Ethnography and user-centered design to inform context-driven implementation.
Context
Context assessment
Ethnography
Evidence-based practice implementation
Human-centered design
User-centered design
Journal
Translational behavioral medicine
ISSN: 1613-9860
Titre abrégé: Transl Behav Med
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101554668
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
18 01 2022
18 01 2022
Historique:
pubmed:
6
7
2021
medline:
17
3
2022
entrez:
5
7
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Despite pervasive findings pointing to its inextricable role in intervention implementation, context remains poorly understood in implementation science. Existing approaches for describing context (e.g., surveys, interviews) may be narrow in scope or superficial in their elicitation of contextual data. Thus, in-depth and multilevel approaches are needed to meaningfully describe the contexts into which interventions will be implemented. Moreover, many studies assess context without subsequently using contextual information to enhance implementation. To be useful for improving implementation, though, methods are needed to apply contextual information during implementation. In the case example presented in this paper, we embedded an ethnographic assessment of context within a user-centered design approach to describe implementation context and apply that information to promote implementation. We developed a patient-reported outcome measure-based clinical intervention to assess and address the pervasive unmet needs of young adults with cancer: the Needs Assessment & Service Bridge (NA-SB). In this paper, we describe the user-centered design process that we used to anticipate context modifications needed to deliver NA-SB and implementation strategies needed to facilitate its implementation. Our ethnographic contextual inquiry yielded a rich understanding of local implementation context and contextual variation across potential scale-up contexts. Other methods from user-centered design (i.e., translation tables and a design team prototyping workshop) allowed us to translate that information into specifications for NA-SB delivery and a plan for implementation. Embedding ethnographic methods within a user-centered design approach can help us to tailor interventions and implementation strategies to their contexts of use to promote implementation. The field of implementation science studies how to better integrate research evidence into practice. To accomplish this integration, it is important to understand the contexts into which interventions are being implemented. For example, implementation may be influenced by contextual factors such as patient/provider beliefs about an intervention, budget constraints, leadership buy-in, an organization’s readiness to change, and many others. Understanding these factors upfront can allow us to adapt interventions to better suit context (e.g., tailoring intervention content to patients’ needs), change context to make it more ready for implementation (e.g., changing provider workflow to accommodate an intervention), and anticipate strategies that may be needed to implement an intervention (e.g., delivering training on the intervention to providers). To do this, the field of implementation science is in need of methods for assessing context and using that information to improve implementation. In this paper, we present several methods, including ethnography and methods from user-centered design, for using context to inform implementation efforts.
Autres résumés
Type: plain-language-summary
(eng)
The field of implementation science studies how to better integrate research evidence into practice. To accomplish this integration, it is important to understand the contexts into which interventions are being implemented. For example, implementation may be influenced by contextual factors such as patient/provider beliefs about an intervention, budget constraints, leadership buy-in, an organization’s readiness to change, and many others. Understanding these factors upfront can allow us to adapt interventions to better suit context (e.g., tailoring intervention content to patients’ needs), change context to make it more ready for implementation (e.g., changing provider workflow to accommodate an intervention), and anticipate strategies that may be needed to implement an intervention (e.g., delivering training on the intervention to providers). To do this, the field of implementation science is in need of methods for assessing context and using that information to improve implementation. In this paper, we present several methods, including ethnography and methods from user-centered design, for using context to inform implementation efforts.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34223893
pii: 6315391
doi: 10.1093/tbm/ibab077
pmc: PMC8826991
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Research Support, U.S. Gov't, Non-P.H.S.
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Subventions
Organisme : NCATS NIH HHS
ID : KL2 TR002490
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIMH NIH HHS
ID : K01 MH113806
Pays : United States
Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : T32 CA122061
Pays : United States
Informations de copyright
© Society of Behavioral Medicine 2021. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.
