The U.S. training institute for dissemination and implementation research in health

Implementation Science

Brian Mittman⁶  Bryan J Weiner⁷  Alice S Ammerman¹  Lawrence W Green⁵  Ross C Brownson²  David Chambers⁸  Cynthia A Vinson³  Russell E Glasgow³  Helen I Meissner⁴ 

[1] Center for Health Promotion & Disease Prevention, Gillings School of Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA;Washington University School of Medicine, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA;Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD, USA;Office of Behavioral and Social Sciences Research, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA;Department of Epidemiology & Biostatistics, School of Medicine, University of California at San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA;VA Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, Sepulveda, CA, USA;Department of Health Policy and Management, Gillings School of Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA;Division of Services and Intervention Research, National Institute of Mental Health, Bethesda, MD, USA

关键词: Implementation;    Dissemination;    Training;   

Others  :  813817
DOI  :  10.1186/1748-5908-8-12

 received in 2012-07-27, accepted in 2012-12-12,  发布年份 2013

【 摘 要 】

Background

The science of dissemination and implementation (D&I) is advancing the knowledge base for how best to integrate evidence-based interventions within clinical and community settings and how to recast the nature or conduct of the research itself to make it more relevant and actionable in those settings. While the field is growing, there are only a few training programs for D&I research; this is an important avenue to help build the field’s capacity. To improve the United States’ capacity for D&I research, the National Institutes of Health and Veterans Health Administration collaborated to develop a five-day training institute for postdoctoral level applicants aspiring to advance this science.

Methods

We describe the background, goals, structure, curriculum, application process, trainee evaluation, and future plans for the Training in Dissemination and Implementation Research in Health (TIDIRH).

Results

The TIDIRH used a five-day residential immersion to maximize opportunities for trainees and faculty to interact. The train-the-trainer-like approach was intended to equip participants with materials that they could readily take back to their home institutions to increase interest and further investment in D&I. The TIDIRH curriculum included a balance of structured large group discussions and interactive small group sessions.

Thirty-five of 266 applicants for the first annual training institute were accepted from a variety of disciplines, including psychology (12 trainees); medicine (6 trainees); epidemiology (5 trainees); health behavior/health education (4 trainees); and 1 trainee each from education & human development, health policy and management, health services research, public health studies, public policy and social work, with a maximum of two individuals from any one institution. The institute was rated as very helpful by attendees, and by six months after the institute, a follow-up survey (97% return rate) revealed that 72% had initiated a new grant proposal in D&I research; 28% had received funding, and 77% had used skills from TIDIRH to influence their peers from different disciplines about D&I research through building local research networks, organizing formal presentations and symposia, teaching and by leading interdisciplinary teams to conduct D&I research.

Conclusions

The initial TIDIRH training was judged successful by trainee evaluation at the conclusion of the week’s training and six-month follow-up, and plans are to continue and possibly expand the TIDIRH in coming years. Strengths are seen as the residential format, quality of the faculty and their flexibility in adjusting content to meet trainee needs, and the highlighting of concrete D&I examples by the local host institution, which rotates annually. Lessons learned and plans for future TIDIRH trainings are summarized.

【 授权许可】

   
2013 Meissner et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Green LW, Ottoson JM, Garcia C, Hiatt RA: Diffusion theory and knowledge dissemination, utilization, and integration in public health. Annu Rev Public Health 2009, 30:151-174.
• [2]Brownson RC, Colditz GA, Proctor EK: Dissemination and implementation research in health: translating science to practice. New York: Oxford University Press, Inc.; 2012.
• [3]Gonzales R, Handley MA, Ackerman S, O’Sullivan PS: A framework for training health professionals in implementation and dissemination science. Acad Med 2012, 87:271-278.
• [4]Straus S, Brouwers M, Johnson D, Lavis J, Legare F, Majumdar S, McKibbon KA, Sales A, Stacey D, Klein G, et al.: Core competencies in the science and practice of knowledge translation: description of a Canadian strategic training initiative. Implement Sci 2011, 6:127. BioMed Central Full Text
• [5]Kho M, Estey E, DeForge R, Mak L, Bell B: Riding the knowledge translation roundabout: lessons learned from the Canadian institutes of health research summer institute in knowledge translation. Implement Sci 2009, 4:33. BioMed Central Full Text
• [6]Proctor E, Landsverk J, Aarons G, Chambers D, Glisson C, Mittman B: Implementation research in mental health services: an emerging science with conceptual, methodological, and training challenges. Adm Policy Ment Health and Ment Health Serv Res 2009, 36:24-34.
• [7]Glasgow RE, Vinson C, Chambers D, Khoury MJ, Kaplan RM, Hunter C: National institutes of health approaches to dissemination and implementation science: current and future directions. Am J Public Health 2012, 102:1274-1281.
• [8]Ottoson JM, Green LW, Beery WL, Senter SK, Cahill CL, Pearson DC, Greenwald HP, Hamre R, Leviton L: Policy-contribution assessment and field-building analysis of the Robert wood Johnson Foundation’s active living research program. Am J Prev Med 2009, 36:S34-S43.
• [9]Green LW: The field-building role of a journal about participatory medicine and health, and the evidence needed. J Participatory Med 2009, 1:e11.
• [10]Rabin BA, Brownson RC, Hiare-Joshu D, Kreuter MW, Weaver NL: A glossary for dissemination and implementation research in health. J Public Health Manag Pract 2018, 142:117-123.
• [11]Ward V, House A, Homer S: Developing a framework for transferring knowledge into action: a thematic analysis of the literature. J Health Serv Res Policy 2009, 14:156-164.
• [12]Glasgow R: What types of evidence are most needed to advance behavioral medicine? Ann Behav Med 2008, 35:19-25.
• [13]Kumanyika SK, Parker L, Sim LJ: Bridging the evidence gap in obesity prevention: a framework to inform decision making. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press; 2010.
• [14]Tabak RG, Khoong EC, Chambers D, Brownson RC: Bridging research and practice: the use of models in dissemination and implementation research. Am J Prev Med 2012, 43:337-350.