BACKGROUND: By addressing physical and psychosocial needs, group care (GC) improves health-related behaviours, peer support, parent-provider interactions and may improve birth outcomes. Hence, global implementation of GC is encouraged. Context analyses prior to implementation are vital to elucidate which local factors may support or hinder implementation.
METHODS: Contextual analyses conducted in the Netherlands and Suriname were compared to identify the factors relevant to the implementability of GC as perceived by healthcare professionals (HCPs). 32 semi-structured interviews were conducted with Dutch and Surinamese healthcare professionals. Audio recordings were transcribed verbatim and coded using the Framework approach. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research guided the development of the interview guide and of the coding tree.
RESULTS: Outer setting: Concerns regarding funding surfaced in both countries. Due to limited health insurance coverage, additional fees would limit accessibility in Suriname. In the Netherlands, midwives dreaded lower revenue due to reimbursement policies that favour one-on-one care. Inner setting: Appropriate space for GC was absent in one Dutch and three Surinamese facilities. Role division regarding GC implementation was clearer in the Netherlands than in Suriname.
METHODS: HCPs from both countries expected increased social support, health knowledge among women, and continuity of care(r). Individuals/innovation deliverers: Self-efficacy and motivation emerged as intertwined determinants to GC implementation in both countries. Individuals/innovation recipients: Competing demands can potentially lower acceptability of GC in both countries. While Dutch HCPs prioritised an open dialogue with mothers, Surinamese HCPs encouraged the inclusion of partners.
METHODS: Campaigns to raise awareness of GC were proposed. Language barriers were a concern for Dutch but not for Surinamese HCPs.
CONCLUSIONS: While the most striking differences between both countries were found in the outer setting, they trickle down and affect all layers of context. Ultimately, at a later stage, the process evaluation will show if those outer setting barriers we identified prior to implementation actually hindered GC implementation. Changes to the health care systems would ensure sustained implementation in both countries, and this conclusion feeds into a more general discussion: how to proceed when contextual analyses reveal barriers that cannot be addressed with the time and resources available.

Aim: To explore general practitioners\' (GPs) views on implementing pharmacogenomic testing in Australian general practice. Methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with nine GPs in Australia, recruited from primary care networks. Interviews were analyzed using thematic analysis. Themes were mapped onto the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research domains. Results: Barriers to implementation included lack of knowledge, education, standardized pharmacogenomic reports and national clinical guidelines and financial inaccessibility. Facilitators included positive exposure to pharmacogenomics, peer influences, interdisciplinary collaboration and proven clinical utility. Current uptake was minimal; however, GPs shared positive perceptions of clinical use. Conclusion: Recommendations for successful implementation include building and disseminating clinical evidence, developing national guidelines and standardized reports, incorporation into formal education and increasing financial accessibility.
What is this article about? This article describes an original research study that examines the implementation of pharmacogenomic testing in Australian general practice. Pharmacogenomic testing applies personalized genomic information to medication prescribing, as genetic differences can affect how a person metabolizes certain medications. While there is excitement about the possibilities of using pharmacogenomics, the general uptake is slow. This study looked to understand the barriers and facilitators to implementation from the perspectives of general practitioners in Australia.What were the results? Through exploratory interviews with general practitioners, this study identified that barriers to implementation include a lack of knowledge, education, standardized reports and national clinical guidelines and financial inaccessibility. Facilitators include positive exposure to pharmacogenomic testing, peer influences, interdisciplinary collaboration and proven clinical utility. Current uptake was minimal; however, GPs shared positive perceptions of the potential of testing.What do the results of the study mean? Based on the results of this study, the following recommendations were generated for successful implementation: building and disseminating clinical evidence, developing national guidelines, incorporation into formal education, establishing accessible experts and improving financial accessibility.

