No abstract

No abstract

Background Advancing causal implementation theory is critical for designing tailored implementation strategies that target specific mechanisms associated with evidence-based practice (EBP) use. This study will test the generalizability of a conceptual model that integrates organizational constructs and behavioral theory to predict clinician use of cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) techniques in community mental health centers. CBT is a leading psychosocial EBP for psychiatric disorders that remains underused despite substantial efforts to increase its implementation. Methods We will leverage ongoing CBT implementation efforts in two large public health systems (Philadelphia and Texas) to recruit 300 mental health clinicians and 600 of their clients across 40 organizations. Our primary implementation outcomes of interest are clinician intentions to use CBT and direct observation of clinician use of CBT. As CBT comprises discrete components that vary in complexity and acceptability, we will measure clinician use of six discrete components of CBT. After finishing their CBT training, participating clinicians will complete measures of organizational and behavior change constructs delineated in the model. Clinicians also will be observed twice via audio recording delivering CBT with a client. Within 48 h of each observation, theorized moderators of the intention-behavior gap will be collected via survey. A subset of clinicians who report high intentions to use CBT but demonstrate low use will be purposively recruited to complete semi-structured interviews assessing reasons for the intention-behavior gap. Multilevel path analysis will test the extent to which intentions and determinants of intention predict the use of each discrete CBT component. We also will test the extent to which theorized determinants of intention that include psychological, organizational, and contextual factors explain variation in intention and moderate the association between intentions and CBT use. Discussion Project ACTIVE will advance implementation theory, currently in its infancy, by testing the generalizability of a promising causal model of implementation. These results will inform the development of implementation strategies targeting modifiable factors that explain substantial variance in intention and implementation that can be applied broadly across EBPs.

Background Suicide is a global health issue. There are a number of evidence-based practices for suicide screening, assessment, and intervention that are not routinely deployed in usual care settings. The goal of this study is to develop and test implementation strategies to facilitate evidence-based suicide screening, assessment, and intervention in two settings where individuals at risk for suicide are especially likely to present: primary care and specialty mental health care. We will leverage methods from behavioral economics, which involves understanding the many factors that influence human decision making, to inform strategy development. Methods We will identify key mechanisms that limit implementation of evidence-based suicide screening, assessment, and intervention practices in primary care and specialty mental health through contextual inquiry involving behavioral health and primary care clinicians. Second, we will use contextual inquiry results to systematically design a menu of behavioral economics-informed implementation strategies that cut across settings, in collaboration with an advisory board composed of key stakeholders (i.e., behavioral economists, clinicians, implementation scientists, and suicide prevention experts). Finally, we will conduct rapid-cycle trials to test and refine the menu of implementation strategies. Primary outcomes include clinician-reported feasibility and acceptability of the implementation strategies. Discussion Findings will elucidate ways to address common and unique barriers to evidence-based suicide screening, assessment, and intervention practices in primary care and specialty mental health care. Results will yield refined, pragmatically tested strategies that can inform larger confirmatory trials to combat the growing public health crisis of suicide.

The COVID-19 pandemic led to heightened anxiety, distress, and burnout among healthcare workers and faculty in academic medicine. Penn Medicine launched Coping First Aid (CFA) in March 2020 in response to the pandemic. Informed by Psychological First Aid principles and therapeutic micro skills, CFA was designed as a tele-mental healthcare service for health system employees and their families delivered by trained lay volunteer coaches under the supervision of licensed mental health clinicians. We present an overview of the model, feasibility and utilization data, and preliminary implementation and effectiveness outcomes based on cross sectional coach (n = 22) and client (n = 57) self-report surveys with a subset of program users in the first year. A total of 44 individuals completed training and were certified to coach. Over the first 24 months of the program, 513 sessions occurred with 273 clients (119 sessions were no-shows or canceled). Follow-up appointments were recommended in 52.6% (n = 270) of sessions and 21.2% (n = 109) of clients were referred for professional mental health care. Client survey respondents reported CFA was helpful; 60% were very or extremely satisfied, and 74% indicated they would recommend the program. Our preliminary findings suggest that CFA was feasible to implement and most clients found the service beneficial. CFA provides a model for rapidly developing and scaling mental health supports during and beyond the pandemic.