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.

UNASSIGNED: This study examined the implementation determinants of a culturally grounded, school-based drug prevention curriculum in rural Hawai\'i. Test development and validation procedures were used to examine the impact of implementation barriers and facilitators of the curriculum in public or charter middle/intermediate schools on Hawai\'i Island.
UNASSIGNED: A five-phase, mixed-methods approach toward test development and validation was used. These phases included item generation (Phase 1), item refinement and selection (Phase 2), item reduction (Phase 3), reliability testing (Phase 4), and validity testing (Phase 5). Educational administrators, teachers, and staff employed by the Hawai\'i State Department of Education (HIDOE) participated in the study.
UNASSIGNED: Phases 1 and 2 yielded 50 implementation barriers and 27 implementation facilitators that were evaluated by 204 HIDOE administrators, teachers, and staff. Factor analysis of the barrier items indicated a four-factor solution: (1) Innovation Barriers, (2) HIDOE State-Level Barriers, (3) Teacher-Level Barriers, and (4) Administrator-Level Barriers. Mean comparisons indicated that several barrier and facilitator items differentiated teachers from administrators in the sample.
UNASSIGNED: This study contributes to the implementation measurement literature, specifically in the areas of mental health and substance use. It also highlights the importance of addressing multiple contextual levels in the implementation of culturally focused prevention interventions.
UNASSIGNED: Examining Implementation Barriers and Facilitators for School-Based Prevention in Hawai\'i. Plain Language Summary Compared with other major ethnic groups, Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander (NHPI) youth have substantially higher rates of substance use and higher adverse mental and physical health effects related to their use. Despite these disparities, educational and community-based practitioners have long struggled with implementing and sustaining promising substance use interventions for NHPI youth. This study contributes to our understanding of measuring implementation barriers and facilitators for substance use prevention for NHPI youth in rural school settings. It contributes to the field of health disparities and health equity promotion, by addressing calls for research to understand factors affecting successful implementation of prevention programs. This is critical toward achieving health equity for underrepresented and vulnerable populations, such as NHPI and rural youth.

UNASSIGNED: Implementation strategies are theorized to work well when carefully matched to implementation determinants and when factors-preconditions, moderators, etc.-that influence strategy effectiveness are prospectively identified and addressed. Existing methods for strategy selection are either imprecise or require significant technical expertise and resources, undermining their utility. This article outlines refinements to causal pathway diagrams (CPDs), a method for articulating the causal process through which implementation strategies work and offers illustrations of their use.
UNASSIGNED: CPDs are a visualization tool to represent an implementation strategy, its mechanism(s) (i.e., the processes through which a strategy is thought to operate), determinants it is intended to address, factors that may impede or facilitate its effectiveness, and the series of outcomes that should be expected if the strategy is operating as intended. We offer principles for constructing CPDs and describe their key functions.
UNASSIGNED: Applications of the CPD method by study teams from two National Institute of Health-funded Implementation Science Centers and a research grant are presented. These include the use of CPDs to (a) match implementation strategies to determinants, (b) understand the conditions under which an implementation strategy works, and (c) develop causal theories of implementation strategies.
UNASSIGNED: CPDs offer a novel method for implementers to select, understand, and improve the effectiveness of implementation strategies. They make explicit theoretical assumptions about strategy operation while supporting practical planning. Early applications have led to method refinements and guidance for the field.
Advances to the Causal Pathway Diagramming Method to Enhance Implementation Precision Plain Language Summary Implementation strategies often fail to produce meaningful improvements in the outcomes we hope to impact. Better tools for choosing, designing, and evaluating implementation strategies may improve their performance. We developed a tool, causal pathway diagrams (CPD), to visualize and describe how implementation strategies are expected to work. In this article, we describe refinements to the CPD tool and accompanying approach. We use real illustrations to show how CPDs can be used to improve how to match strategies to barriers, understand the conditions in which those strategies work best, and develop generalizable theories describing how implementation strategies work. CPDs can serve as both a practical and scientific tool to improve the planning, deployment, and evaluation of implementation strategies. We demonstrate the range of ways that CPDs are being used, from a highly practical tool to improve implementation practice to a scientific approach to advance testing and theorizing about implementation strategies.

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.

