A modified theoretical framework to assess implementation fidelity of adaptive public health interventions

Background: One of the major debates in implementation research turns around fidelity and adaptation. Fidelity is the degree to which an intervention is implemented as intended by its developers. It is meant to ensure that the intervention maintains its intended effects. Adaptation is the process of implementers or users bringing changes to the original design of an intervention. Depending on the nature of the modifications brought, adaptation could either be potentially positive or could carry the risk of threatening the theoretical basis of the intervention, resulting in a negative effect on expected outcomes. Adaptive interventions are those for which adaptation is allowed or even encouraged. Classical fidelity dimensions and conceptual frameworks do not address the issue of how to adapt an intervention while still maintaining its effectiveness. Discussion: We support the idea that fidelity and adaptation co-exist and that adaptations can impact either positively or negatively on the intervention's effectiveness. For adaptive interventions, research should answer the question how an adequate fidelity-adaptation balance can be reached. One way to address this issue is by looking systematically at the aspects of an intervention that are being adapted. We conducted fidelity research on the implementation of an empowerment strategy for dengue prevention in Cuba. In view of the adaptive nature of the strategy, we anticipated that the classical fidelity dimensions would be of limited use for assessing adaptations. The typology we used in the assessment-implemented, not-implemented, modified, or added components of the strategy-also had limitations. It did not allow us to answer the question which of the modifications introduced in the strategy contributed to or distracted from outcomes. We confronted our empirical research with existing literature on fidelity, and as a result, considered that the framework for implementation fidelity proposed by Carroll et al. in 2007 could potentially meet our concerns. We propose modifications to the framework to assess both fidelity and adaptation. Summary: The modified Carroll et al.'s framework we propose may permit a comprehensive assessment of the implementation fidelity-adaptation balance required when implementing adaptive interventions, but more empirical research is needed to validate it

FIRE (facilitating implementation of research evidence) : a study protocol

Research evidence underpins best practice, but is not always used in healthcare. The Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (PARIHS) framework suggests that the nature of evidence, the context in which it is used, and whether those trying to use evidence are helped (or facilitated) affect the use of evidence. Urinary incontinence has a major effect on quality of life of older people, has a high prevalence, and is a key priority within European health and social care policy. Improving continence care has the potential to improve the quality of life for older people and reduce the costs associated with providing incontinence aids

The effectiveness of interventions to disseminate the results of non-commercial randomised clinical trials to healthcare professionals: a systematic review

Background: It is unclear how to disseminate the results of randomised controlled trials effectively to health professionals and policymakers to improve treatment, care or prevention through changing policy and practice. This systematic review examined the effectiveness of different methods of dissemination of clinical research results to professional audiences. // Methods: We systematically reviewed the published and grey literature from 2000 to 2022 for studies assessing different approaches for disseminating clinical study results to professional audiences (health professionals, policymakers and guideline developers). Two reviewers assessed potentially relevant full texts for inclusion. We grouped studies by intervention type, synthesising findings using effect direction plots. Outcomes were grouped into out-takes (e.g. awareness, knowledge, understanding), outcomes (e.g. attitude changes) and impact (changes in policy/practice). The quality of evidence was assessed using GRADE. // Results: Our search identified 13,264 unique records, of which 416 full texts were assessed for eligibility. Of 60 studies that were identified as eligible for inclusion, 20 evaluated the effectiveness of interventions to disseminate clinical research results (13 RCTs, 2 observational studies, 3 pre- and post-intervention surveys and 2 cross-sectional surveys). Studies were grouped by intervention: 7 studies that involved face-to-face meetings between the target audience and trained educators were classified as ‘outreach interventions’; 5 studies that provided a summary format for systematic review findings (e.g. summary of findings tables) were grouped together. There was high certainty evidence of a small beneficial impact of outreach interventions on health and moderate certainty evidence of impact on practice (mostly prescribing). There was no evidence of impact on policy and very low certainty around benefits on outcomes and out-takes. We found no consistent benefits of summary formats for systematic review results on outcomes or out-takes (moderate quality evidence). Other interventions with less evidence are reported in the Additional Materials. // Conclusions: Outreach interventions to disseminate clinical research results can lead to changes in practice and improvements in health. However, these interventions can be resource-intensive. Investment is vital to identify and implement effective and cost-effective ways to disseminate results, so that the potential benefits of trials to patients can be realised. // Trial registration: International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO), CRD42019137364

Adapting Translational Research Methods to Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene

Translational research applies scientific techniques to achieve practical outcomes, connecting pure research and pure practice. Many translational research types have arisen since the mid-1900s, reflecting the need to better integrate scientific advancement with policy and practice. Water, sanitation, and hygiene (WaSH) development efforts have aimed to reduce morbidity and mortality and improve service delivery; thus, associated research has a strong orientation toward applied studies that use diverse methods to support decision-making. Drawing from knowledge that emerged to support other professional fields, such as manufacturing and clinical healthcare, we characterize different types of translational research and clarify nomenclature and principles. We describe study approaches relevant to translational research questions, and offer overarching recommendations, specific examples, and resources for further study as practical advice to professionals who seek to apply translational methods to WaSH problems. To enhance collective outcomes, professionals should mindfully align projects within the translational spectrum. We further recommend overarching good practices such as documenting intervention adaptations, overtly considering contextual factors, and better distinguishing efficacy from effectiveness research by replicating studies in different contexts. By consciously improving the compatibility and linkages between WaSH science and practice, this guide can accelerate urgently needed progress toward global development goals

