The Role of Organizational Processes in Dissemination and Implementation Research

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gregory A. Aarons ◽  
Joanna C. Moullin ◽  
Mark G. Ehrhart
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Organizational Development ◽  
Organizational Factors ◽  
Dissemination And Implementation ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Organizational Strategies ◽  
Evidence Based Practices ◽  
Effective Dissemination ◽  
Dissemination And Implementation Research ◽  
Ebp Implementation

Both organizational characteristics and specific organizational strategies are important for the effective dissemination and implementation of evidence-based practices (EBPs) in health and allied health care settings, as well as mental health, alcohol/drug treatment, and social service settings. One of the primary goals of this chapter is to support implementers and leaders within organizations in attending to and shaping the context in which implementation takes place in order to increase the likelihood of implementation success and long-term sustainment. The chapter summarizes some of the most critical organizational factors and strategies likely to impact successful evidence-based practice implementation. There are myriad approaches to supporting organizational development and change—this chapter focuses on issues supported by relevant scientific literatures, particularly those germane to EBP implementation in health care and related settings.

Furthering Dissemination and Implementation Research

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lawrence W. Green ◽  
Mona Nasser
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Implementation Research ◽  
External Validity ◽  
Evidence Based Practice ◽  
Internal Validity ◽  
Implementation Process ◽  
Dissemination And Implementation ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Evidence Based Practices ◽  
Dissemination And Implementation Research

This chapter raises questions about the reliability of much “evidence-based practice” disseminated from the original studies and systematic reviews of those studies, insofar as they were often conducted and reviewed with inadequate attention to external validity. Important issues are raised for dissemination and implementation researchers. Indeed, the pressure on investigators to provide for increasingly rigorous controls on threats to internal validity, and to exclude studies that fall below standards for internal validity, has made many such sources of evidence more suspect in their external validity and less credible to the practitioners or policymakers who would adopt them. Greater attention is needed to ways to incorporate considerations of external validity into studies and in systematic reviews of studies to produce more generalizable evidence, and greater attention to practice-based evidence that can complement the more formal evidence-based practices in the process of implementing and evaluating the dissemination and implementation process

Measurement Issues in Dissemination and Implementation Research

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cara C. Lewis ◽  
Enola K. Proctor ◽  
Ross C. Brownson
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Implementation Research ◽  
Health Care Access ◽  
Healthcare Research ◽  
Dissemination And Implementation ◽  
Measurement Issues ◽  
Care Access ◽  
Dissemination And Implementation Science ◽  
Dissemination And Implementation Research ◽  
Access And Quality

The National Institutes of Health, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, the CDC, and a number of private foundations have expressed the need for advancing the science of dissemination and implementation. Interest in dissemination and implementation research is present in many countries. Improving health care requires not only effective programs and interventions, but also effective strategies to move them into community based settings of care. But before discrete strategies can be tested for effectiveness, comparative effectiveness, or cost effectiveness, context and outcome constructs must be identified and defined in such a way that enables their manipulation and measurement. Measurement is underdeveloped, with few psychometrically strong measures and very little attention paid to their pragmatic nature. A variety of tools are needed to capture health care access and quality, and no measurement issues are more pressing than those for dissemination and implementation science.

Dissemination and Implementation Research in Health

2017 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Evidence Base ◽  
Dissemination And Implementation ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Collaborative Partnerships ◽  
Social Service Agencies ◽  
Effective Interventions ◽  
Health Related Research ◽  
Health Related ◽  
Dissemination And Implementation Research ◽  
Policies And Programs

