs and conducted sensitivity analyses to estimate costs: (1) when implementing the intervention in high/low resource-intensive environments and (2) assuming variability in participant enrollment. To implement the STRIDE program for 15 individuals with serious mental illnesses, we estimated costs for the 12-month (30-session) intervention, with materials available in the public domain, at $16,427 or $1095 per participant. The majority of costs, $12,767, were associated with direct labor costs. Replication costs are largely associated with labor. Community health centers offer an untapped resource for implementing behavioral-lifestyle interventions, particularly under the Affordable Care Act, though additional payment reforms or incentives may be needed.