Prevention Research Center, Brown School at Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, United States.
Division of Public Health Sciences, Department of Surgery and Alvin J. Siteman Cancer Center, Washington University School of Medicine, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, United States.
Front Public Health. 2022 Sep 12;10:892258. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2022.892258. eCollection 2022.
INTRODUCTION: The dissemination of evidence-based interventions (i.e., programs, practices, and policies) is a core function of US state health departments (SHDs). However, interventions are originally designed and tested with a specific population and context. Hence, adapting the intervention to meet the real-world circumstances and population's needs can increase the likelihood of achieving the expected health outcomes for the target population from the implemented intervention. This study identified how SHD employees decide to adapt public health programs and what influences decisions on how to adapt them. MATERIALS AND METHODS: SHD employees ( = 45) were interviewed using a qualitative semi-structured interview guide. Telephone interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. The transcripts were consensus-coded and themes were identified using thematic analysis. Several themes aligned with the Model for Adaptation Design and Impact. RESULTS: Data, outcomes, and health department evaluations influenced decisions to adapt a program (pre-adaptation), and reasons to adapt a program included organizational and sociopolitical contextual factors. SHD middle-level managers, program managers and staff, and local agencies were involved in the decisions to adapt the programs. Finally, the goals for adapting a program included enhancing effectiveness/outcomes, reach and satisfaction with the program; funding; and partner engagement. After SHD employees decided to adapt a program, data and evidence guided the changes. Program staff and evaluators were engaged in the adaptation process. Program managers consulted partners to gather ideas on how best to adapt a program based on partners' experiences implementing the program and obtaining community input. Lastly, program managers also received input on adapting content and context from coalition meetings and periodic technical assistance calls. DISCUSSION: The findings related to decisions to adapt public health programs provide practitioners with considerations for adapting them. Findings reaffirm the importance of promoting public health competencies in program evaluation and adaptation, as well as systematically documenting and evaluating the adaptation processes. In addition, the themes could be studied in future research as mechanisms, mediators, and moderators to implementation outcomes.
简介:传播循证干预措施(即计划、实践和政策)是美国州卫生部门(SHD)的核心职能。然而,干预措施最初是针对特定人群和背景设计和测试的。因此,调整干预措施以满足现实情况和人口需求,可以增加目标人群从实施干预措施中获得预期健康结果的可能性。本研究确定了 SHD 员工如何决定调整公共卫生计划,以及哪些因素影响他们调整计划的决策。
材料与方法:采用定性半结构式访谈指南对 SHD 员工(=45 人)进行访谈。电话访谈进行录音,并逐字转录为文字记录。使用主题分析对文字记录进行共识编码和主题识别。几个主题与适应设计和影响模型一致。
结果:数据、结果和卫生部门评估影响了调整计划的决策(预先调整),调整计划的原因包括组织和社会政治背景因素。SHD 中层管理人员、项目管理人员和工作人员以及地方机构参与了调整计划的决策。最后,调整计划的目标包括提高计划的有效性/结果、覆盖率和对计划的满意度、资金和合作伙伴参与度。在 SHD 员工决定调整计划后,数据和证据指导了变更。项目工作人员和评估人员参与了适应过程。项目管理人员咨询合作伙伴,根据合作伙伴实施计划的经验和获得社区投入,收集有关最佳调整计划的想法。最后,项目管理人员还通过联盟会议和定期技术援助电话获得有关调整内容和背景的意见。
讨论:与调整公共卫生计划的决策相关的发现为从业人员提供了调整计划的考虑因素。研究结果再次证实了在计划评估和适应中促进公共卫生能力的重要性,以及系统地记录和评估适应过程。此外,这些主题可以在未来的研究中作为实施结果的机制、调解因素和调节因素进行研究。
Front Public Health. 2022
Front Public Health. 2021
J Public Health Manag Pract.
Campbell Syst Rev. 2024-6-13
Prev Chronic Dis. 2024-2-1
Implement Sci Commun. 2023-7-27
Implement Sci. 2022-4-12
Arch Public Health. 2022-3-29
Front Public Health. 2021
Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheitsforschung Gesundheitsschutz. 2021-5