The second dose of measles-containing vaccines (MCV2) has significant programmatic relevance in the current immunisation landscape because it serves as both an opportunity to reduce measles immunity gaps and strengthen second year of life vaccination platforms. However, MCV2 coverage remains suboptimal across countries in the World Health Organization (WHO) African Region and this puts a significant number of children at risk of morbidity and mortality from measles despite the availability of an effective vaccine. There is an urgent need to strengthen the implementation of MCV2 but this requires a thorough and systematic understanding of contextual factors that influence it. The literature that describes the determinants of implementation of MCV2 in a manner that adequately accounts for the complexity of the implementation context is scarce. Therefore, the purpose of this rapid review was to explore the implementation determinants of MCV2 in the WHO African Region using systems thinking. Literature search in two databases (PubMed and Google Scholar) were conducted. After screening, a total of 17 eligible articles were included in the study. Thematic analysis of extracted data was performed to identify the implementation determinants, after which they were mapped using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). A causal loop diagram (CLD) was used to illustrate the linkages between identified determinants. We found 44 implementation determinants across the five CFIR domains, i.e., innovation, outer setting, inner setting, individual, and implementation process. The majority of identified determinants are within the individual domain followed by the inner setting domain. The CLD showed that multiple contingent connections and feedback relationships exist between the identified implementation determinants within and across CFIR domains. The linkages between the implementation determinants revealed three balancing and reinforcing loops each. The findings suggest that implementation determinants of second-dose measles vaccination in the WHO African Region are complex, with multiple interconnections and interdependencies, and this insight should guide subsequent policies. There is an urgent need for further implementation research with embedded CLD in specific settings to inform the design of tailored systemic strategies to improve the implementation effectiveness of MCV2.

A rapid review was conducted to explore the implementation determinants of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination in the World Health Organization African Region and describe their dynamic relationship. PubMed and Google Scholar were searched in October 2023 to find relevant literature. A total of 64 published studies that reported factors affecting HPV vaccination were identified. Analysis of identified factors yielded 74 implementation determinants of HPV vaccination across the five domains of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR): two (2.70%) were in the innovation domain, seven (9.46%) were in the outer setting domain, 14 (18.92%) were in the inner setting domain, 37 (50%) were in the individual domain and 14 (18.92%) were in the implementation process domain. A causal loop diagram of these implementation determinants revealed four balancing and seven reinforcing loops. Applying systems lens promoted a more holistic understanding of the implementation determinants of HPV vaccination, exposing leverage points for interventions.

In 2019, national immunization programs in Ghana, Kenya, and Malawi commenced the implementation of RTS,S/AS01 vaccination in large-scale pilot schemes. Understanding the implementation context of this malaria vaccination in the pilot countries can provide useful insights for enhancing implementation outcomes in new countries. There has not yet been a proper synthesis of the implementation determinants of malaria vaccination programs. A rapid review was conducted to identify the implementation determinants of the pilot malaria vaccination programs in Ghana, Kenya, and Malawi, and describe the mechanism by which these determinants interact with each other. A literature search was conducted in November 2023 in PubMed and Google Scholar to identify those studies that described the factors affecting malaria vaccine implementation in Ghana, Kenya, and Malawi. Thirteen studies conducted between 2021 and 2023 were included. A total of 62 implementation determinants of malaria vaccination across all five domains of the consolidated framework for implementation research (CFIR) were identified. A causal loop diagram showed that these factors are interconnected and interrelated, identifying nine reinforcing loops and two balancing loops. As additional countries in Africa prepare for a malaria vaccine roll-out, it is pertinent to ensure that they have access to adequate information about the implementation context of countries that are already implementing malaria vaccination programs so that they understand the potential barriers and facilitators. This information can be used to inform context-specific systems enhancement to maximize implementation success. Going forward, primary implementation studies that incorporate the causal loop diagram should be integrated into the malaria vaccine implementation program to enable immunization program managers and other key stakeholders to identify and respond to emerging implementation barriers in a timely and systematic manner, to improve overall implementation performance.