Cervical cancer can be prevented, primarily by the administration of the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine. Healthcare workers (HCWs) and teachers play important roles when schools are used for vaccine delivery; however, challenges exist. This study aimed to understand the barriers and facilitators to HPV vaccination that are perceived by HCWs and teachers. Guided by the consolidated framework for implementation research (CFIR), key informant interviews were conducted in Lusaka district between June 2021 and November 2021 using a semi-structured questionnaire. Recorded interviews were transcribed verbatim and imported into NVIVO 12 for data management and analysis. We coded transcripts inductively and deductively based on the adapted CFIR codebook. We reached saturation with 23 participants. We identified barriers and facilitators across the five CFIR domains. Facilitators included offering the HPV vaccine free of charge, HPV vaccine effectiveness, stakeholder engagement, and timely planning of the HPV vaccination. Barriers included vaccine mistrust due to its perceived novelty, low levels of parental knowledge, myths and misinformation about the vaccine, lack of parental consent to vaccinate daughters, lack of transport for vaccination outreach, lack of staff incentives, and inadequate sensitisation. Using the CFIR as a guiding framework, we have identified implementation barriers and facilitators to HPV vaccination among HCWs and teachers. Most of the identified barriers are modifiable, hence it is prudent that these are addressed for a high HPV vaccine uptake.

Multilevel service delivery frameworks are approaches to structuring and organizing a spectrum of evidence-based services and supports, focused on assessment, prevention, and intervention designed for the local context. Exemplar frameworks in child mental health include positive behavioral interventions and supports in education, collaborative care in primary care, and systems of care in community mental health settings. Yet, their high-quality implementation has lagged. This work proposes a conceptual foundation for multilevel service delivery frameworks spanning diverse mental health service settings that can inform development of strategic implementation supports. We draw upon the existing literature for three exemplar multilevel service delivery frameworks in different child mental health service settings to (1) identify core components common to each framework, and (2) to highlight prominent implementation determinants that interface with each core component. Six interrelated components of multilevel service delivery frameworks were identified, including, (1) a systems-level approach, (2) data-driven problem solving and decision-making, (3) multiple levels of service intensity using evidence-based practices, (4) cross-linking service sectors, (5) multiple providers working together, including in teams, and (6) built-in implementation strategies that facilitate delivery of the overall model. Implementation determinants that interface with core components were identified at each contextual level. The conceptual foundation provided in this paper has the potential to facilitate cross-sector knowledge sharing, promote generalization across service settings, and provide direction for researchers, system leaders, and implementation intermediaries/practitioners working to strategically support the high-quality implementation of these frameworks.

Practical and feasible methods for matching implementation strategies to diagnosed barriers of evidence-based interventions in real-world contexts are lacking. This evaluation compared actual implementation strategies applied with those recommended by an expert opinion-based tool to improve guideline-concordant cirrhosis care in a Veterans Health Administration national learning collaborative effort.
This convergent parallel mixed-methods study aimed to (1) identify pre-implementation Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) barriers to cirrhosis care through focus groups with frontline providers, (2) generate 20 recommended strategies using focus group identified barriers entered into the CFIR-Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) Implementation Strategy Matching Tool, (3) survey providers over two consecutive years on the actual use of 73 ERIC strategies and determine strategy effectiveness, (4) compare actual versus recommended strategy use, and (5) compare actual versus expected barriers by reverse applying the CFIR-ERIC Matching Tool.
Eighteen semi-structured focus groups were conducted with 197 providers representing 95 VA sites to identify barriers to quality improvement, including cirrhosis care complexity, clarity of national goals, and local leadership support. The CFIR-ERIC Matching Tool recommended strategies such as assessing for readiness and needs, promoting adaptability, building local groups, preparing champions, and working with opinion leaders and early adopters. Subsequent strategy surveys found that sites used the top 20 \"recommended\" strategies no more frequently than other strategies. However, 14 (70%) of the top recommended strategies were significantly positively associated with cirrhosis care compared to 48% of actual strategies. Reverse CFIR-ERIC matching found that the strategies most used in the first year corresponded to the following barriers: opinion leaders, access to knowledge and information, and resources. The strategies most frequently employed in the second year addressed barriers such as champions, cosmopolitanism, readiness for implementation, relative priority, and patient needs and resources. Strategies used in both years were those that addressed adaptability, trialability, and compatibility.
This study is among the first to empirically evaluate the relationship between CFIR-ERIC Matching Tool recommended strategies and actual strategy selection and effectiveness in the real world. We found closer connections between recommended strategies and strategy effectiveness compared to strategy frequency, suggesting validity of barrier identification, and application of the expert-informed tool.