Identity Development Evolution and Sharing (IDEAS) reduces provider stigma, but few have been trained to implement IDEAS, highlighting a need for implementation strategies that facilitate uptake. We evaluated whether external facilitation successfully supported IDEAS implementation and whether IDEAS reduced provider stigma within and across sites irrespective of implementation barriers and facilitators. Key informants from 10 sites completed interviews and surveys of appropriateness, acceptability, and feasibility. Interviews were analyzed using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research guidelines. Intervention effectiveness was measured via paired t tests of pre-/post-quantitative data on provider stigma completed by practitioners who attended the training. Ten sites successfully implemented IDEAS via external facilitation; 58 practitioners from nine sites completed pre- and post-surveys. Data showed significant decreases in stigma after the intervention. IDEAS, supported by external facilitation, is a feasible, acceptable, and appropriate means of reducing stigma among occupational therapy practitioners.
External Facilitation Supports the Successful Use of “Identity Development Evolution and Sharing” (IDEAS)—An Intervention That Effectively Reduces Harmful Biases Among Occupational TherapistsThis study is important for clinical managers and other change agents wishing to address provider biases in healthcare settings. The study expands an existing program for reducing healthcare provider bias called “Identity Development Evolution and Sharing” or “IDEAS.” IDEAS is a program created by an occupational therapist who sought to improve healthcare experiences for those who have been harmed by implicit biases among healthcare providers. IDEAS involves watching filmed stories of people who have been harmed by stigma within healthcare and then having a reflective discussion about the film, creating a safe space in which providers can evaluate their biases and consider ways in which they might make positive changes. This study is important for managers and other change agents because it highlights characteristics of organizations that can both support and hinder the use of IDEAS in clinical settings. These factors can be taken into consideration prior to using an intervention such as IDEAS to support the degree to which an organization succeeds at implementing the program. This study also explains how the creator of IDEAS provides external support to facilitate staff in leading an IDEAS intervention. In addition, this study will be of interest to implementation scholars and/or people who would like to learn more about methods for measuring barriers and facilitators to integrating new programs in clinical settings.

BACKGROUND: Black Kentuckians experience more deleterious colorectal cancer (CRC) outcomes than their White counterparts, a disparity that could be reduced by increased screening in Black communities. Previous research has shown that Black Kentuckians may not be equitably informed of different CRC screening options by health care providers, making community-based screening a potentially effective option among this disparate population. We used the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to identify church leaders\' perspectives of contextual factors that might influence community-based screening and explore the feasibility of using church-based screening outreach.
METHODS: Six participants were selected, based on leadership roles and interest in CRC screening, from five established Louisville-area church partners that had previously participated in community health initiatives. Data were collected, both virtually and in-person, in Summer 2021 using semi-structured interview guides developed with guidance from the CFIR Guide that focused on domains most relevant to community-based interventions. Data were transcribed verbatim, coded by two independent researchers, and member checked for accuracy.
RESULTS: Data were aligned primarily with six CFIR constructs: key stakeholders, champions, opinion leaders, tension for change, compatibility, and culture. Participants noted a strong tension for change in their community due to perceptions of inadequacy with clinical approaches to CRC screening. Additionally, they stressed the importance of identifying individuals both within the church who could champion CRC screening and help implement program activities, as well as those outside the church who could collaborate with other local organizations to increase participant reach. Finally, participants agreed that faith-based CRC screening aligned with church culture and would also likely be compatible with overall community values.
CONCLUSIONS: Overall, our church partners strongly endorsed the need for, and importance of, community-based CRC screening. Given a history of successful implementation of health promotion programs within our partner churches, it is highly likely that a CRC screening intervention would also be effective. Findings from this study will be used to identify implementation strategies that might positively impact a future faith-based CRC screening intervention, as well as CFIR constructs that are most positively associated with CRC screening completion.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the implementation contexts and strategies that influence the uptake and selection of alternative peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) materials and design.
METHODS: Qualitative evaluation of end user perspectives within a randomized control trial of different PICC materials and design.
METHODS: Semi-structured interviews with key stakeholders were undertaken via an adapted, rapid-analytic approach using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Outcomes were mapped against the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) tool for strategies to guide innovation in PICC practice.
RESULTS: Participants (n = 23) represented a combination of users and inserters/purchasers, from adult and paediatric settings. Dominant themes included intervention characteristics (intervention source), inner setting (structural characteristics) and individuals involved (self-efficacy). Strategies emerging to support a change from ERIC mapping (n = 16) included promotion of intervention adaptability, inclusion of staff and consumer perspectives and sufficient funding. Implementation contexts such as inner setting and individuals involved equally impacted PICC success and implementation effectiveness and enabled a greater understanding of barriers and facilitators to intervention implementation in this trial.
CONCLUSIONS: Trial evidence is important, but healthcare decision-making requires consideration of local contexts especially resourcing. Implementation contexts for Australian healthcare settings include a practical, strategic toolkit for the implementation of alternative PICC materials and designs.
UNASSIGNED: This study adhered to COREQ guidelines.
UNASSIGNED: No patient or public contribution.