Fifteen to twenty years is how long it takes for the billions of dollars of health-related research to translate into evidence-based policies and programs suitable for public use. Over the past 15 years, an exciting science has emerged that seeks to narrow the gap between the discovery of new knowledge and its application in public health, mental health, and health care settings. Dissemination and implementation (D&I) research seeks to understand how to best apply scientific advances in the real world, by focusing on pushing the evidence-based knowledge base out into routine use. To help propel this crucial field forward, leading D&I scholars and researchers have collaborated to put together this volume to address a number of key issues, including: how to evaluate the evidence base on effective interventions; which strategies will produce the greatest impact; how to design an appropriate study; and how to track a set of essential outcomes. D&I studies must also take into account the barriers to uptake of evidence-based interventions in the communities where people live their lives and the social service agencies, hospitals, and clinics where they receive care. The challenges of moving research to practice and policy are universal, and future progress calls for collaborative partnerships and cross-country research. The fundamental tenet of D&I research—taking what we know about improving health and putting it into practice—must be the highest priority. This book is nothing less than a roadmap that will have broad appeal to researchers and practitioners across many disciplines.

Moving Research into Practice: Can We Make Dissemination Stick?

2013 ◽  
Vol 79 (2) ◽  
pp. 163-180
Author(s):  
Bryan G. Cook ◽  
Lysandra Cook ◽  
Timothy J. Landrum
Keyword(s):  
Special Education ◽  
Education Research ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Evidence Based Practices ◽  
Ongoing Research ◽  
What Works ◽  
Effective Dissemination ◽  
Research Findings ◽  
Practice Gap ◽  
Traditional Approaches

Although researchers in special education have made significant advances in defining and identifying evidence-based practices, scholars often constitute an insular group that disseminates research findings primarily through outlets and venues targeting like-minded researchers using traditional approaches. Thus, despite tangible results in determining what works, using dissemination approaches that fail to resonate with or influence practitioners represents an important but often overlooked contributor to the ongoing research-to-practice gap in special education. The authors argue that empirical and theoretical literature outside of special education may offer insight into how ideas take hold, which may be especially relevant to the effective dissemination of evidence-based practices. Drawing on Heath and Heath's (2008) model, the authors describe 6 characteristics of messages that are likely to “stick”: (a) simple, (b) unexpected, (c) concrete, (d) credible, (e) emotional, and (f) stories. The authors consider each in terms of implications for dissemination of special education research findings, and urge special education researchers to consider researching, refining, and applying dissemination strategies that can make special education research matter on a broader scale.

Unhealthy Politics

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric M. Patashnik ◽  
Alan S. Gerber ◽  
Conor M. Dowling
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
The United States ◽  
Evidence Base ◽  
Medical Industry ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Evidence Based Practices ◽  
Delivery Of Medical Care ◽  
Based Medicine

The U.S. medical system is touted as the most advanced in the world, yet many common treatments are not based on sound science. This book sheds new light on why the government's response to this troubling situation has been so inadequate, and why efforts to improve the evidence base of U.S. medicine continue to cause so much political controversy. The book paints a portrait of a medical industry with vast influence over which procedures and treatments get adopted, and a public burdened by the rising costs of health care yet fearful of going against “doctor's orders.” It offers vital insights into the limits of science, expertise, and professionalism in American politics. The book explains why evidence-based medicine is important. First, the delivery of unproven care can expose patients to serious risks. Second, the slow integration of evidence can lead to suboptimal outcomes for patients who receive treatments that work less well for their conditions than alternatives. Third, the failure to implement evidence-based practices encourages wasteful spending, causing the health care system to underperform relative to its level of investment. This book assesses whether the delivery of medical care in the United States is evidence based. It argues that by systematically ignoring scientific evidence (or the lack thereof), the United States is substantially out of balance.

What Makes or Breaks Evidence-Based Supervision? Staff and Organizational Predictors of Evidence-Based Practice in Probation

2021 ◽  
pp. 0306624X2110491
Author(s):  
Sara Debus-Sherrill ◽  
Alex Breno ◽  
Faye S. Taxman
Keyword(s):  
Organizational Culture ◽  
Survey Data ◽  
Evidence Based Practice ◽  
Organizational Factors ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Evidence Based Practices ◽  
Weak Evidence ◽  
The Impact