With a high mortality of 12.6% of all cancer cases, colorectal cancer (CRC) accounts for substantial burden of disease in Europe. In the past decade, more and more countries have introduced organized colorectal cancer screening programs, making systematic screening available to entire segments of a population, typically based on routine stool tests and/or colonoscopy. While the effectiveness of organized screening in reducing CRC incidence and mortality has been confirmed, studies continuously report persistent program implementation challenges. This systematic review will synthesize the literature on organized CRC screening programs. Its aim is to understand what is currently known about the barriers and facilitators that influence the implementation of these programs and about the implementation strategies used to navigate these determinants.
A systematic review of primary studies of any research design will be conducted. CENTRAL, CINAHL, EMBASE, International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Scopus will be searched. Websites of (non-)government health care organizations and websites of organizations affiliated with authors of included studies will be screened for unpublished evaluation reports. Existing organized CRC screening programs will be contacted with a request to share program-specific grey literature. Two researchers will independently screen each publication in two rounds for eligibility. Included studies will focus on adult populations involved in the implementation of organized CRC screening programs and contain information about implementation determinants/ strategies. Publications will be assessed for their risk of bias. Data extraction will include study aim, design, location, setting, sample, methods, and measures; program characteristics; implementation stage, framework, determinants, strategies, and outcomes; and service and other outcome information. Findings will be synthesized narratively using the three stages of thematic synthesis.
With its sole focus on the implementation of organized CRC screening programs, this review will help to fill a central knowledge gap in the literature on colorectal cancer screening. Its findings can inform the decision-making in policy and practice needed to prioritize resources for establishing new and maintaining existing programs in the future.
PROSPERO (CRD42022306580).

The pragmatic (i.e., practical) quality of quantitative implementation measures has received increased attention in the implementation science literature in recent years. Implementation measures that are judged to be pragmatic by implementation stakeholders are thought to be more likely to be applied in research and practice. Despite the need for pragmatic implementation measures, ambiguity and uncertainty regarding what constitutes a pragmatic measure remains. This study sought to identify and critically appraise the published literature to understand (i) how pragmatism is defined as a measurement construct/quality of implementation determinants and outcome instruments; (ii) how pragmatic qualities of instruments are evaluated; (iii) identify key gaps and limitations of the current evidence-base and (iv) identify recommendations for future research. We conducted a scoping review of the literature also employing methods of critical review. PubMed and PsycINFO databases, using the OVID interface, were searched for relevant articles published between January 2010 and September 2020. Articles that contained a definition and/or described characteristics of \"pragmatism\" as a measurement construct of quantitative implementation outcomes (as defined by Proctor\'s Implementation Outcomes taxonomy) and/or implementation determinants were eligible for inclusion. Nine articles met inclusion criteria. A degree of overlap in definitions and terms used to describe the pragmatic qualities of quantitative implementation determinant and outcome instruments were found. The most frequently cited descriptors of pragmatism were \"not burdensome\", \"brief\", \"reliable\", \"valid\" and \"sensitive to change\". 3 of the 9 included articles involved international implementation stakeholders in defining and conceptualizing pragmatism and employed specific methods to do so, including a systematic literature review, stakeholder interviews, concept mapping, and a Delphi process. All other articles defined pragmatism, with or without citing relevant literature. One article objectively assessed the pragmatic qualities, above and beyond the psychometric qualities, of implementation measures, using the Psychometric and Pragmatic Evidence Rating Scale (PAPERS). The evidence base within the implementation instrumentation literature on what pragmatism is and how it might be assessed is limited. Some of the research identified in the review provides a strong foundation to build upon, by testing its applicability in other settings (including healthcare areas and countries) and among a more diverse group of stakeholders. We discuss directions for further development of the concept of pragmatism relating to the measurement of implementation determinants and outcomes.
The need for pragmatic (i.e., practical) measures to evaluate implementation efforts has been repeatedly called for in the implementation science literature. This literature review focuses on understanding how pragmatism, as a measurement construct and quality of implementation measures, is defined, conceptualized and evaluated. We identified few articles (n = 9) that contribute to our understanding of how pragmatism is defined and evaluated. We found that the most frequently used terms to describe pragmatic qualities of implementation measures include “not burdensome”, “brief”, “reliable”, “valid” and “sensitive to change”. We identified one scale, the Psychometric and Pragmatic Evidence Rating Scale (PAPERS), developed to measure the pragmatic quality, as well as psychometric quality, of implementation measures. We identified several gaps and limitations of the current evidence-base and offer directions to further develop the concept and appraisal of pragmatism. Specifically, we recommend that future research focus on engaging and involving a wider diversity of implementation stakeholders in defining and conceptualizing pragmatism as well as subjecting existing pragmatic assessment measures to more rigorous and extensive evaluation.

