Formative evaluation and adaptation of pre-and early implementation of diabetes shared medical appointments to maximize sustainability and adoption

BackgroundUnderstanding the many factors that influence implementation of new programs, in addition to their success or failure, is extraordinarily complex. This qualitative study examines the implementation and adaptation process of two linked clinical programs within Primary Care, diabetes shared medical appointments (SMAs) and a reciprocal Peer-to-Peer (P2P) support program for patients with poorly controlled diabetes, through the lens of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). We illustrate the role and importance of pre-implementation interviews for guiding ongoing adaptations to improve implementation of a clinical program, achieve optimal change, and avoid type III errors.MethodsWe conducted 28 semi-structured phone interviews between September of 2013 and May of 2016, four to seven interviewees at each site. The interviewees were physician champions, chiefs of primary care, pharmacists, dieticians, nurses, health psychologists, peer facilitators, and research coordinators. Modifiable barriers and facilitators to implementation were identified and adaptations documented. Data analysis started with immersion in the data to obtain a sense of the whole and then by cataloging principal themes per CFIR constructs. An iterative consensus-building process was used to code. CFIR constructs were then ranked and compared by the researchers.ResultsWe identified a subset of CFIR constructs that are most likely to play a role in the effectiveness of the diabetes SMAs and P2P program based on our work with the participating sites to date. Through the identification of barriers and facilitators, a subset of CFIR constructs arose, including evidence strength and quality, relative advantage, adaptability, complexity, patient needs and resources, compatibility, leadership engagement, available resources, knowledge and beliefs, and champions.ConclusionsWe described our method for identification of contextual factors that influenced implementation of complex diabetes clinical programs - SMAs and P2P. The qualitative phone interviews aided implementation through the identification of modifiable barriers or conversely, actionable findings. Implementation projects, and certainly clinical programs, do not have unlimited resources and these interviews allowed us to determine which facets to target and act on for each site. As the study progresses, these findings will be compared and correlated to outcome measures. This comprehensive adaptation data collection will also facilitate and enhance understanding of the future success or lack of success of implementation and inform potential for translation and public health impact. The approach of using the CFIR to guide us to actionable findings and help us better understand barriers and facilitators has broad applicability and can be used by other projects to guide, adapt, and improve implementation of research into practice.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT02132676.

[1]  M. Pitman Qualitative Research Design: An Interactive Approach , 1998 .

[2]  Naihua Duan,et al.  An Overview of Research and Evaluation Designs for Dissemination and Implementation. , 2017, Annual review of public health.

[3]  R. Strawderman,et al.  Randomized Controlled Effectiveness Trial of Reciprocal Peer Support in Heart Failure , 2013, Circulation. Heart failure.

[4]  Candice Bowman,et al.  The role of formative evaluation in implementation research and the QUERI experience , 2006, Journal of General Internal Medicine.

[5]  J. Lowery,et al.  Fostering implementation of health services research findings into practice: a consolidated framework for advancing implementation science , 2009, Implementation science : IS.

[6]  L. Damschroder,et al.  Implementation evaluation of the Telephone Lifestyle Coaching (TLC) program: organizational factors associated with successful implementation , 2017, Translational behavioral medicine.

[7]  M. Patton,et al.  Enhancing the quality and credibility of qualitative analysis. , 1999, Health services research.

[8]  Elizabeth Murray,et al.  Achieving change in primary care—causes of the evidence to practice gap: systematic reviews of reviews , 2015, Implementation Science.

[9]  J. Piette,et al.  Diabetes Control With Reciprocal Peer Support Versus Nurse Care Management , 2010, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[10]  David A Chambers,et al.  The Adaptome: Advancing the Science of Intervention Adaptation. , 2016, American journal of preventive medicine.

[11]  David A. Chambers,et al.  The dynamic sustainability framework: addressing the paradox of sustainment amid ongoing change , 2013, Implementation Science.

[12]  M. Laurant,et al.  Process evaluation on quality improvement interventions , 2003, Quality & safety in health care.

[13]  L. Palinkas,et al.  Dynamic adaptation process to implement an evidence-based child maltreatment intervention , 2012, Implementation Science.

[14]  P. Nilsen Making sense of implementation theories, models and frameworks , 2015, Implementation Science.

[15]  S. Mitchell,et al.  Implementation and adaptation of the Re-Engineered Discharge (RED) in five California hospitals: a qualitative research study , 2017, BMC Health Services Research.

[16]  R. Glasgow,et al.  Why don't we see more translation of health promotion research to practice? Rethinking the efficacy-to-effectiveness transition. , 2003, American journal of public health.

[17]  Hsiu-Fang Hsieh,et al.  Three Approaches to Qualitative Content Analysis , 2005, Qualitative health research.

[18]  Candice Bowman,et al.  The Role of Formative Evaluation in Implementation Research and the QUERI Experience , 2006 .

[20]  Joseph A. Maxwell,et al.  Qualitative Research Design: An Interactive Approach , 1996 .

[21]  Donna M. Zulman,et al.  The Shared Health Appointments and Reciprocal Enhanced Support (SHARES) study: study protocol for a randomized trial , 2017, Trials.

[22]  Henna Hasson,et al.  Systematic evaluation of implementation fidelity of complex interventions in health and social care , 2010, Implementation science : IS.

[23]  C. Lenfant Shattuck lecture--clinical research to clinical practice--lost in translation? , 2003, The New England journal of medicine.