Implantation of bone marrow mononuclear cells using injectable fibrin matrix enhances neovascularization in infarcted myocardium.

J. Ryu,Il-Kwon Kim,Seung‐Woo Cho,M. Cho,K. Hwang,Hai-nan Piao,S. Piao,S. Lim,Y. Hong,C. Choi,K. Yoo,Byung‐Soo Kim

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.BIOMATERIALS.2004.02.058

IF: 14

Biomaterials

Abstract:

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

A systems approach to scale-up for population health improvement

Harriet Koorts,Harry Rutter

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12961-021-00679-0

2021-03-01

Health Research Policy and Systems

Abstract:Abstract Despite a number of important global public health successes, for many health behaviours there is a continued lack of interventions that have been sufficiently scaled up to achieve system-wide integration. This has limited sustainable and equitable population health improvement. Systems change plays a major role in the relation between implementation processes and at-scale institutionalisation of public health interventions. However, in research, systems approaches remain underutilised in scaling up. Public health scale-up models have typically centred on intervention replication through linear expansion. In this paper, we discuss current conceptualisations and approaches used when scaling up in public health, and propose a new perspective on scaling that shifts attention away from the intervention to focus instead on achieving the desired population-level health outcomes. In our view, ‘scaling up’ exists on a continuum. At one end, effective scaling can involve a linear, intervention-orientated expansive approach that prioritises the spread of evidence-based interventions into existing systems in order to drive expansion in the application of that intervention. At the other end, we contend that scale-up can sit within a complex systems paradigm in which interventions are conceptualised as events in systems. In this case, implementation and scale-up activities should focus on generating changes within the system itself to achieve the desired outcome. This we refer to as ‘systems-orientated scale-up’ to achieving population health improvement, which can complement traditional approaches in relevant situations. We argue that for some health behaviours, our proposed approach towards scaling up could enhance intervention implementation, sustainability and population health impact.

health policy & services
[Combined intrapleural and low epidural anesthesia for upper abdominal surgery].

S. Konichezky,P. Szmuk,T. Ezri,D. Soroker,U. Ben-Aharon,R. Pfefferman

1995-03-01

Abstract:Intrapleural administration of local anesthetics to achieve postoperative analgesia was recently described by Kvalheim and Reiestad. It has been stated that the intrapleural technique provides analgesia, but not surgical anesthesia. However, this method has been used recently for anesthesia during minor surgical procedures. We describe the use of combined, bilateral intrapleural and low epidural anesthesia in a woman with severe impairment of cardiopulmonary function who underwent combined splenectomy and cholecystectomy.
The struggle of translating science into action: Foundational concepts of implementation science

Frances Rapport,Robyn Clay‐Williams,Kate Churruca,Patti Shih,Anne Hogden,Jeffrey Braithwaite

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jep.12741

2017-03-31

Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice

Abstract:RATIONALE, AIMS, AND OBJECTIVES: "Implementation science," the scientific study of methods translating research findings into practical, useful outcomes, is contested and complex, with unpredictable use of results from routine clinical practice and different levels of continuing assessment of implementable interventions. The authors aim to reveal how implementation science is presented and understood in health services research contexts and clarify the foundational concepts: diffusion, dissemination, implementation, adoption, and sustainability, to progress knowledge in the field.METHOD: Implementation science models, theories, and frameworks are critiqued, and their value for laying the groundwork from which to implement a study's findings is emphasised. The paper highlights the challenges of turning research findings into practical outcomes that can be successfully implemented and the need for support from change agents, to ensure improvements to health care provision, health systems, and policy. The paper examines how researchers create implementation plans and what needs to be considered for study outputs to lead to sustainable interventions. This aspect needs clear planning, underpinned by appropriate theoretical paradigms that rigorously respond to a study's aims and objectives.CONCLUSION: Researchers might benefit from a return to first principles in implementation science, whereby applications that result from research endeavours are both effective and readily disseminated and where interventions can be supported by appropriate health care personnel. These should be people specifically identified to promote change in service organisation, delivery, and policy that can be systematically evaluated over time, to ensure high-quality, long-term improvements to patients' health.

medicine, general & internal,health care sciences & services,medical informatics
Factors influencing the scale-up of public health interventions in low- and middle-income countries: a qualitative systematic literature review