BACKGROUND: Tuberculosis (TB) is a major cause of death worldwide, and Chinese TB burden ranked the second globally. Chinese primary healthcare (PHC) sectors implement the TB Control Program (TCP) to improve active case finding, referral, treatment adherence, and health education. This study aimed to identify barriers and enablers of TCP implementation in high TB burden regions of West China.
METHODS: We conducted a representative study using mixed-methods in 28 counties or districts in Chongqing Municipality and Guizhou Province of West China from October 2021 to May 2022. Questionnaire surveys and semi-structured in-depth interviews were conducted with 2720 TB healthcare workers (HCWs) and 20 interviewees in PHC sectors. Descriptive statistical analysis was used to investigate TB HCWs\' characteristics, and path analysis model was utilized to analyze the impact of associated factors on TCP implementation. Thematic framework analysis was developed with the guide of the adapted Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) on factors of TCP implementation.
RESULTS: This study found that 84.6% and 94.1% of community and village HCWs had low professional titles. Based on the results of multiple regression analysis and correlation analysis, lower TB core knowledge scores (-0.09) were identified as barriers for TCP implementation in community PHC sectors, and low working satisfaction (-0.17) and low working willingness (-0.10) are barriers for TPC implementation in village PHC sectors. The results of in-depth interviews reported barriers in all domains and enablers in four domains of CFIR. There were identified 19 CFIR constructs associated with TCP implementation, including 22 barriers such as HCWs\' heavy workload, and 12 enablers such as HCWs\' passion towards TCP planning.
CONCLUSIONS: With the guide of the CFIR framework, complex factors (barriers and enablers) of TCP implementation in PHC sectors of West China were explored, which provided important evidences to promote TB program in high TB burden regions. Further implementation studies to translate those factors into implementation strategies are urgent needed.

BACKGROUND: Approval of the first long-acting injectable antiretroviral therapy (LAI ART) medication heralded a new era of HIV treatment. However, the years since approval have been marked by implementation challenges. The \"Accelerating Implementation of Multilevel Strategies to Advance Long-Acting Injectable for Underserved Populations (ALAI UP Project)\" aims to accelerate the systematic and equitable delivery of LAI ART.
METHODS: We coded and analysed implementation barriers according to the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) domains, desired resources and programme goals from questionnaire short-answer responses by clinics across the United States responding to ALAI UP\'s solicitation to participate in the project between November 2022 and January 2023.
RESULTS: Thirty-eight clinics responded to ALAI UP\'s solicitation. The characteristics of LAI ART as an innovation (cost, complexity of procurement, dosing interval, limited eligibility) precipitated and interacted with barriers in other CFIR domains. Barriers included obtaining coverage for the cost of medication (27/38 clinics) (outer setting); need for new workflows and staffing (12/38) and/or systems to support injection scheduling/coordination (16/38), transportation and expanded clinic hours (13/38) (inner setting); and patient (10/38) and provider (7/38) education (individuals). To support implementation, applicants sought: technical assistance to develop protocols and workflows (18/38), specifically strategies to address payor challenges (8/38); additional staff for care coordination and benefits navigation (17/38); opportunities to share experiences with other implementing clinics (12/38); patient-facing materials to educate and increase demand (7/38); and support engaging communities (6/38). Clinics\' LAI ART programme goals varied. Most prioritized delivering LAI ART to their most marginalized patients struggling to achieve viral suppression on oral therapy, despite awareness that current US Food and Drug Administration approval is only for virally suppressed patients. The goal for LAI ART reach after 1 year of implementation ranged from ≤10% of patients with HIV on LAI ART (17/38) to ≥50% of patients (2/38).
CONCLUSIONS: Diverse clinic types are interested in offering LAI ART and most aspire to use LAI ART to support their most vulnerable patients sustain viral suppression. Dedicated resources centred on equity and relevant to context and population are needed to support implementation. Otherwise, the introduction of LAI ART risks exacerbating, not ameliorating, health disparities.