Lost in Knowledge Translation: Moving Towards a Clearer Picture? Mapping the conceptualisation of knowledge translation, transfer and exchange across public health in the North East

Over recent decades the concept of evidence-based practice in health care has become part of the language of practitioners, policymakers and researchers. However, a gap between the production of research evidence and use of this evidence in practice has been identified, leading to repeated calls for solutions which will render the process more effective and efficient. It is increasingly acknowledged that getting evidence into, or out of, policy and practice arenas is not a straightforward or a linear process and to view it as such may be both misleading and overly simplistic. The term knowledge translation (KT) is used to describe the work required to close or bridge this gap and is becoming common vocabulary. However, as a concept KT (and related terms) are not yet clearly defined, nor are there agreed meanings in many areas including public health. While there is a growing body of literature exploring these concepts, using this evidence to inform public health practice, strategy, research and education is often difficult given the diverse range of sources, the worldviews upon which they are based and the need for local ‘contextual fit’. This study was commissioned by Fuse to explore how various stakeholder groups (e.g. practitioners, commissioners, academics, researchers, local authority/government) make sense of and experience the concepts and processes of knowledge translation, transfer and exchange. The study aims were to: Undertake a rapid review of recent literature syntheses pertaining to knowledge translation, exchange and transfer in public health, Explore and articulate (map) stakeholder conceptualisations and interpretations of knowledge translation, exchange and transfer in public health

Exploring knowledge broker influences on sharing and use of evidence for health policy and practice in low- and middle-income countries

Little is known about how intermediaries called knowledge brokers work in low- and middle-income countries to help move evidence into policy and practice to improve health outcomes. The aim of this PhD research project was to understand how knowledge brokers spread and mobilize evidence in multiple countries and regions in the context of an internationally funded global health program. It used case studies, interviews, and surveys of nearly 600 health professionals in more than 65 countries. Findings show knowledge brokers participating in the studies worked in multiple roles in healthcare systems and used their professional networks to help policymakers, healthcare providers, and others adapt evidence for use in the local context. They exhibited attributes such as a “can-do” spirit to overcome challenges in implementing evidence. Knowledge brokers were influenced in selecting evidence by having an opportunity to share it during their professional duties, how well the evidence fit their professional role, successes in using the evidence in similar contexts, and how well it fit the healthcare decision-making culture of the country. Initiatives to increase evidence uptake should consider strengthening the use of knowledge brokers in health organizations and building their capacity to work across countries and regions

‘Maybe we can turn the tide’ : an explanatory mixed-methods study to understand how knowledge brokers mobilise health evidence in low- and middle-income countries

Background: Little is known about how knowledge brokers (KBs) operate in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) to translate evidence for health policy and practice. These intermediaries facilitate relationships between evidence producers and users to address public health issues. Aims and objectives: To increase understanding, a mixed-methods study collected data from KBs who had acted on evidence from the 2015 Global Maternal Newborn Health Conference in Mexico. Methods: Of the 1000 in-person participants, 252 plus 72 online participants (n=324) from 56 countries completed an online survey, and 20 participants from 15 countries were interviewed. Thematic analysis and application of knowledge translation (KT) theory explored factors influencing KB actions leading to evidence uptake. Descriptive statistics of respondent characteristics were used for cross-case comparison. Findings: Results suggest factors supporting the KB role in evidence uptake, which include active relationships with evidence users through embedded KB roles, targeted and tailored evidence communication to fit the context, user receptiveness to evidence from a similar country setting, adaptability in the KB role, and action orientation of KBs. Discussion and conclusions: Initiatives to increase evidence uptake in LMICs should work to establish supportive structures for embedded KT, identify processes for ongoing cross-country learning, and strengthen KBs already showing effectiveness in their roles

From evidence-based research to practice-based evidence : disseminating a web-based computer-tailored workplace sitting intervention through a health promotion organisation

Prolonged sitting has been linked to adverse health outcomes; therefore, we developed and examined a web-based, computer-tailored workplace sitting intervention. As we had previously shown good effectiveness, the next stage was to conduct a dissemination study. This study reports on the dissemination efforts of a health promotion organisation, associated costs, reach achieved, and attributes of the website users. The organisation systematically registered all the time and resources invested to promote the intervention. Website usage statistics (reach) and descriptive statistics (website users' attributes) were also assessed. Online strategies (promotion on their homepage; sending e-mails, newsletters, Twitter, Facebook and LinkedIn posts to professional partners) were the main dissemination methods. The total time investment was 25.6 h, which cost approximately 845 EUR in salaries. After sixteen months, 1599 adults had visited the website and 1500 (93.8%) completed the survey to receive personalized sitting advice. This sample was 38.3 +/- 11.0 years, mainly female (76.9%), college/university educated (89.0%), highly sedentary (88.5% sat >8 h/day) and intending to change (93.0%) their sitting. Given the small time and money investment, these outcomes are positive and indicate the potential for wide-scale dissemination. However, more efforts are needed to reach men, non-college/university educated employees, and those not intending behavioural change

Dissemination and Implementation Science: Research Models and Methods

Dissemination and implementation (DI) science has grown exponentially in the past decade. This chapter reviews and discusses the research methodology pertinent to empirical DI inquiry within mental health services research. This chapter (a) reviews models of DI science, (b) presents and discusses design, variables, and measures relevant to DI processes, and (c) offers recommendations for future research