Research on staff and organizational factors that affect receptivity, adoption, feasibility, and utilization of innovations in justice settings is limited. This study uses survey data from 349 employees in one probation agency to assess how staff and perceived organizational factors influence attitudes related to evidence-based practices (EBPs) and their self-reported use. Staff characteristics, including education and knowledge about EBPs, and perceptions of the organization, including cynicism about the organization’s ability to change, predicted EBP outcomes. Staff age, tenure at the agency, and caseload size affected perceptions of organizational culture, but did not predict attitudes or use of EBPs. There is weak evidence for a relationship between self-reported use of EBPs with attitudinal support for EBPs, prior EBP training, and knowledge of EBPs. This study contributes to an emerging body of literature about the impact of various individual and organizational factors on support for EBPs with important lessons for implementation.

scholarly journals Evaluating agency-led adaptions to an evidence-based lifestyle intervention for adults with serious mental illness

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
pp. 263348952094320
Author(s):  
Kelly A Aschbrenner ◽  
Gary R Bond ◽  
Sarah I Pratt ◽  
Kenneth Jue ◽  
Gail Williams ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Mental Illness ◽  
Mental Health Care ◽  
Serious Mental Illness ◽  
Real World ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Cardiovascular Risk Reduction ◽  
Evidence Based Practices ◽  
Practical Advantage

Background: Limited empirical evidence exists on the impact of adaptations that occur in implementing evidence-based practices (EBPs) in real-world practice settings. The purpose of this study was to measure and evaluate adaptations to an EBP (InSHAPE) for obesity in persons with serious mental illness in a national implementation in mental health care settings. Methods: We conducted telephone interviews with InSHAPE provider teams at 37 (95%) of 39 study sites during 24-month follow-up of a cluster randomized trial of implementation strategies for InSHAPE at behavioral health organizations. Our team rated adaptations as fidelity-consistent or fidelity-inconsistent. Multilevel regression models were used to estimate the relationship between adaptations and implementation and participant outcomes. Results: Of 37 sites interviewed, 28 sites (76%) made adaptations to InSHAPE ( M = 2.1, SD = 1.3). Sixteen sites (43%) made fidelity-consistent adaptations, while 22 (60%) made fidelity-inconsistent adaptations. The number of fidelity-inconsistent adaptations was negatively associated with InSHAPE fidelity scores (β = −4.29; p < .05). A greater number of adaptations were associated with significantly higher odds of participant-level cardiovascular risk reduction (odds ratio [ OR] = 1.40; confidence interval [CI] = [1.08, 1.80]; p < .05). With respect to the type of adaptation, we found a significant positive association between the number of fidelity-inconsistent adaptations and cardiovascular risk reduction ( OR = 1.59; CI = [1.01, 2.51]; p < .05). This was largely explained by the fidelity-inconsistent adaptation of holding exercise sessions at the mental health agency versus a fitness facility in the community (a core form of InSHAPE) ( OR = 2.52; 95% CI = [1.11, 5.70]; p < .05). Conclusions: This research suggests that adaptations to an evidence-based lifestyle program were common during implementation in real-world mental health practice settings even when fidelity was monitored and reinforced through implementation interventions. Results suggest that adaptations, including those that are fidelity-inconsistent, can be positively associated with improved participant outcomes when they provide a potential practical advantage while maintaining the core function of the intervention. Plain language abstract: Treatments that have been proven to work in research studies are not always one-size-fits-all. In real-world clinical settings where people receive mental health care, sometimes there are good reasons to change certain things about a treatment. For example, a particular treatment might not fit well in a specific clinic or cultural context, or it might not meet the needs of specific patient groups. We studied adaptations to an evidence-based practice (InSHAPE) targeting obesity in persons with serious mental illness made by teams implementing the program in routine mental health care settings. We learned that adaptations to InSHAPE were common, and that an adaptation that model experts initially viewed as inconsistent with fidelity to the model turned out to have a positive impact on participant health outcomes. The results of this study may encourage researchers and model experts to work collaboratively with mental health agencies and clinicians implementing evidence-based practices to consider allowing for and guiding adaptations that provide a potential practical advantage while maintaining the core purpose of the intervention.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document