BACKGROUND: The etonogestrel contraceptive implant is currently approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the prevention of pregnancy up to 3 years. However, studies that suggest efficacy up to 5 years. There is little information on the prevalence of extended use and the factors that influence clinicians in offering extended use. We investigated clinician perspectives on the barriers and facilitators to offering extended use of the contraceptive implant.
METHODS: Using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), we conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews. Participants were recruited from a nationwide survey study of reproductive health clinicians on their knowledge and perspective of extended use of the contraceptive implant. To optimize the diversity of perspectives, we purposefully sampled participants from this study. We used content analysis and consensual qualitative research methods to inform our coding and data analysis. Themes arose deductively and inductively.
RESULTS: We interviewed 20 clinicians including advance practice clinicians, family medicine physicians, obstetrician/gynecologist and complex family planning sub-specialists. Themes regarding barriers and facilitators to extended use of the contraceptive implant emerged. Barriers included the FDA approval for 3 years and clinician concern about liability in the context of off-label use of the contraceptive implant. Educational materials and a champion of extended use were facilitators.
CONCLUSIONS: There is opportunity to expand access to extended use of the contraceptive implant by developing educational materials for clinicians and patients, identifying a champion of extended use, and providing information on extended use prior to replacement appointments at 3 years.

Implementation of pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) to prevent HIV transmission is suboptimal in the United States, particularly among people who use drugs (PWUD). PrEP research among PWUD is scarce, and the factors that impact implementation are largely unknown. Therefore, we conducted a scoping review of implementation determinants (i.e., barriers and facilitators), as well as the change methods (implementation strategies and adjunctive interventions) that have been evaluated to increase PrEP implementation and use among PWUD. We identified 32 peer-reviewed articles assessing determinants and five that evaluated change methods. Determinants were coded using the updated Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), which is an established framework to understand the multilevel barriers and facilitators associated with implementation. Findings indicate that most research was conducted among PrEP recipients (i.e., patients), focusing on awareness and willingness to use PrEP, with less focus on factors impacting clinicians and service delivery systems. Moreover, very few change methods have been evaluated to improve clinician adoption and adherence to CDC guidelines for PrEP provision and/or recipient uptake and adherence to PrEP. Future research is needed that focuses on factors impacting implementation from a clinician standpoint as well as innovative change methods to increase PrEP awareness, reach, adoption, and sustained adherence to guidelines. Implementation Science offers a wealth of knowledge to speed up the effort to end the HIV epidemic in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Up to 50% of antibiotic prescriptions for upper respiratory infections (URIs) are inappropriate. Clinical decision support (CDS) systems to mitigate unnecessary antibiotic prescriptions have been implemented into electronic health records, but their use by providers has been limited.
OBJECTIVE: As a delegation protocol, we adapted a validated electronic health record-integrated clinical prediction rule (iCPR) CDS-based intervention for registered nurses (RNs), consisting of triage to identify patients with low-acuity URI followed by CDS-guided RN visits. It was implemented in February 2022 as a randomized controlled stepped-wedge trial in 43 primary and urgent care practices within 4 academic health systems in New York, Wisconsin, and Utah. While issues were pragmatically addressed as they arose, a systematic assessment of the barriers to implementation is needed to better understand and address these barriers.
METHODS: We performed a retrospective case study, collecting quantitative and qualitative data regarding clinical workflows and triage-template use from expert interviews, study surveys, routine check-ins with practice personnel, and chart reviews over the first year of implementation of the iCPR intervention. Guided by the updated CFIR (Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research), we characterized the initial barriers to implementing a URI iCPR intervention for RNs in ambulatory care. CFIR constructs were coded as missing, neutral, weak, or strong implementation factors.
RESULTS: Barriers were identified within all implementation domains. The strongest barriers were found in the outer setting, with those factors trickling down to impact the inner setting. Local conditions driven by COVID-19 served as one of the strongest barriers, impacting attitudes among practice staff and ultimately contributing to a work infrastructure characterized by staff changes, RN shortages and turnover, and competing responsibilities. Policies and laws regarding scope of practice of RNs varied by state and institutional application of those laws, with some allowing more clinical autonomy for RNs. This necessitated different study procedures at each study site to meet practice requirements, increasing innovation complexity. Similarly, institutional policies led to varying levels of compatibility with existing triage, rooming, and documentation workflows. These workflow conflicts were compounded by limited available resources, as well as an implementation climate of optional participation, few participation incentives, and thus low relative priority compared to other clinical duties.
CONCLUSIONS: Both between and within health care systems, significant variability existed in workflows for patient intake and triage. Even in a relatively straightforward clinical workflow, workflow and cultural differences appreciably impacted intervention adoption. Takeaways from this study can be applied to other RN delegation protocol implementations of new and innovative CDS tools within existing workflows to support integration and improve uptake. When implementing a system-wide clinical care intervention, considerations must be made for variability in culture and workflows at the state, health system, practice, and individual levels.
BACKGROUND: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04255303; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04255303.