17
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      A pragmatic method for costing implementation strategies using time-driven activity-based costing

      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

          Implementation strategies increase the adoption of evidence-based practices, but they require resources. Although information about implementation costs is critical for decision-makers with budget constraints, cost information is not typically reported in the literature. This is at least partly due to a need for clearly defined, standardized costing methods that can be integrated into implementation effectiveness evaluation efforts.

          Methods

          We present a pragmatic approach to systematically estimating detailed, specific resource use and costs of implementation strategies that combine time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC), a business accounting method based on process mapping and known for its practicality, with a leading implementation science framework developed by Proctor and colleagues, which guides specification and reporting of implementation strategies. We illustrate the application of this method using a case study with synthetic data.

          Results

          This step-by-step method produces a clear map of the implementation process by specifying the names, actions, actors, and temporality of each implementation strategy; determining the frequency and duration of each action associated with individual strategies; and assigning a dollar value to the resources that each action consumes. The method provides transparent and granular cost estimation, allowing a cost comparison of different implementation strategies. The resulting data allow researchers and stakeholders to understand how specific components of an implementation strategy influence its overall cost.

          Conclusion

          TDABC can serve as a pragmatic method for estimating resource use and costs associated with distinct implementation strategies and their individual components. Our use of the Proctor framework for the process mapping stage of the TDABC provides a way to incorporate cost estimation into implementation evaluation and may reduce the burden associated with economic evaluations in implementation science.

          Related collections

          Most cited references26

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          A compilation of strategies for implementing clinical innovations in health and mental health.

          Efforts to identify, develop, refine, and test strategies to disseminate and implement evidence-based treatments have been prioritized in order to improve the quality of health and mental health care delivery. However, this task is complicated by an implementation science literature characterized by inconsistent language use and inadequate descriptions of implementation strategies. This article brings more depth and clarity to implementation research and practice by presenting a consolidated compilation of discrete implementation strategies, based on a review of 205 sources published between 1995 and 2011. The resulting compilation includes 68 implementation strategies and definitions, which are grouped according to six key implementation processes: planning, educating, financing, restructuring, managing quality, and attending to the policy context. This consolidated compilation can serve as a reference to stakeholders who wish to implement clinical innovations in health and mental health care and can facilitate the development of multifaceted, multilevel implementation plans that are tailored to local contexts.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Leadership and organizational change for implementation (LOCI): a randomized mixed method pilot study of a leadership and organization development intervention for evidence-based practice implementation

            Background Leadership is important in the implementation of innovation in business, health, and allied health care settings. Yet there is a need for empirically validated organizational interventions for coordinated leadership and organizational development strategies to facilitate effective evidence-based practice (EBP) implementation. This paper describes the initial feasibility, acceptability, and perceived utility of the Leadership and Organizational Change for Implementation (LOCI) intervention. A transdisciplinary team of investigators and community stakeholders worked together to develop and test a leadership and organizational strategy to promote effective leadership for implementing EBPs. Methods Participants were 12 mental health service team leaders and their staff (n = 100) from three different agencies that provide mental health services to children and families in California, USA. Supervisors were randomly assigned to the 6-month LOCI intervention or to a two-session leadership webinar control condition provided by a well-known leadership training organization. We utilized mixed methods with quantitative surveys and qualitative data collected via surveys and a focus group with LOCI trainees. Results Quantitative and qualitative analyses support the LOCI training and organizational strategy intervention in regard to feasibility, acceptability, and perceived utility, as well as impact on leader and supervisee-rated outcomes. Conclusions The LOCI leadership and organizational change for implementation intervention is a feasible and acceptable strategy that has utility to improve staff-rated leadership for EBP implementation. Further studies are needed to conduct rigorous tests of the proximal and distal impacts of LOCI on leader behaviors, implementation leadership, organizational context, and implementation outcomes. The results of this study suggest that LOCI may be a viable strategy to support organizations in preparing for the implementation and sustainment of EBP. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13012-014-0192-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Printed educational materials: effects on professional practice and healthcare outcomes.

