2
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      External facilitators’ perceptions of internal facilitation skills during implementation of collaborative care for mental health teams: a qualitative analysis informed by the i-PARIHS framework

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Facilitation is a key strategy that may contribute to successful implementation of healthcare innovations. In blended facilitation, external facilitators (EFs) guide and support internal facilitators (IFs) in directing implementation processes. Developers of the i-PARIHS framework propose that successful facilitation requires project management, team/process, and influencing/negotiating skills. It is unclear what IF skills are most important in real-world settings, which could inform recruitment and training efforts. As prior qualitative studies of IF skills have only interviewed IFs, the perspectives of their EF partners are needed. Furthermore, little is known regarding the distribution of implementation tasks between IFs and EFs, which could impact sustainability once external support is removed. In the context of an implementation trial, we therefore: 1) evaluated IFs’ use of i-PARIHS facilitation skills, from EFs’ perspectives; 2) identified attributes of IFs not encompassed within the i-PARIHS skills; and 3) investigated the relative contributions of IFs and EFs during facilitation.

          Methods

          Analyses were conducted within a hybrid type II trial utilizing blended facilitation to implement the collaborative chronic care model within mental health teams of nine VA medical centers. Each site committed one team and an IF to weekly process design meetings and additional implementation activities over 12 months. Three EFs worked with three sites each. Following study completion, the EFs completed semi-structured qualitative interviews reflecting on the facilitation process, informed by the i-PARIHS facilitation skill areas. Interviews were analyzed via directed content analysis.

          Results

          EFs emphasized the importance of IFs having strong project management, team/process, and influencing/negotiating skills. Prior experience in these areas and a mental health background were also benefits. Personal characteristics (e.g., flexible, assertive) were described as critical, particularly when faced with conflict. EFs discussed the importance of clear delineation of EF/IF roles, and the need to shift facilitation responsibilities to IFs.

          Conclusions

          Key IF skills, according to EFs, are aligned with i-PARIHS recommendations, but IFs’ personal characteristics were also emphasized as important factors. Findings highlight traits to consider when selecting IFs and potential training areas (e.g., conflict management). EFs and IFs must determine an appropriate distribution of facilitation tasks to ensure long-term sustainability of practices.

          Trial registration

          Clinicaltrials.gov, September 7, 2015, # NCT02543840.

          Related collections

          Most cited references14

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          PARIHS revisited: from heuristic to integrated framework for the successful implementation of knowledge into practice

          Background The Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services, or PARIHS framework, was first published in 1998. Since this time, work has been ongoing to further develop, refine and test it. Widely used as an organising or conceptual framework to help both explain and predict why the implementation of evidence into practice is or is not successful, PARIHS was one of the first frameworks to make explicit the multi-dimensional and complex nature of implementation as well as highlighting the central importance of context. Several critiques of the framework have also pointed out its limitations and suggested areas for improvement. Discussion Building on the published critiques and a number of empirical studies, this paper introduces a revised version of the framework, called the integrated or i-PARIHS framework. The theoretical antecedents of the framework are described as well as outlining the revised and new elements, notably, the revision of how evidence is described; how the individual and teams are incorporated; and how context is further delineated. We describe how the framework can be operationalised and draw on case study data to demonstrate the preliminary testing of the face and content validity of the revised framework. Summary This paper is presented for deliberation and discussion within the implementation science community. Responding to a series of critiques and helpful feedback on the utility of the original PARIHS framework, we seek feedback on the proposed improvements to the framework. We believe that the i-PARIHS framework creates a more integrated approach to understand the theoretical complexity from which implementation science draws its propositions and working hypotheses; that the new framework is more coherent and comprehensive and at the same time maintains it intuitive appeal; and that the models of facilitation described enable its more effective operationalisation. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13012-016-0398-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Implementing evidence-based interventions in health care: application of the replicating effective programs framework

