Lee Rebekka M, Daly James G, Gundersen Dan, Lederman Ruth I, Dargon-Hart Susan, Winickoff Jonathan P, Emmons Karen M
Harvard University T H Chan School of Public Health.
Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School Department of Medicine.
Res Sq. 2024 Oct 15:rs.3.rs-4601170. doi: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-4601170/v1.
Implementation science increasingly aims to improve equity in delivery of evidence-based interventions. It is important to expand the conceptualization of the inner setting, organizations like community health centers where interventions are put into place, accordingly. Taking a comprehensive, partnered approach to measuring the inner setting among a network of community health centers engaged in implementation research ensures assessment of the variability among sites and generates centralized contextual data that can be applied across studies.
We conducted a cross-sectional survey among staff (n = 63) from 12 community health centers in Massachusetts engaged in research at the Implementation Science Center for Cancer Control Equity. The survey assessed inner setting constructs from the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, including learning climate, leadership engagement, available resources, and implementation demands/stress using validated measures. Additional equity-focused inner setting items included structural characteristics of the work infrastructure and language access services. Descriptive statistics examined differences by staff role and health center.
Staff rated learning climate (mean = 3.98) and leadership engagement (mean = 3.67) positively, while available resources (mean = 2.78) had the lowest rating, particularly staffing resources. Clinical staff rated the inner context lowest compared to other roles. Most centers provided tuition assistance and all reported supportive human resources benefits for caregiving, while fewer offered formal mentorship or affinity groups. Most community health centers reported written materials are routinely provided to patients in languages other than English and interpreter services were most common in Spanish, Vietnamese, and Portuguese.
This study provides a baseline assessment of the inner setting within Massachusetts community health centers. Periodic follow-up surveys will monitor changes over time. Data can be used in future analyses to explore how inner setting characteristics influence implementation outcomes and impact equitable translation of evidence-based interventions into practice.
实施科学越来越致力于提高循证干预措施实施过程中的公平性。因此,扩大对内部环境的概念化理解很重要,内部环境指的是像社区卫生中心这样实施干预措施的组织。采用全面且合作的方法来衡量参与实施研究的社区卫生中心网络中的内部环境,可确保评估各地点之间的差异,并生成可应用于各项研究的集中式背景数据。
我们对马萨诸塞州12家参与癌症控制公平性实施科学中心研究的社区卫生中心的工作人员(n = 63)进行了横断面调查。该调查使用经过验证的测量方法,评估了实施研究综合框架中的内部环境构建要素,包括学习氛围、领导参与度、可用资源以及实施需求/压力。其他以公平性为重点的内部环境项目包括工作基础设施的结构特征和语言获取服务。描述性统计分析了工作人员角色和卫生中心之间的差异。
工作人员对学习氛围(平均分为3.98)和领导参与度(平均分为3.67)评价积极,而可用资源(平均分为2.78)得分最低,尤其是人员配备资源。与其他角色相比,临床工作人员对内部环境的评价最低。大多数中心提供学费资助,所有中心都报告了对护理人员的支持性人力资源福利,而提供正式指导或亲和团体的中心较少。大多数社区卫生中心报告称,常规会以英语以外的语言向患者提供书面材料,口译服务在西班牙语、越南语和葡萄牙语使用者中最为常见。
本研究提供了马萨诸塞州社区卫生中心内部环境的基线评估。定期的后续调查将监测随时间的变化。这些数据可用于未来的分析,以探讨内部环境特征如何影响实施结果以及循证干预措施公平转化为实践的情况。