Références
Support Care Cancer. 2007 Oct;15(10):1125-44
pubmed: 17235503
Soc Sci Med. 2009 Mar;68(6):1161-8
pubmed: 19167141
BMC Health Serv Res. 2015 Jul 22;15:277
pubmed: 26199147
Matern Child Nutr. 2015 Dec;11 Suppl 3:55-72
pubmed: 26778802
Med Care Res Rev. 2011 Feb;68(1):3-33
pubmed: 20675353
Patient Educ Couns. 2010 Nov;81(2):235-44
pubmed: 20189747
JMIR Res Protoc. 2013 Jun 24;2(1):e21
pubmed: 23796508
Support Care Cancer. 2012 Jan;20(1):75-85
pubmed: 21311915
Transl Behav Med. 2019 Nov 25;9(6):1057-1064
pubmed: 30535343
Ann Fam Med. 2013 May-Jun;11 Suppl 1:S115-23
pubmed: 23690380
Cancer. 2016 Apr 1;122(7):1009-16
pubmed: 26848927
J Cancer Surviv. 2012 Sep;6(3):239-50
pubmed: 22457219
J Behav Health Serv Res. 2017 Apr;44(2):177-194
pubmed: 26289563
BMJ. 2019 Jan 24;364:k5267
pubmed: 30679170
Support Care Cancer. 2017 Jul;25(7):2229-2239
pubmed: 28261754
Cancer. 2019 Nov 15;125(22):4059-4068
pubmed: 31373682
JAMA Psychiatry. 2019 Jan 1;76(1):3-4
pubmed: 30427985
J Biomed Inform. 2005 Feb;38(1):75-87
pubmed: 15694887
Am J Public Health. 2011 Nov;101(11):2059-67
pubmed: 21940916
Health Educ Behav. 2019 Feb;46(1):32-39
pubmed: 30227078
Qual Life Res. 2021 Nov;30(11):3015-3033
pubmed: 32651805
Cancer. 2013 Jan 1;119(1):201-14
pubmed: 22744865
Implement Sci. 2016 May 17;11:72
pubmed: 27189233
Ann Oncol. 2015 Sep;26(9):1846-1858
pubmed: 25888610
Support Care Cancer. 2021 Aug;29(8):4693-4704
pubmed: 33511477
J Clin Epidemiol. 2015 Sep;68(9):1085-92
pubmed: 25962972
Ann Fam Med. 2006 Mar-Apr;4(2):124-31
pubmed: 16569715
Support Care Cancer. 2016 Jul;24(7):3047-56
pubmed: 26887586
Front Public Health. 2019 Jan 22;7:3
pubmed: 30723713
Cancer. 2019 Apr 15;125(8):1350-1356
pubmed: 30620401
Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes. 2015;109(2):103-14
pubmed: 26028447
BMC Health Serv Res. 2019 Mar 25;19(1):189
pubmed: 30909897
BMC Health Serv Res. 2020 Jun 29;20(1):591
pubmed: 32600396
Syst Rev. 2018 May 5;7(1):72
pubmed: 29729669
J Adolesc Young Adult Oncol. 2011 Sep;1(3):145-51
pubmed: 26811924
Implement Sci. 2015 Sep 28;10:135
pubmed: 26416206
Implement Res Pract. 2021 Jan-Dec;2:
pubmed: 34056611
J Adolesc Young Adult Oncol. 2017 Dec;6(4):519-523
pubmed: 28605222
J Clin Oncol. 2014 May 10;32(14):1480-501
pubmed: 24711559
BMC Health Serv Res. 2018 Mar 27;18(1):209
pubmed: 29580251
Qual Health Res. 2016 Aug;26(10):1382-92
pubmed: 26667882
BMJ. 2000 Dec 2;321(7273):1400-2
pubmed: 11099288
Psychooncology. 2014 Nov;23(11):1267-75
pubmed: 24664958
Health Care Anal. 2010 Dec;18(4):389-401
pubmed: 20063197
Qual Life Res. 2020 Feb;29(2):347-355
pubmed: 31606809