Development and testing of an implementation strategy for a complex housing intervention: protocol for a mixed methods study

Implementation Science

Randi Tolliver⁵  Valery Shuman⁵  Macey Henderson²  Huiping Xu¹  Emily Ahonen³  Jeani Young⁴  Dennis P Watson² 

[1] Department of Biostatistics, Indiana University, Richard M. Fairbanks School of Public Health, Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis, 714 N. Senate Ave, Indianapolis 46202, IN, USA;Department of Health Policy and Management, Indiana University, Richard M. Fairbanks School of Public Health, Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis, 714 N. Senate Ave, Indianapolis 46202, IN, USA;Department of Social Behavioral Sciences & Department of Environmental Health Science, Indiana University, Richard M. Fairbanks School of Public Health, Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis, 714 N. Senate Ave, Indianapolis 46202, IN, USA;University Information and Technology Services, Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis, 535 W. Michigan St, Indianapolis 46202, IN, USA;Midwest Harm Reduction Institute, Heartland Health Outreach Inc., 1207 W. Leland Ave., Chicago 60640, IL, USA

关键词: Technical assistance;    Training;    Fidelity;    Housing First;    Housing;    Protocol;    Implementation strategy;   

Others  :  1139506
DOI  :  10.1186/s13012-014-0138-4

 received in 2014-09-02, accepted in 2014-09-19,  发布年份 2014

【 摘 要 】

Background

There is currently a lack of scientifically designed and tested implementation strategies. Such strategies are particularly important for highly complex interventions that require coordination between multiple parts to be successful. This paper presents a protocol for the development and testing of an implementation strategy for a complex intervention known as the Housing First model (HFM). Housing First is an evidence-based practice for chronically homeless individuals demonstrated to significantly improve a number of outcomes.

Methods/design

Drawing on practices demonstrated to be useful in implementation and e-learning theory, our team is currently adapting a face-to-face implementation strategy so that it can be delivered over a distance. Research activities will be divided between Chicago and Central Indiana, two areas with significantly different barriers to HFM implementation. Ten housing providers (five from Chicago and five from Indiana) will be recruited to conduct an alpha test of each of four e-learning modules as they are developed. Providers will be requested to keep a detailed log of their experience completing the modules and participate in one of two focus groups. After refining the modules based on alpha test results, we will test the strategy among a sample of four housing organizations (two from Chicago and two from Indiana). We will collect and analyze both qualitative and quantitative data from administration and staff. Measures of interest include causal factors affecting implementation, training outcomes, and implementation outcomes.

Discussion

This project is an important first step in the development of an evidence-based implementation strategy to increase scalability and impact of the HFM. The project also has strong potential to increase limited scientific knowledge regarding implementation strategies in general.