Susan E Bulthuis,Maryse C Kok,Joanna Raven,Marjolein A Dieleman

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/heapol/czz140

2019-11-13

Health Policy and Planning

Abstract:Abstract To achieve universal health coverage, the scale-up of high impact public health interventions is essential. However, scale-up is challenging and often not successful. Therefore, a systematic review was conducted to provide insights into the factors influencing the scale-up of public health interventions in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Two databases were searched for studies with a qualitative research component. The GRADE-CERQual approach was applied to assess the confidence in the evidence for each key review finding. A multi-level perspective on transition was applied to ensure a focus on vertical scale-up for sustainability. According to this theory, changes in the way of organizing (structure), doing (practice) and thinking (culture) need to take place to ensure the scale-up of an intervention. Among the most prominent factors influencing scale-up through changes in structure was the availability of financial, human and material resources. Inadequate supply chains were often barriers to scale-up. Advocacy activities positively influenced scale-up, and changes in the policy environment hindered or facilitated scale-up. The most outstanding factors influencing scale-up through changes in practice were the availability of a strategic plan for scale-up and the way in which training and supervision was conducted. Furthermore, collaborations such as community participation and partnerships facilitated scale-up, as well as the availability of research and monitoring and evaluation data. Factors influencing scale-up through a change in culture were less prominent in the literature. While some studies articulated the acceptability of the intervention in a given sociocultural environment, more emphasis was placed on the importance of stakeholders feeling a need for a specific intervention to facilitate its scale-up. All identified factors should be taken into account when scaling up public health interventions in LMICs. The different factors are strongly interlinked, and most of them are related to one crucial first step: the development of a scale-up strategy before scaling up.

health care sciences & services,health policy & services
SpeakGreek: An online speech training tool for L2 pedagogy and clinical intervention

K. Nicolaidis,G. Papanikolaou,Evia Kainada,Konstantinos Avdelidis

Abstract:This paper presents the first online biofeedback speech training tool for Greek designed to offer training on the production and perception of segmental and suprasegmental aspects of Greek. It is addressed to learners of Greek as an L2 and to clinical populations with articulation and phonation problems. The tool comprises four components: (i) the Phonetic Library, i.e., the acoustic, articulatory and visual description of different pronunciation aspects, (ii) the Basic Training, which trains users on phonation, pitch and intensity manipulation, (iii) the Sound Trainer, and (iv) the Melody Trainer, with perception and production exercises on sounds, stress and intonation. All components of production include real-time biofeedback. Initial results from L2 learners of Greek using two of the tool’s components show improvement on production of the intonation of whquestions and on consonant identification.
Revisiting concepts of evidence in implementation science

Ross C. Brownson,Rachel C. Shelton,Elvin H. Geng,Russell E. Glasgow

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-022-01201-y

2022-04-12

Implementation Science

Abstract:Abstract Background Evidence, in multiple forms, is a foundation of implementation science. For public health and clinical practice, evidence includes the following: type 1 evidence on etiology and burden; type 2 evidence on effectiveness of interventions; and type 3: evidence on dissemination and implementation (D&I) within context. To support a vision for development and use of evidence in D&I science that is more comprehensive and equitable (particularly for type 3 evidence), this article aims to clarify concepts of evidence, summarize ongoing debates about evidence, and provide a set of recommendations and tools/resources for addressing the “how-to” in filling evidence gaps most critical to advancing implementation science. Main text Because current conceptualizations of evidence have been relatively narrow and insufficiently characterized in our opinion, we identify and discuss challenges and debates about the uses, usefulness, and gaps in evidence for implementation science. A set of questions is proposed to assist in determining when evidence is sufficient for dissemination and implementation. Intersecting gaps include the need to (1) reconsider how the evidence base is determined, (2) improve understanding of contextual effects on implementation, (3) sharpen the focus on health equity in how we approach and build the evidence-base, (4) conduct more policy implementation research and evaluation, and (5) learn from audience and stakeholder perspectives. We offer 15 recommendations to assist in filling these gaps and describe a set of tools for enhancing the evidence most needed in implementation science. Conclusions To address our recommendations, we see capacity as a necessary ingredient to shift the field’s approach to evidence. Capacity includes the “push” for implementation science where researchers are trained to develop and evaluate evidence which should be useful and feasible for implementers and reflect community or stakeholder priorities. Equally important, there has been inadequate training and too little emphasis on the “pull” for implementation science (e.g., training implementers, practice-based research). We suggest that funders and reviewers of research should adopt and support a more robust definition of evidence. By critically examining the evolving nature of evidence, implementation science can better fulfill its vision of facilitating widespread and equitable adoption, delivery, and sustainment of scientific advances.