              Printed educational materials are widely used passive dissemination strategies to improve the quality of clinical practice and patient outcomes. Traditionally they are presented in paper formats such as monographs, publication in peer-reviewed journals and clinical guidelines. To assess the effect of printed educational materials on the practice of healthcare professionals and patient health outcomes.To explore the influence of some of the characteristics of the printed educational materials (e.g. source, content, format) on their effect on professional practice and patient outcomes. For this update, search strategies were rewritten and substantially changed from those published in the original review in order to refocus the search from published material to printed material and to expand terminology describing printed materials. Given the significant changes, all databases were searched from start date to June 2011. We searched: MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), HealthStar, CINAHL, ERIC, CAB Abstracts, Global Health, and the EPOC Register. We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-randomised trials, controlled before and after studies (CBAs) and interrupted time series (ITS) analyses that evaluated the impact of printed educational materials (PEMs) on healthcare professionals' practice or patient outcomes, or both. We included three types of comparisons: (1) PEM versus no intervention, (2) PEM versus single intervention, (3) multifaceted intervention where PEM is included versus multifaceted intervention without PEM. There was no language restriction. Any objective measure of professional practice (e.g. number of tests ordered, prescriptions for a particular drug), or patient health outcomes (e.g. blood pressure) were included. Two review authors undertook data extraction independently, and any disagreement was resolved by discussion among the review authors. For analyses, the included studies were grouped according to study design, type of outcome (professional practice or patient outcome, continuous or dichotomous) and type of comparison. For controlled trials, we reported the median effect size for each outcome within each study, the median effect size across outcomes for each study and the median of these effect sizes across studies. Where the data were available, we re-analysed the ITS studies and reported median differences in slope and in level for each outcome, across outcomes for each study, and then across studies. We categorised each PEM according to potential effects modifiers related to the source of the PEMs, the channel used for their delivery, their content, and their format. The review includes 45 studies: 14 RCTs and 31 ITS studies. Almost all the included studies (44/45) compared the effectiveness of PEM to no intervention. One single study compared paper-based PEM to the same document delivered on CD-ROM. Based on seven RCTs and 54 outcomes, the median absolute risk difference in categorical practice outcomes was 0.02 when PEMs were compared to no intervention (range from 0 to +0.11). Based on three RCTs and eight outcomes, the median improvement in standardised mean difference for continuous profession practice outcomes was 0.13 when PEMs were compared to no intervention (range from -0.16 to +0.36). Only two RCTs and two ITS studies reported patient outcomes. In addition, we re-analysed 54 outcomes from 25 ITS studies, using time series regression and observed statistically significant improvement in level or in slope in 27 outcomes. From the ITS studies, we calculated improvements in professional practice outcomes across studies after PEM dissemination (standardised median change in level = 1.69). From the data gathered, we could not comment on which PEM characteristic influenced their effectiveness. The results of this review suggest that when used alone and compared to no intervention, PEMs may have a small beneficial effect on professional practice outcomes. There is insufficient information to reliably estimate the effect of PEMs on patient outcomes, and clinical significance of the observed effect sizes is not known. The effectiveness of PEMs compared to other interventions, or of PEMs as part of a multifaceted intervention, is uncertain.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                zcidav@upenn.edu
                Journal
                Implement Sci
                Implement Sci
                Implementation Science : IS
                BioMed Central (London )
                1748-5908
                5 May 2020
                5 May 2020
                2020
                : 15
                : 28
                Affiliations
                [1 ]GRID grid.25879.31, ISNI 0000 0004 1936 8972, Department of Psychiatry, Perelman School of Medicine, , University of Pennsylvania, ; Philadelphia, PA USA
                [2 ]GRID grid.25879.31, ISNI 0000 0004 1936 8972, Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, , University of Pennsylvania, ; Philadelphia, PA USA
                [3 ]GRID grid.413916.8, ISNI 0000 0004 0419 1545, Center for Mental Healthcare and Outcomes Research, , Central Arkansas Veterans Healthcare System, ; North Little Rock, AR USA
                [4 ]South Central Mental Illness Research, Education and Clinical Center, Central Arkansas, Little Rock, USA
                [5 ]Veterans Healthcare System, North Little Rock, AR USA
                [6 ]GRID grid.241054.6, ISNI 0000 0004 4687 1637, Division of Health Services Research, Department of Psychiatry, College of Medicine, , University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, ; Little Rock, AR USA
                [7 ]GRID grid.25879.31, ISNI 0000 0004 1936 8972, Department of Medical Ethics and Health Policy, Perelman School of Medicine, , University of Pennsylvania, ; Philadelphia, PA USA
                [8 ]GRID grid.241054.6, ISNI 0000 0004 4687 1637, Departments of Pharmacy Practice and Psychiatry, , University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, ; Little Rock, AR USA
                [9 ]GRID grid.241054.6, ISNI 0000 0004 4687 1637, Center for Implementation Research, , University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, ; Little Rock, AR USA
                [10 ]GRID grid.413916.8, ISNI 0000 0004 0419 1545, Central Arkansas Veterans Healthcare System, ; Little Rock, AR USA
                [11 ]GRID grid.25879.31, ISNI 0000 0004 1936 8972, School of Social Policy and Practice, , University of Pennsylvania, ; Philadelphia, PA USA
                [12 ]GRID grid.25879.31, ISNI 0000 0004 1936 8972, Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, , University of Pennsylvania, ; Philadelphia, PA USA
                [13 ]GRID grid.25879.31, ISNI 0000 0004 1936 8972, Penn Implementation Science Center, , Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, ; Philadelphia, USA
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4323-0175
                Article
                993
                10.1186/s13012-020-00993-1
                7201568
                32370752
                f5aadd53-5d27-4b88-a877-03758004a782
                © 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
                : 30 October 2019
                : 16 April 2020
                Funding
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100000025, National Institute of Mental Health;
                Award ID: 3P50MH113840-03
                Award Recipient :
                Categories
                Methodology
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2020

                Medicine
                costing,economic evaluation,implementation strategies,time-driven activity-based costing

                Comments

                Comment on this article