【 授权许可】

   
2014 Watson et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Powell BJ, McMillen JC, Proctor EK, Carpenter CR, Griffey RT, Bunger AC, Glass JE, York JL: A compilation of strategies for implementing clinical innovations in health and mental health. Med Care Res Rev 2012, 69:123-157.
• [2]Proctor EK, 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 2009, 36:24-34.
• [3]May C: A rational model for assessing and evaluating complex interventions in health care.BMC Health Serv Res 2006, 6:86.
• [4]Campbell SM, Reeves D, Kontopantelis E, Sibbald B, Roland M: Effects of pay for performance on the quality of primary care in England. New Engl J Med 2009, 361:368-378.
• [5]Clark HW, Power AK, Le Fauve CE, Lopez EI: Policy and practice implications of epidemiological surveys on co-occurring mental and substance use disorders. J Subst Abuse Treat 2008, 34:3-13.
• [6]Bostic RW, Thornton RLJ, Rudd EC, Sternthal MJ: Health in all policies: the role of the US Department of Housing and Urban Development and present and future challenges. Health Affair 2012, 31(9):2130-2137.
• [7]Watson DP: From structural chaos to a model of consumer support: understanding the roles of structure and agency in mental health recovery for the formerly homeless. J Forensic Psychol Pract 2012, 12:325-348.
• [8]Greenhalgh T, Robert G, MacFarlane F, Bate P, Kyriakidou O: Diffusion of innovations in service organizations: systematic review and recommendations. Milbank Q 2004, 82:581-629.
• [9]Dickson-Gomez J, Convey M, Hilario H, Corbett AM, Weeks M: Unofficial policy: access to housing, housing information and social services among homeless drug users in Hartford.Connecticut Subst Abuse Treat Prev Policy 2007, 2:8.
• [10]Tsemberis S: From streets to homes: an innovative approach to supported housing for homeless adults with psychiatric disabilities. J Community Psychol 1999, 27:225-241.
• [11]Collins SE, Malone DK, Clifasefi SL: Housing retention in single-site Housing First for chronically homeless individuals with severe alcohol problems. Am J Public Health 2013, 103:S269-S274.
• [12]Sadowski LS, Kee RA, VanderWeele TJ, Buchanan D: Effect of a housing and case management program on emergency department visits and hospitalizations among chronically ill homeless adults: a randomized trial. JAMA 2009, 301:1771-1778.
• [13]Tsemberis S, Eisenberg RF: Pathways to Housing: supported housing for street-dwelling homeless individuals with psychiatric disabilities. Psychiatr Serv 2000, 51:487-493.
• [14]Padgett DK, Gulcur L, Tsemberis S: Housing First services for people who are homeless with co-occurring serious mental illness and substance abuse. Res Soc Wor Prac 2006, 16:74-83.
• [15]Tsemberis S, Asmussen S: From streets to homes ¿ the Pathways to Housing consumer preference supported housing model. Alcohol Treat Q 1999, 17:113-131.
• [16][http://usich.gov/opening_doors/] webcite United States Interagency Council on Homelessness: Opening doors: federal strategic plan to prevent and end homelessness: 2010 Fact Sheet..
• [17]A Plan, not a dream: how to end homelessness in ten years. National Alliance to End Homelessness, Washington DC; 2000.
• [18]Pearson CL, Montgomery AE, Locke G: Housing stability among homeless individuals with serious mental illness participating in housing first programs. J Community Psychol 2009, 37:404-417.
• [19]George C, Chernega JN, Stawiski S, Figert A, Bendixen AV: Connecting fractured lives to a fragmented system: Chicago Housing for Health Partnership. Equal Oppor Int 2008, 27:161-180.
• [20]Watson DP, Wagner DE, Rivers MM: Understanding the critical ingredients for facilitating consumer change in housing first programming: a case study approach. J Behav Health Serv Res 2013, 40:169-179.
• [21]Watson DP, Orwat J, Wagner DE, Shuman V, Tolliver R: The Housing First model (HFM) Fidelity Index: designing and testing a tool for measuring integrity of housing programs that serve active substance users.Subst Abuse Treat Prev Policy 2013, 8:16.
• [22]Watson DP, George CC: Evaluation of the Midwest Harm Reduction Institute¿s harm reduction housing training and technical assistance program. Center for Urban Research and Learning, Loyola University Chicago, Chicago, IL; 2009.
• [23]Klein KJ, Knight AP: Innovation implementation. Curr Dir Psychol Sci 2005, 14:243-246.
• [24]Derouin RE, Fritzsche BA, Salas E: E-learning in organizations. J Air Waste Manage Assoc 2005, 31:920-940.