            Background We describe the use of a conceptual framework and implementation protocol to prepare effective health services interventions for implementation in community-based (i.e., non-academic-affiliated) settings. Methods The framework is based on the experiences of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Replicating Effective Programs (REP) project, which has been at the forefront of developing systematic and effective strategies to prepare HIV interventions for dissemination. This article describes the REP framework, and how it can be applied to implement clinical and health services interventions in community-based organizations. Results REP consists of four phases: pre-conditions (e.g., identifying need, target population, and suitable intervention), pre-implementation (e.g., intervention packaging and community input), implementation (e.g., package dissemination, training, technical assistance, and evaluation), and maintenance and evolution (e.g., preparing the intervention for sustainability). Key components of REP, including intervention packaging, training, technical assistance, and fidelity assessment are crucial to the implementation of effective interventions in health care. Conclusion REP is a well-suited framework for implementing health care interventions, as it specifies steps needed to maximize fidelity while allowing opportunities for flexibility (i.e., local customizing) to maximize transferability. Strategies that foster the sustainability of REP as a tool to implement effective health care interventions need to be developed and tested.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Getting evidence into practice: the role and function of facilitation.

              This paper presents the findings of a concept analysis of facilitation in relation to successful implementation of evidence into practice. In 1998, we presented a conceptual framework that represented the interplay and interdependence of the many factors influencing the uptake of evidence into practice. One of the three elements of the framework was facilitation, alongside the nature of evidence and context. It was proposed that facilitators had a key role in helping individuals and teams understand what they needed to change and how they needed to change it. As part of the on-going development and refinement of the framework, the elements within it have undergone a concept analysis in order to provide theoretical and conceptual clarity. The concept analysis approach was used as a framework to review critically the research literature and seminal texts in order to establish the conceptual clarity and maturity of facilitation in relation to its role in the implementation of evidence-based practice. The concept of facilitation is partially developed and in need of delineation and comparison. Here, the purpose, role and skills and attributes of facilitators are explored in order to try and make distinctions between this role and other change agent roles such as educational outreach workers, academic detailers and opinion leaders. We propose that facilitation can be represented as a set of continua, with the purpose of facilitation ranging from a discrete task-focused activity to a more holistic process of enabling individuals, teams and organizations to change. A number of defining characteristics of facilitation are proposed. However, further research to clarify and evaluate different models of facilitation is required.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                samantha.connolly@va.gov
                Journal
                BMC Health Serv Res
                BMC Health Serv Res
                BMC Health Services Research
                BioMed Central (London )
                1472-6963
                4 March 2020
                4 March 2020
                2020
                : 20
                : 165
                Affiliations
                [1 ]ISNI 0000 0004 4657 1992, GRID grid.410370.1, Center for Healthcare Organization & Implementation Research, VA Boston Healthcare System, ; 150 S. Huntington Ave., Building 9, Room 208C, Boston, MA 02130 USA
                [2 ]ISNI 000000041936754X, GRID grid.38142.3c, Department of Psychiatry, , Harvard Medical School, ; Boston, MA USA
                [3 ]ISNI 0000 0004 1936 7558, GRID grid.189504.1, Department of Health Law, Policy and Management, , Boston University School of Public Health, ; Boston, MA USA
                [4 ]ISNI 0000 0004 0419 1545, GRID grid.413916.8, VA Quality Enhancement Research Initiative (QUERI) Program for Team-Based Behavioral Health, Central Arkansas Veterans Healthcare System, ; North Little Rock, AR USA
                [5 ]ISNI 0000 0004 4687 1637, GRID grid.241054.6, Department of Psychiatry, , University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, ; Little Rock, AR USA
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1007-5626
                Article
                5011
                10.1186/s12913-020-5011-3
                7057643
                32131824
                af2355c0-b671-4f4a-ae80-503b43424431
                © The Author(s). 2020

                Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

                History
                : 12 June 2019
                : 20 February 2020
                Funding
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100007181, Quality Enhancement Research Initiative;
                Award ID: QUE-15-289
                Award Recipient :
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100000738, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs;
                Award ID: CIN-13-403
                Award Recipient :
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100012462, Office of Academic Affiliations, Department of Veterans Affairs;
                Award ID: Advanced Fellowship Program in Health Services Research, the Center for Healthcare Organization and Implementation Research (CHOIR), VA Boston Healthcare System
                Categories
                Research Article
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2020

                Health & Social care
                internal facilitators,external facilitators,blended facilitation,i-parihs framework

                Comments

                Comment on this article