health care sciences & services,health policy & services
Policy Implementation Science to Advance Population Health: The Potential for Learning Health Policy Systems

April Oh,Ali Abazeed,David A. Chambers

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2021.681602

IF: 5.2

2021-06-17

Frontiers in Public Health

Abstract:Many health policies are designed with the intention of improving health outcomes for all. Yet implementation of policies are variable across contexts, potentially limiting its impact on population health outcomes. The potential impact of a policy to advance health equity depends both on the design and its implementation, requiring ongoing evaluation and stakeholder engagement. Despite the importance of health policies in shaping public health, health care policy implementation science remains underrepresented in research. We argue that enhanced integration of policy questions within implementation science could reduce the time lag from policy to practice and improve population health outcomes to build a body of evidence on effective policy implementation. In this commentary, we argue that approaches to studying policy implementation science should reflect the dynamic and evolving policy context, analogous to the “learning healthcare system,” to better understand and respond to systematic and multilevel impacts of policy. Several example opportunities for a learning health policy system are posed in building a broader agenda toward research and practice in policy implementation science in public health.

public, environmental & occupational health
Promises and pitfalls in implementation science from the perspective of US-based researchers: learning from a pre-mortem

Rinad S. Beidas,Shannon Dorsey,Cara C. Lewis,Aaron R. Lyon,Byron J. Powell,Jonathan Purtle,Lisa Saldana,Rachel C. Shelton,Shannon Wiltsey Stirman,Meghan B. Lane-Fall

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-022-01226-3

2022-08-15

Implementation Science

Abstract:Implementation science is at a sufficiently advanced stage that it is appropriate for the field to reflect on progress thus far in achieving its vision, with a goal of charting a path forward. In this debate, we offer such reflections and report on potential threats that might stymie progress, as well as opportunities to enhance the success and impact of the field, from the perspective of a group of US-based researchers.

health care sciences & services,health policy & services
Implementation Science in School Mental Health: A 10-Year Progress Update and Development of a New Research Agenda

Aaron R. Lyon,Elizabeth H. Connors,Gwendolyn M. Lawson,Erum Nadeem,Julie Sarno Owens

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12310-024-09731-0

2024-11-13

School Mental Health

Abstract:Implementation science has grown considerably in school mental health over the past decade, driven by the persistent gaps between knowledge about "what works" to promote student well-being and what is typically delivered in schools. In 2014, Owens and colleagues outlined an implementation research agenda for the field of school mental health, emphasizing professional development and coaching, evidence-based practice fidelity, and sustainment. This paper provides a 10-year progress review across these domains and articulates an updated research agenda focused on: (1) pragmatic implementation strategies, (2) implementation mechanisms explaining the connection between implementation strategies and outcomes, (3) strategic intervention redesign to promote implementation, and (4) de-implementation of low-value practices. We propose critical research questions in these areas and conclude by highlighting contemporary study designs and methods (i.e., hybrid trial designs; sequential, multiple assignment, randomized trials; rapid qualitative approaches; economic analyses) that can be leveraged to investigate implementation research questions in school mental health over the next decade. In doing so, we hope to promote shared understanding of evolving implementation research priorities and opportunities to promote equitable, pragmatic, and sustainable implementation efforts in school mental health and drive synergy across projects.

psychology, educational, developmental
Fostering implementation of health services research findings into practice: a consolidated framework for advancing implementation science

Laura J Damschroder,David C Aron,Rosalind E Keith,Susan R Kirsh,Jeffery A Alexander,Julie C Lowery

