4
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Network-Based Delivery and Sustainment of Evidence-Based Prevention in Community-Clinical Partnerships Addressing Health Equity: A Qualitative Exploration

      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: Increased delivery of evidence-based preventive services can improve population health and increase health equity. Community-clinical partnerships offer particular promise, but delivery and sustainment of preventive services through these systems face several challenges related to service integration and collaboration. We used a social network analysis perspective to explore (a) the range of contributions made by community-clinical partnership network members to support the delivery of evidence-based preventive services and (b) important influences on the ability of these partnerships to sustain service delivery.

          Methods: Data come from an implementation evaluation of the Prevention and Wellness Trust Fund initiative, which supported nine Massachusetts communities to coordinate delivery of evidence-based prevention and address inequities in hypertension, pediatric asthma, falls among older adults, or tobacco use. In 2016, we conducted semi-structured interviews with (a) leadership teams representing nine community-level partnerships and (b) practitioners from four high-implementation partnerships ( n = 23). We managed data using NVivo11 and utilized a framework analysis approach.

          Results: Key network contributions for delivery of evidence-based preventive services included creating referrals, delivering services, providing links to community members, and administration and leadership. Less emphasized contributions included wraparound services, technical assistance, and venue provision. Implementers from high-implementation partnerships also highlighted contributions such as program adaptation, creating buy-in, and sharing information to improve service delivery. Expected drivers of program sustainability included the ability to develop a business case, ongoing network facilitation, technology support, continued integrated action, and sufficient staffing to maintain programming.

          Conclusion: The study highlights the need to take a long-term, infrastructure-focused approach when designing community-clinical partnerships. Strategic partnership composition, including identifying sources of necessary network contributions, in conjunction with efforts from the outset to link systems, align effort, and build a long-term funding structure can support the required coordinated action around preventive services needed to improve health equity.

          Related collections

          Most cited references45

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found

          The social determinants of health: coming of age.

          In the United States, awareness is increasing that medical care alone cannot adequately improve health overall or reduce health disparities without also addressing where and how people live. A critical mass of relevant knowledge has accumulated, documenting associations, exploring pathways and biological mechanisms, and providing a previously unavailable scientific foundation for appreciating the role of social factors in health. We review current knowledge about health effects of social (including economic) factors, knowledge gaps, and research priorities, focusing on upstream social determinants-including economic resources, education, and racial discrimination-that fundamentally shape the downstream determinants, such as behaviors, targeted by most interventions. Research priorities include measuring social factors better, monitoring social factors and health relative to policies, examining health effects of social factors across lifetimes and generations, incrementally elucidating pathways through knowledge linkage, testing multidimensional interventions, and addressing political will as a key barrier to translating knowledge into action.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            A review of collaborative partnerships as a strategy for improving community health.

            Collaborative partnerships (people and organizations from multiple sectors working together in common purpose) are a prominent strategy for community health improvement. This review examines evidence about the effects of collaborative partnerships on (a) community and systems change (environmental changes), (b) community-wide behavior change, and (c) more distant population-level health outcomes. We also consider the conditions and factors that may determine whether collaborative partnerships are effective. The review concludes with specific recommendations designed to enhance research and practice and to set conditions for promoting community health.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Beyond “implementation strategies”: classifying the full range of strategies used in implementation science and practice

              Background Strategies are central to the National Institutes of Health’s definition of implementation research as “the study of strategies to integrate evidence-based interventions into specific settings.” Multiple scholars have proposed lists of the strategies used in implementation research and practice, which they increasingly are classifying under the single term “implementation strategies.” We contend that classifying all strategies under a single term leads to confusion, impedes synthesis across studies, and limits advancement of the full range of strategies of importance to implementation. To address this concern, we offer a system for classifying implementation strategies that builds on Proctor and colleagues’ (2013) reporting guidelines, which recommend that authors not only name and define their implementation strategies but also specify who enacted the strategy (i.e., the actor) and the level and determinants that were targeted (i.e., the action targets). Main body We build on Wandersman and colleagues’ Interactive Systems Framework to distinguish strategies based on whether they are enacted by actors functioning as part of a Delivery, Support, or Synthesis and Translation System. We build on Damschroder and colleague’s Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research to distinguish the levels that strategies target (intervention, inner setting, outer setting, individual, and process). We then draw on numerous resources to identify determinants, which are conceptualized as modifiable factors that prevent or enable the adoption and implementation of evidence-based interventions. Identifying actors and targets resulted in five conceptually distinct classes of implementation strategies: dissemination, implementation process, integration, capacity-building, and scale-up. In our descriptions of each class, we identify the level of the Interactive System Framework at which the strategy is enacted (actors), level and determinants targeted (action targets), and outcomes used to assess strategy effectiveness. We illustrate how each class would apply to efforts to improve colorectal cancer screening rates in Federally Qualified Health Centers. Conclusions Structuring strategies into classes will aid reporting of implementation research findings, alignment of strategies with relevant theories, synthesis of findings across studies, and identification of potential gaps in current strategy listings. Organizing strategies into classes also will assist users in locating the strategies that best match their needs.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Front Public Health
                Front Public Health
                Front. Public Health
                Frontiers in Public Health
                Frontiers Media S.A.
                2296-2565
                26 June 2020
                2020
                : 8
                : 213
                Affiliations
                [1] 1Department of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Harvard T. H. Chan School of Public Health , Boston, MA, United States
                [2] 2Division of General Internal Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital , Boston, MA, United States
                Author notes

                Edited by: Katherine Henrietta Leith, University of South Carolina, United States

                Reviewed by: Pradeep Nair, Central University of Himachal Pradesh, India; Geoffrey W. Wilkinson, Boston University, United States

                *Correspondence: Shoba Ramanadhan sramanadhan@ 123456hsph.harvard.edu

                This article was submitted to Public Health Education and Promotion, a section of the journal Frontiers in Public Health

                Article
                10.3389/fpubh.2020.00213
                7332771
                32671008
                395bfac8-1c7b-48eb-be43-5c5437d003a5
                Copyright © 2020 Ramanadhan, Daly, Lee, Kruse and Deutsch.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

                History
                : 03 February 2020
                : 08 May 2020
                Page count
                Figures: 1, Tables: 1, Equations: 0, References: 69, Pages: 12, Words: 9837
                Funding
                Funded by: Commonwealth of Massachusetts 10.13039/100006637
                Funded by: National Institutes of Health 10.13039/100000002
                Categories
                Public Health
                Original Research

                community-clinical partnerships,social networks,evidence-based interventions,implementation,equity,preventive services

                Comments

                Comment on this article