BACKGROUND: The Systems Analysis and Improvement Approach (SAIA) is an evidence-based package of systems engineering tools originally designed to improve patient flow through the prevention of Mother-to-Child transmission of HIV (PMTCT) cascade. SAIA is a potentially scalable model for maximizing the benefits of universal antiretroviral therapy (ART) for mothers and their babies. SAIA-SCALE was a stepped wedge trial implemented in Manica Province, Mozambique, to evaluate SAIA\'s effectiveness when led by district health managers, rather than by study nurses. We present the results of a qualitative assessment of implementation determinants of the SAIA-SCALE strategy during two intensive and one maintenance phases.
METHODS: We used an extended case study design that embedded the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to guide data collection, analysis, and interpretation. From March 2019 to April 2020, we conducted in-depth individual interviews (IDIs) and focus group discussions (FGDs) with district managers, health facility maternal and child health (MCH) managers, and frontline nurses at 21 health facilities and seven districts of Manica Province (Chimoio, Báruè, Gondola, Macate, Manica, Sussundenga, and Vanduzi).
RESULTS: We included 85 participants: 50 through IDIs and 35 from three FGDs. Most study participants were women (98%), frontline nurses (49.4%), and MCH health facility managers (32.5%). An identified facilitator of successful intervention implementation (regardless of intervention phase) was related to SAIA\'s compatibility with organizational structures, processes, and priorities of Mozambique\'s health system at the district and health facility levels. Identified barriers to successful implementation included (a) inadequate health facility and road infrastructure preventing mothers from accessing MCH/PMTCT services at study health facilities and preventing nurses from dedicating time to improving service provision, and (b) challenges in managing intervention funds.
CONCLUSIONS: The SAIA-SCALE qualitative evaluation suggests that the scalability of SAIA for PMTCT is enhanced by its fit within organizational structures, processes, and priorities at the primary level of healthcare delivery and health system management in Mozambique. Barriers to implementation that impact the scalability of SAIA include district-level financial management capabilities and lack of infrastructure at the health facility level. SAIA cannot be successfully scaled up to adequately address PMTCT needs without leveraging central-level resources and priorities.
BACKGROUND: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03425136 . Registered on 02/06/2018.

BACKGROUND: There is a lack of consensus about how to prioritize potential implementation strategies for HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) delivery. We compared several prioritization methods for their agreement and pragmatism in practice in a resource-limited setting.
METHODS: We engaged diverse stakeholders with clinical PrEP delivery and PrEP decision-making experience across 55 facilities in Kenya to prioritize 16 PrEP delivery strategies. We compared four strategy prioritization methods: (1) \"past experience surveys\" with experienced practitioners reflecting on implementation experience (N = 182); (2 and 3) \"pre- and post-small-group ranking\" surveys before and after group discussion (N = 44 and 40); (4) \"go-zone\" quadrant plots of perceived effectiveness vs feasibility. Kendall\'s correlation analysis was used to compare strategy prioritization using the four methods. Additionally, participants were requested to group strategies into three bundles with up to four strategies/bundle by phone and online survey.
RESULTS: The strategy ranking correlation was strongest between the pre- and post-small-group rankings (Tau: 0.648; p < 0.001). There was moderate correlation between go-zone plots and post-small-group rankings (Tau: 0.363; p = 0.079) and between past-experience surveys and post-small-group rankings (Tau: 0.385; p = 0.062). For strategy bundling, participants primarily chose bundles of strategies in the order in which they were listed, reflecting option ordering bias. Neither the phone nor online approach was effective in selecting strategy bundles. Participants agreed that the strategy ranking activities conducted during the workshop were useful in prioritizing a final set of strategies.
CONCLUSIONS: Both experienced and inexperienced stakeholder participants\' strategy rankings tended to prioritize strategies perceived as feasible. Small group discussions focused on feasibility and effectiveness revealed moderately different priorities than individual rankings. The strategy bundling approach, though less time- and resource-intensive, was not effective. Future research should further compare the relative effectiveness and pragmatism of methodologies to prioritize implementation strategies.