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-4-50

2009-08-07

Implementation Science

Abstract:BackgroundMany interventions found to be effective in health services research studies fail to translate into meaningful patient care outcomes across multiple contexts. Health services researchers recognize the need to evaluate not only summative outcomes but also formative outcomes to assess the extent to which implementation is effective in a specific setting, prolongs sustainability, and promotes dissemination into other settings. Many implementation theories have been published to help promote effective implementation. However, they overlap considerably in the constructs included in individual theories, and a comparison of theories reveals that each is missing important constructs included in other theories. In addition, terminology and definitions are not consistent across theories. We describe the Consolidated Framework For Implementation Research (CFIR) that offers an overarching typology to promote implementation theory development and verification about what works where and why across multiple contexts.MethodsWe used a snowball sampling approach to identify published theories that were evaluated to identify constructs based on strength of conceptual or empirical support for influence on implementation, consistency in definitions, alignment with our own findings, and potential for measurement. We combined constructs across published theories that had different labels but were redundant or overlapping in definition, and we parsed apart constructs that conflated underlying concepts.ResultsThe CFIR is composed of five major domains: intervention characteristics, outer setting, inner setting, characteristics of the individuals involved, and the process of implementation. Eight constructs were identified related to the intervention (e.g., evidence strength and quality), four constructs were identified related to outer setting (e.g., patient needs and resources), 12 constructs were identified related to inner setting (e.g., culture, leadership engagement), five constructs were identified related to individual characteristics, and eight constructs were identified related to process (e.g., plan, evaluate, and reflect). We present explicit definitions for each construct.ConclusionThe CFIR provides a pragmatic structure for approaching complex, interacting, multi-level, and transient states of constructs in the real world by embracing, consolidating, and unifying key constructs from published implementation theories. It can be used to guide formative evaluations and build the implementation knowledge base across multiple studies and settings.

health care sciences & services,health policy & services
Attitude theory and measurement in implementation science: a secondary review of empirical studies and opportunities for advancement

Jessica Fishman,Catherine Yang,David Mandell

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-021-01153-9

2021-09-14

Implementation Science

Abstract:Abstract Background Implementation science studies often express interest in “attitudes,” a term borrowed from psychology. In psychology, attitude research has an established methodological and theoretical base, which we briefly summarize here. We then review implementation studies designed to measure attitudes and compare their definitions and methods with those from psychology. Methods A recent review identified 46 studies empirically examining factors associated with implementation. For each of these studies, we evaluated whether authors included attitudes as a construct of interest, and if so, whether and how the construct was defined, measured, and analyzed. Results Most of the articles (29/46 [63%]) mention attitudes as an implementation factor. Six articles include a definition of the construct. Nineteen studies were designed to measure attitudes but lacked clarity in describing how attitudes were measured. Those that explained their measurement approach used methods that differed from one another and from validated methods in social psychology. Few articles described associated analyses or provided results specific to attitudes. Despite the lack of specificity regarding relevant measurement, analysis, and results, the articles often included causal conclusions about the role of attitudes. Conclusions Attitudes may be an important construct to implementation scientists, but studies to date are ambiguous in their definitions of attitudes and inconsistent in the methods used to measure and analyze attitudes. We discuss how implementation studies can apply psychology’s standardized definitions, validated measurement approaches, and causal models that include attitudes. This application of attitude theory and methods could offer implementation research valuable scientific opportunities.

health care sciences & services,health policy & services
Gaps in communication theory paradigms when conducting implementation science research: qualitative observations from interviews with administrators, implementors, and evaluators of rural health programs

Nicole L. Johnson,Jennifer Van Tiem,Erin Balkenende,DeShauna Jones,Julia E. Friberg,Emily E. Chasco,Jane Moeckli,Kenda S. Steffensmeier,Melissa J. A. Steffen,Kanika Arora,Borsika A. Rabin and Heather Schacht Reisinger

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-024-01395-3

2024-09-19

Implementation Science

Abstract:Communication is considered an inherent element of nearly every implementation strategy. Often it is seen as a means for imparting new information between stakeholders, representing a Transaction orientation to communication. From a Process orientation, communication is more than information-exchange and is acknowledged as being shaped by (and shaping) the individuals involved and their relationships with one another. As the field of Implementation Science (IS) works to strengthen theoretical integration, we encourage an interdisciplinary approach that engages communication theory to develop richer understanding of strategies and determinants of practice.

health care sciences & services,health policy & services
Frontalis musculotaneous island flap for coverage of forehead defect.

