Using the RE-AIM framework to evaluate the implementation of scaling-up the Friendship Bench in Zimbabwe - a quantitative observational study.
Friendship Bench
Low- and middle-income countries
Mental health
RE-AIM
common mental disorders (CMD)
implementation evaluation
scale up
sub-Saharan Africa
Journal
BMC health services research
ISSN: 1472-6963
Titre abrégé: BMC Health Serv Res
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101088677
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
22 Nov 2022
22 Nov 2022
Historique:
received:
06
04
2022
accepted:
30
10
2022
entrez:
24
11
2022
pubmed:
25
11
2022
medline:
26
11
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
This study aimed to evaluate the real-world implementation of the Friendship Bench (FB) - an evidence-based brief psychological intervention delivered by community health workers (CHWs) - three years after its implementation in three city health departments in Zimbabwe. Implementation sites were evaluated according to their current performance using the RE-AIM framework making this one of the first evaluations of a scaled-up evidence-based psychological intervention in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). Using the RE-AIM guide ( www.re-aim.org ), the authors designed quantitative indicators based on existing FB implementation data. Thirty-six primary health care clinics (PHC) in Harare (n=28), Chitungwiza (n=4) and Gweru (n=4) were included. Among these clinics 20 were large comprehensive health care centers, 7 medium (mostly maternal and child healthcare) and 9 small clinics (basic medical care and acting as referral clinic). Existing data from these clinics, added to additionally collected data through interviews and field observations were used to investigate and compare the performance of the FB across clinics. The focus was on the RE-AIM domains of Reach, Adoption, and Implementation. Small clinics achieved 34% reach, compared to large (15%) and medium clinics (9%). Adoption was high in all clinic types, ranging from 59% to 71%. Small clinics led the implementation domain with 53%, followed by medium sized clinics 43% and large clinics 40%. Small clinics performed better in all indicators and differences in performance between small and large clinics were significant. Program activity and data quality depends on ongoing support for delivering agents and buy-in from health authorities. The Friendship Bench program was implemented over three years transitioning from a research-based implementation program to one led locally. The Reach domain showed the largest gap across clinics where larger clinics performed poorly relative to smaller clinics and should be a target for future implementation improvements. Program data needs to be integrated into existing health information systems. Future studies should seek to optimize scale-up and sustainment strategies to maintain effective task-shared psychological interventions in SSA.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
This study aimed to evaluate the real-world implementation of the Friendship Bench (FB) - an evidence-based brief psychological intervention delivered by community health workers (CHWs) - three years after its implementation in three city health departments in Zimbabwe. Implementation sites were evaluated according to their current performance using the RE-AIM framework making this one of the first evaluations of a scaled-up evidence-based psychological intervention in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA).
METHODS
METHODS
Using the RE-AIM guide ( www.re-aim.org ), the authors designed quantitative indicators based on existing FB implementation data. Thirty-six primary health care clinics (PHC) in Harare (n=28), Chitungwiza (n=4) and Gweru (n=4) were included. Among these clinics 20 were large comprehensive health care centers, 7 medium (mostly maternal and child healthcare) and 9 small clinics (basic medical care and acting as referral clinic). Existing data from these clinics, added to additionally collected data through interviews and field observations were used to investigate and compare the performance of the FB across clinics. The focus was on the RE-AIM domains of Reach, Adoption, and Implementation.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Small clinics achieved 34% reach, compared to large (15%) and medium clinics (9%). Adoption was high in all clinic types, ranging from 59% to 71%. Small clinics led the implementation domain with 53%, followed by medium sized clinics 43% and large clinics 40%. Small clinics performed better in all indicators and differences in performance between small and large clinics were significant. Program activity and data quality depends on ongoing support for delivering agents and buy-in from health authorities.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
The Friendship Bench program was implemented over three years transitioning from a research-based implementation program to one led locally. The Reach domain showed the largest gap across clinics where larger clinics performed poorly relative to smaller clinics and should be a target for future implementation improvements. Program data needs to be integrated into existing health information systems. Future studies should seek to optimize scale-up and sustainment strategies to maintain effective task-shared psychological interventions in SSA.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36419089
doi: 10.1186/s12913-022-08767-9
pii: 10.1186/s12913-022-08767-9
pmc: PMC9682765
doi:
Types de publication
Observational Study
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1392Subventions
Organisme : Medical Research Council
ID : MR/S004270/1
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : GACD MRC
ID : MRC UKRI MR/S004270/1.
Informations de copyright
© 2022. The Author(s).
Références
AIDS. 2020 Jun 1;34(7):1065-1074
pubmed: 32287060
Implement Sci. 2015 Apr 21;10:53
pubmed: 25895742
Hum Resour Health. 2016 Sep 06;14(1):54
pubmed: 27601052
Am J Public Health. 2013 Jun;103(6):e38-46
pubmed: 23597377
Annu Rev Clin Psychol. 2018 May 7;14:185-208
pubmed: 29401043
Glob Ment Health (Camb). 2020 Mar 02;7:e7
pubmed: 32346482
BMC Health Serv Res. 2018 Mar 13;18(1):177
pubmed: 29534729
Acta Psychiatr Scand. 1997 Jun;95(6):469-75
pubmed: 9242841
J Clin Child Adolesc Psychol. 2016 Nov-Dec;45(6):812-826
pubmed: 26566999
BMJ Open. 2021 Sep 13;11(9):e045481
pubmed: 34518246
Implement Sci. 2016 Jan 29;11:12
pubmed: 26821910
Epidemiol Psychiatr Sci. 2018 Feb;27(1):11-21
pubmed: 28965528
Am J Public Health. 2007 Apr;97(4):641-7
pubmed: 17329665
BMC Public Health. 2011 Oct 26;11:828
pubmed: 22029430
BMC Psychiatry. 2011 Sep 30;11:156
pubmed: 21961801
Am J Prev Med. 2006 Jan;30(1):67-73
pubmed: 16414426
Depress Anxiety. 2018 Mar;35(3):195-208
pubmed: 29356216
Eval Health Prof. 2006 Mar;29(1):126-53
pubmed: 16510882
BMC Health Serv Res. 2019 Mar 25;19(1):189
pubmed: 30909897
Int J Ment Health Syst. 2016 May 11;10:39
pubmed: 27175215
J Am Board Fam Med. 2018 Jan-Feb;31(1):139-150
pubmed: 29330248
PLoS One. 2020 May 6;15(5):e0231872
pubmed: 32374724
Implement Sci. 2014 Aug 28;9:96
pubmed: 25163664
J Community Psychol. 2020 May;48(4):1163-1177
pubmed: 31970812
Int J MS Care. 2014 Winter;16(4):192-7
pubmed: 25694778
BMC Psychol. 2015 Sep 16;3:32
pubmed: 26376626
Transcult Psychiatry. 2020 Feb;57(1):161-172
pubmed: 31180824
Epidemiol Psychiatr Sci. 2020 May 11;29:e127
pubmed: 32389151
JAMA. 2016 Dec 27;316(24):2618-2626
pubmed: 28027368
Ann Behav Med. 2004 Feb;27(1):3-12
pubmed: 14979858
Afr J Prim Health Care Fam Med. 2017 May 29;9(1):e1-e10
pubmed: 28582996
World Psychiatry. 2010 Oct;9(3):169-76
pubmed: 20975864
Implement Sci Commun. 2020 Apr 28;1:40
pubmed: 32885197