No abstract

Background: Organizational readiness for implementation (ORI) is a barrier to disseminating recovery-oriented evidence-based practices for people with severe mental illnesses. However, there is a knowledge gap regarding implementation strategies and specific actions related to those strategies that may enhance ORI across organizations. The Transtheoretical Model (TTM) is a well-established stage-based model used to support organizational change. In TTM, the first three stages—Pre-contemplation, Contemplation, and Preparation—represent the pre-implementation phase, during which ORI should be developed. This study explored ORI enhancement strategies reported as useful by different stakeholders in the field of community mental health (CMH) and tested the applicability of the TTM readiness stages as an organizing framework to direct ORI development. Methods: The study included the following two phases: (1) a qualitative exploration of ORI enhancement actions reported by various stakeholders in the CMH field ( N = 16) based on their experience in successful implementation projects and (2) a consolidation process performed by the research team to create coherent groups of actions and their overarching implementation strategies per readiness stage. Results: A comprehensive list of strategies and related actions was created. The strategies and actions correspond with each of the first three stages of the TTM. Stakeholders differed in their methods of facilitating engagement across the organization and in their level of involvement in developing ORI. Conclusions: This study is a first step in conceptualizing a systematic process for developing ORI using the TTM as a theoretical framework. Future studies should test the transferability and effectiveness of this repository to other implementation efforts, expend the lists per stage, and further explore differences between stakeholders’ role in ORI development. Plain language abstract: Interventions that were proven effective in supporting the recovery of people with mental illnesses are not sufficiently available in the field of community mental health. One barrier to getting those interventions implemented is the lack of willingness and preparedness of organizations to change their practice, also referred to as organizational readiness for implementation (ORI). Little is known about how to enhance ORI to increase the availability of interventions. This study explored actions used to enhance ORI by people in different roles who successfully implemented new recovery-oriented interventions in community mental health settings. The actions were organized into three stages of readiness development based on the Transtheoretical Model (TTM) of behavioral change. Differences were found between administrators, consultants, supervisors, and providers in the type and number of strategies they described. The results show the applicability of the TTM as an organizing framework for ORI development and provide sets of strategies and specific actions to support different readiness needs across the organization.

Results enlighten an overall high WRSE, which indicates successful adaptation of OTs to changing roles and tasks in mental health, similar to studies in other countries. However, it reveals discrepancies between job demands and self-efficacy of OTs that should be addressed at educational and managerial levels.

Background Knowledge about the development of organizational readiness for implementation (ORI) is limited. ORI, referred to as the willingness and capacity of all relevant stakeholders to change practice, is critical for increasing the adoption rate of evidence-based practices and improving implementation outcomes. However, no methodology currently guides ORI’s enhancement or addresses differences in readiness needs across an organization. This study used the transtheoretical model (TTM) as a framework for classifying a well-established compilation of implementation strategies into three readiness stages: pre-contemplation, contemplation, and preparation. Methods A modified Delphi method was used to establish consensus among a panel of purposefully selected research and field implementation experts. The Delphi process involved three rounds of online questionnaires. The third round also included a live video discussion to clarify definitions in an effort to increase consensus among experts. Results Of the 73 strategies reviewed, the experts identified 75% (n = 55) as relevant for pre-implementation and reached a high-level agreement on the assignment of 7% (n = 5) of the strategies to the pre-contemplation stage (ORI-1), 25% (n = 18) to the contemplation stage (ORI-2), and 52% (n = 38) to the preparation stage (ORI-3). Several strategies were identified as relevant to more than one stage. Conclusions Participating experts were able to reach high-level agreement on the relevance of specific sets of implementation strategies to each of the three ORI stages. The lowest number of strategies was assigned to ORI-1 and the highest number to ORI-3. Given the overlap of strategies across ORI stages, there is a need to better understand the specific utilization of such strategies at different stages. Future studies are needed to empirically evaluate the relevance and applicability of this expert-informed typology based on implementers’ experiences in the field.

Background Organizational readiness is a known barrier to implementing evidence-based practices (EBPs) in community mental health services. A robust methodology for enhancing organizational readiness for implementation (ORI) has the potential to improve implementation outcomes of EBPs and ensure better services for people with a psychiatric disability. Prior work established a framework of implementation strategies targeting ORI enhancement by asking a group of implementation experts from various fields to categorize strategies from the “Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change” (ERIC) Project into three readiness stages, consistent with the pre-action stages of the Transtheoretical Model of behavioral change: Pre-contemplation, Contemplation, and Preparation. The current study provides initial confirmation and refinement to this expert-driven typology based on community mental health field experiences. Methods We conducted in-depth interviews with stakeholders involved in a recent EBP implementation project. Participants included staff (n=9) from four community mental health agencies and the implementation team who facilitated the project (n=3). Their pre-implementation experiences were compared with the experts’ typology to identify consistencies and discrepancies. Results The participants’ experiences were congruent with two thirds of the strategies identified by the experts for specific ORI stages. The refinements included 12 strategies used in additional stages beyond the experts’ classification, four strategies from the ERIC list that were not included in the ORI typology, and five new strategies. Conclusions This study provides initial confirmation and refinements to the previously published ORI typology. The results offer guidance as to how ORI could be enhanced in the community mental health field.