A. Kayıkçıoğlu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00006534-200010000-00044

2000-10-01

Abstract:
Combining systems thinking approaches and implementation science constructs within community-based prevention: a systematic review

Jillian Whelan,Penny Fraser,Kristy A Bolton,Penelope Love,Claudia Strugnell,Tara Boelsen-Robinson,Miranda R Blake,Erik Martin,Steven Allender,Colin Bell

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12961-023-01023-4

2023-08-28

Abstract:Background: Systems science offers methods for designing population health interventions while implementation science provides specific guidance for successful implementation. Integrating systems and implementation science may strengthen implementation and enhance and sustain systemic change to achieve system-level outcomes. Little is known about the extent to which these two approaches have been integrated to date. This review aimed to identify and synthesise the peer-reviewed literature that has reported the combined use of systems thinking approaches and implementation science constructs (within the same study), to deliver population health interventions. Methods: A systematic literature search of peer-reviewed original research was conducted across six databases from 2009 to 2021. Journal manuscripts were included if they: (1) reported on a population health study conducted in a community, (2) reported the use of a systems method in the design of the intervention, and (3) used an implementation science theory, framework or model in the delivery of the intervention. Data extracted related to the specific systems methods and definitions and implementation science constructs used. The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) was used to assess study quality. Results: Of the 9086 manuscripts returned, 320 manuscripts were included for full-text review. Of these, 17 manuscripts that reported on 14 studies were included in the final extraction. The most frequently reported systems methods were a 'whole of community systems approach' (n = 4/14) and 'community-based system dynamics' (n = 2/14). Nineteen different implementation science theories, frameworks and models were used for intervention delivery, with RE-AIM being the only framework used in more than one study. Conclusion: There are few published peer-reviewed studies using systems thinking and implementation science for designing and delivering population health interventions. An exploration of synergies is worthwhile to operationalise alignment and improve implementation of systems thinking approaches. Review protocol registration PROSPERO CRD42021250419.
[Morphometric study of the grouped lymphoid nodules in Wistar rats with different behavioral activity exposed to acute stress].

E. Ivanova

Abstract:This paper describes the results of the study of the structural elements of the grouped lymphoid nodules (GLN, Peyer's patches) of rat ileum after the exposure to emotional-painful stress. In the control group of behaviorally passive rats, the area, occupied by GLN structural elements in the intestinal sections, was significantly greater than that one in the group of active rats. After the exposure to stress, the areas of all GLN structural components were decreased in the behaviorally passive rats. In the group of behaviorally active rats exposed to stress, the areas occupied by the GLN internodular zones, were increased, while the areas of lymphoid nodules remained practically unchanged, suggesting high adaptation capacity of this group of animals.
Commentary: Bridging and Reducing the Gaps Between Research and Practice: Pathways to Outcomes and the Interactive Systems Framework for Dissemination and Implementation 2.0

Abraham Wandersman,Brittany S. Cook,Kristina Clark,Paul Flaspohler,Amber Watson,Andrea E. Lamont

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/01632787241299820

2024-11-13

Evaluation & the Health Professions

Abstract:Evaluation &the Health Professions, Ahead of Print. There are many ways proposed to achieve better societal outcomes (e.g., in health, education, and well-being) including: (1) bridging research and practice, (2) building the motivation and capacity of service delivery organizations (e.g., schools, hospitals, clinics, and community-based organizations) to innovate, and (c) providing service delivery systems with high-quality support via training and technical assistance. The Interactive Systems Framework for Dissemination and Implementation (ISF) was developed to describe how relevant systems, organizations, and processes can interact and work toward these goals. Stimulated by the 13 articles contained in the two special issues of Strengthening the Science and Practice of Implementation Support: Evaluating the Effectiveness of Training and Technical Assistance Centers, we describe several enhancements to the ISF including: how service delivery systems can operate better, how motivation and capacity can be built, and how training and technical assistance centers can provide more evidence-informed technical assistance and other promising innovations. ISF 2.0 incorporates these and other enhancements with the goal of achieving better outcomes. We conclude that the actions and accountability of funders and of organizations and systems to funders would accelerate progress in the systems to achieve outcomes—and result in improving the science and practice of implementation support.

health care sciences & services,health policy & services
A research agenda to advance the study of implementation mechanisms

Cara C Lewis,Hannah E Frank,Gracelyn Cruden,Bo Kim,Aubyn C Stahmer,Aaron R Lyon,Bianca Albers,Gregory A Aarons,Rinad S Beidas,Brian S Mittman,Bryan J Weiner,Nate J Williams,Byron J Powell,MNoE Group,Maria E Fernandez,Sarah Masyuko,Michael Pullmann,Lisa Saldana,Anjuli D Wagner,Callie Walsh-Bailey,Shannon Wiltsey Stirman