First-level leadership is uniquely positioned to support evidence-based practice (EBP) implementation for behavioral health due to first-level leaders\' access to and relationship with service providers. First-level leaders are individuals who directly supervise and manage frontline employees who do not manage others. However, first-level leadership is underrepresented in existing reviews of the impact of leadership on EBP implementation. This review describes the relationship between first-level leadership and implementation determinants and outcomes.
A scoping review was performed to synthesize the literature on the relationship between first-level leadership and inner-context and implementation outcomes. A literature search was conducted in PubMed, Eric, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Scopus, and Web of Science. To be eligible, studies had to examine first-level leadership, be conducted in settings providing behavioral health services, and examine the relationship between first-level leadership and an implementation or inner-context outcome. Data extraction and synthesis were performed to describe study characteristics, leader-outcome relationships, and overlap in leadership frameworks.
Twenty-one records met our inclusion criteria. Studies primarily relied on observational designs and were often cross-sectional. Studies more often examined general leadership rather than leadership strategically focused on EBP implementation (i.e., strategic implementation leadership). Our findings suggest that several forms of first-level leadership are inconsistently related to a broad set of implementation determinants, with infrequent examination of specific implementation outcomes. The broad set of implementation determinants studied, limited number of replications, and inconsistent findings have resulted in sparse evidence for any specific leadership-outcome relationship. The greatest accumulation of evidence exists for general leadership\'s positive relationship with providers\' EBP attitudes, most notably in the form of transformational leadership. This was followed by evidence for strategic implementation leadership facilitating general implementation. Our synthesis revealed moderate conceptual overlap of strategic implementation leadership behaviors described in the theory of implementation leadership and theory of middle managers\' role in implementation.
Our findings suggest that first-level leadership may play an important role in shaping implementation determinants and outcomes, but consistent empirical support is sparse and confidence dampened by methodological issues. To advance the field, we need studies that adopt stronger methodological rigor, address the conceptual overlap in leadership frameworks, examine a broader set of implementation outcomes, and examine conditions under which leadership impacts implementation.
This review was not registered.

Studies of clinical effectiveness have demonstrated the many benefits of programmes that avoid unnecessary hospitalisations. Therefore, it is imperative to examine the factors influencing implementation of these programmes to ensure these benefits are realised across different healthcare contexts and settings. Numerous factors may act as determinants of implementation success or failure (facilitators and barriers), by either obstructing or enabling changes in healthcare delivery. Understanding the relationships between these determinants is needed to design and tailor strategies that integrate effective programmes into routine practice. Our aims were to describe the implementation determinants for hospital avoidance programmes for people with chronic conditions and the relationships between these determinants.
An electronic search of four databases was conducted from inception to October 2019, supplemented by snowballing for additional articles. Data were extracted using a structured data extraction tool and risk of bias assessed using the Hawker Tool. Thematic synthesis was undertaken to identify determinants of implementation success or failure for hospital avoidance programmes for people with chronic conditions, which were categorised according to the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). The relationships between these determinants were also mapped.
The initial search returned 3537 articles after duplicates were removed. After title and abstract screening, 123 articles underwent full-text review. Thirteen articles (14 studies) met the inclusion criteria. Thematic synthesis yielded 23 determinants of implementation across the five CFIR domains. \'Availability of resources\', \'compatibility and fit\', and \'engagement of interprofessional team\' emerged as the most prominent determinants across the included studies. The most interconnected implementation determinants were the \'compatibility and fit\' of interventions and \'leadership influence\' factors.
Evidence is emerging for how chronic condition hospital avoidance programmes can be successfully implemented and scaled across different settings and contexts. This review provides a summary of key implementation determinants and their relationships. We propose a hypothesised causal loop diagram to represent the relationship between determinants within a complex adaptive system.
PROSPERO 162812.