• [25]Means B, Yukie T, Murphy R, Bakia M, Jones K: Evaluation of evidence-based practices in online learning: a meta-analysis and review of online learning studies evaluation. U.S. Department of Education, Office of Planning, Evaluation, and Policy Development, Washington, D.C; 2010.
• [26]Miller L: ASTD 2012 State of the industry report: organizations continue to invest in workplace learning. ASTD Press, Alexandria, VA; 2012.
• [27]Burnes B, Jackson P: Success and failure in organizational change: an exploration of the role of values. J Chang Manage 2011, 11:133-162.
• [28]Anderson T: Towards a theory of online learning. Theory and Practice of Online Learning 2008, 45-74.
• [29]Swan K: A constructivist model for thinking about learning online. In Elements of Quality Online Education: Engaging Communities, Wisdom from the Sloan Consortium. Edited by Bourne J, Moore J. Sloan Consortium, Needham, MA; 2005:13-30.
• [30]Bransford JD, Brown A, Cocking R: How people learn: mind, brain, experience, and school. National Academies Press, Washington DC; 1999.
• [31]Chaudoir SR, Dugan AG, Barr CH: Measuring factors affecting implementation of health innovations: a systematic review of structural, organizational, provider, patient, and innovation level measures.Implement Sci 2013, 8:22.
• [32]Bond GR, Drake RE, McHugo GJ, Rapp CA, Whitley R: Strategies for improving fidelity in the national evidence-based practices project. Res Soc Wor Prac 2009, 19:569-581.
• [33]Novak JD: Meaningful learning: the essential factor for conceptual change in limited or inappropriate propositional hierarchies leading to empowerment of learners. Sci Ed 2002, 86:548-571.
• [34]Allen MW: Designing Successful E-Learning: Forget what you Know about Instructional Design and do Something Interesting. Pfeiffer, San Francisco, CA; 2011.
• [35]Jonassen DH, Hernandez-Serrano J: Case-based reasoning and instructional design: using stories to support problem solving. ETR&D-Educ Tech Res 2002, 50:65-77.
• [36]Becker DR, Drake RE, Bond GR, Nawaz S, Haslett WR, Martinez RA: Best practices: a national mental health learning collaborative on supported employment. Psychiatr Serv 2011, 62:704-706.
• [37]Schouten LMT, Hulscher MEJL, Van Everdingen JJE, Huijsman R, Grol RPTM: Evidence for the impact of quality improvement collaboratives: systematic review. Brit Med J 2008, 336:1491-1494.
• [38]Mayer RE: Applying the science of learning to medical education. Med Educ 2010, 44:543-549.
• [39]Kangas E, Kinnunen T: Applying user-centered design to mobile application development. Commun ACM 2005, 48:55-59.
• [40]Patton MQ: Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA; 2002.
• [41][http://www.maxqda.com/.] webcite VERBI Software-Consult-Sozialforschung GmbH: MAXQDA, Software for Qualitative Data Analysis.
• [42]Hsieh H-F, Shannon SE: Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qual Health Res 2005, 15:1277-1288.
• [43]Creswell JH, Plano Clark VL: Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA; 2011.
• [44]Helfrich CD, Li Y-F, Sharp ND, Sales AE: Organizational readiness to change assessment (ORCA): development of an instrument based on the Promoting Action on Research in Health Services (PARIHS) framework.Implement Sci 2009, 4:38.
• [45]Holgado Tello FP, Chacón Moscoso S, Barbero García I, Sanduvete Chaves S: Training satisfaction rating scale: development of a measurement model using polychoric correlations. Eur J Psychol Assess 2006, 22:268-279.
• [46]Chamberlain P, Brown CH, Saldana L: Observational measure of implementation progress in community based settings: the stages of implementation completion (SIC).Implement Sci 2011, 6:116.
• [47]Saldana L, Chamberlain P, Wang W, Hendricks Brown C: Predicting program start-up using the stages of implementation measure. Adm Policy Ment Health 2012, 39:419-425.
• [48]Aarons GA: Mental health provider attitudes toward adoption of evidence-based practice: the Evidence-Based Practice Attitude Scale (EBPAS). Ment Health Serv Res 2004, 6:61-74.
• [49]Yin RK: Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA; 2008.
• [50]Eisenhardt KM, Graebner ME: Theory building from cases: opportunities and challenges. Acad Manage J 2007, 50:25-32.
• [51]Corbin JM, Strauss AL: Grounded theory research: procedures, canons, and evaluative criteria. Qual Sociol 1990, 13:3-21.
• [52]Saldana L, Chamberlain P: Supporting implementation: the role of community development teams to build infrastructure. Am J Community Psychol 2012, 50:334-346.