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s43058-024-00633-5

2024-09-16

Abstract:Background: Implementation science scholars have made significant progress identifying factors that enable or obstruct the implementation of evidence-based interventions, and testing strategies that may modify those factors. However, little research sheds light on how or why strategies work, in what contexts, and for whom. Studying implementation mechanisms-the processes responsible for change-is crucial for advancing the field of implementation science and enhancing its value in facilitating equitable policy and practice change. The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality funded a conference series to achieve two aims: (1) develop a research agenda on implementation mechanisms, and (2) actively disseminate the research agenda to research, policy, and practice audiences. This article presents the resulting research agenda, including priorities and actions to encourage its execution. Method: Building on prior concept mapping work, in a semi-structured, 3-day, in-person working meeting, 23 US-based researchers used a modified nominal group process to generate priorities and actions for addressing challenges to studying implementation mechanisms. During each of the three 120-min sessions, small groups responded to the prompt: "What actions need to be taken to move this research forward?" The groups brainstormed actions, which were then shared with the full group and discussed with the support of facilitators trained in structured group processes. Facilitators grouped critical and novel ideas into themes. Attendees voted on six themes they prioritized to discuss in a fourth, 120-min session, during which small groups operationalized prioritized actions. Subsequently, all ideas were collated, combined, and revised for clarity by a subset of the authorship team. Results: From this multistep process, 150 actions emerged across 10 priority areas, which together constitute the research agenda. Actions included discrete activities, projects, or products, and ways to shift how research is conducted to strengthen the study of implementation mechanisms. Conclusions: This research agenda elevates actions to guide the selection, design, and evaluation of implementation mechanisms. By delineating recommended actions to address the challenges of studying implementation mechanisms, this research agenda facilitates expanding the field of implementation science, beyond studying what works to how and why strategies work, in what contexts, for whom, and with which interventions.
Outcomes for Implementation Research: Conceptual Distinctions, Measurement Challenges, and Research Agenda

Enola Proctor,Hiie Silmere,Ramesh Raghavan,Peter Hovmand,Greg Aarons,Alicia Bunger,Richard Griffey,Melissa Hensley

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10488-010-0319-7

2010-10-19

Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research

Abstract:An unresolved issue in the field of implementation research is how to conceptualize and evaluate successful implementation. This paper advances the concept of “implementation outcomes” distinct from service system and clinical treatment outcomes. This paper proposes a heuristic, working “taxonomy” of eight conceptually distinct implementation outcomes—acceptability, adoption, appropriateness, feasibility, fidelity, implementation cost, penetration, and sustainability—along with their nominal definitions. We propose a two-pronged agenda for research on implementation outcomes. Conceptualizing and measuring implementation outcomes will advance understanding of implementation processes, enhance efficiency in implementation research, and pave the way for studies of the comparative effectiveness of implementation strategies.

public, environmental & occupational health,health policy & services
Leveraging systems science and design thinking to advance implementation science: moving toward a solution-oriented paradigm

Terry T.-K. Huang,Emily A. Callahan,Emily R. Haines,Cole Hooley,Dina M. Sorensen,David W. Lounsbury,Nasim S. Sabounchi,Peter S. Hovmand

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2024.1368050

IF: 5.2

2024-05-16

Frontiers in Public Health

Abstract:Many public health challenges are characterized by complexity that reflects the dynamic systems in which they occur. Such systems involve multiple interdependent factors, actors, and sectors that influence health, and are a primary driver of challenges of insufficient implementation, sustainment, and scale of evidence-based public health interventions. Implementation science frameworks have been developed to help embed evidence-based interventions in diverse settings and identify key factors that facilitate or hinder implementation. These frameworks are largely static in that they do not explain the nature and dynamics of interrelationships among the identified determinants, nor how those determinants might change over time. Furthermore, most implementation science frameworks are top-down, deterministic, and linear, leaving critical gaps in understanding of both how to intervene on determinants of successful implementation and how to scale evidence-based solutions. Design thinking and systems science offer methods for transforming this problem-oriented paradigm into one that is solution-oriented. This article describes these two approaches and how they can be integrated into implementation science strategies to promote implementation, sustainment, and scaling of public health innovation, ultimately resulting in transformative systems changes that improve population health.

public, environmental & occupational health
Dynamics behind the scale up of evidence-based obesity prevention: protocol for a multi-site case study of an electronic implementation monitoring system in health promotion practice

Kathleen P. Conte,Sisse Groen,Victoria Loblay,Amanda Green,Andrew Milat,Lina Persson,Christine Innes-Hughes,Jo Mitchell,Sarah Thackway,Mandy Williams,Penelope Hawe

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-017-0686-5

2017-12-01

Implementation Science

Abstract:BackgroundThe effectiveness of many interventions to promote health and prevent disease has been well established. The imperative has therefore shifted from amassing evidence about efficacy to scale-up to maximise population-level health gains. Electronic implementation monitoring, or ‘e-monitoring’, systems have been designed to assist and track the delivery of preventive policies and programs. However, there is little evidence on whether e-monitoring systems improve the dissemination, adoption, and ongoing delivery of evidence-based preventive programs. Also, given considerable difficulties with e-monitoring systems in the clinical sector, scholars have called for a more sophisticated re-examination of e-monitoring’s role in enhancing implementation.MethodsIn the state of New South Wales (NSW), Australia, the Population Health Information Management System (PHIMS) was created to support the dissemination of obesity prevention programs to 6000 childcare centres and elementary schools across all 15 local health districts. We have established a three-way university-policymaker-practice research partnership to investigate the impact of PHIMS on practice, how PHIMS is used, and how achievement of key performance indicators of program adoption may be associated with local contextual factors. Our methods encompass ethnographic observation, key informant interviews and participatory workshops for data interpretation at a state and local level. We use an on-line social network analysis of the collaborative relationships across local health district health promotion teams to explore the relationship between PHIMS use and the organisational structure of practice.DiscussionInsights will be sensitised by institutional theory, practice theory and complex adaptive system thinking, among other theories which make sense of socio-technical action. Our working hypothesis is that the science of getting evidence-based programs into practice rests on an in-depth understanding of the role they play in the on-going system of local relationships and multiple accountabilities. Data will be synthesised to produce a typology to characterise local context, PHIMS use and key performance indicator achievement (of program implementation) across the 15 local health districts. Results could be used to continuously align e-monitoring technologies within quality improvement processes to ensure that such technologies enhance practice and innovation. A partnership approach to knowledge production increases the likelihood that findings will be put into practice.

health care sciences & services,health policy & services

Implantation of bone marrow mononuclear cells using injectable fibrin matrix enhances neovascularization in infarcted myocardium.

A systems approach to scale-up for population health improvement

[Combined intrapleural and low epidural anesthesia for upper abdominal surgery].

The struggle of translating science into action: Foundational concepts of implementation science

Factors influencing the scale-up of public health interventions in low- and middle-income countries: a qualitative systematic literature review

SpeakGreek: An online speech training tool for L2 pedagogy and clinical intervention

Revisiting concepts of evidence in implementation science

Policy Implementation Science to Advance Population Health: The Potential for Learning Health Policy Systems

Promises and pitfalls in implementation science from the perspective of US-based researchers: learning from a pre-mortem

Implementation Science in School Mental Health: A 10-Year Progress Update and Development of a New Research Agenda

Fostering implementation of health services research findings into practice: a consolidated framework for advancing implementation science

Attitude theory and measurement in implementation science: a secondary review of empirical studies and opportunities for advancement

Gaps in communication theory paradigms when conducting implementation science research: qualitative observations from interviews with administrators, implementors, and evaluators of rural health programs

Frontalis musculotaneous island flap for coverage of forehead defect.

Combining systems thinking approaches and implementation science constructs within community-based prevention: a systematic review

[Morphometric study of the grouped lymphoid nodules in Wistar rats with different behavioral activity exposed to acute stress].

Commentary: Bridging and Reducing the Gaps Between Research and Practice: Pathways to Outcomes and the Interactive Systems Framework for Dissemination and Implementation 2.0

A research agenda to advance the study of implementation mechanisms

Outcomes for Implementation Research: Conceptual Distinctions, Measurement Challenges, and Research Agenda

Leveraging systems science and design thinking to advance implementation science: moving toward a solution-oriented paradigm

Dynamics behind the scale up of evidence-based obesity prevention: protocol for a multi-site case study of an electronic implementation monitoring system in health promotion practice