Use of implementation mapping to develop a multifaceted implementation strategy for an electronic prospective surveillance model for cancer rehabilitation.

Cancer survivorship Consolidated framework for implementation research Expert recommendations for implementing change Implementation mapping Implementation science Implementation strategies Knowledge to action framework Patient-reported outcomes Prospective surveillance model Rehabilitation

Journal

Implementation science communications
ISSN: 2662-2211
Titre abrégé: Implement Sci Commun
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101764360

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
01 Oct 2024
Historique:
received: 25 06 2024
accepted: 18 09 2024
revised: 23 08 2024
medline: 2 10 2024
pubmed: 2 10 2024
entrez: 1 10 2024
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Electronic Prospective Surveillance Models (ePSMs) remotely monitor the rehabilitation needs of people with cancer via patient-reported outcomes at pre-defined time points during cancer care and deliver support, including links to self-management education and community programs, and recommendations for further clinical screening and rehabilitation referrals. Previous guidance on implementing ePSMs lacks sufficient detail on approaches to select implementation strategies for these systems. The purpose of this article is to describe how we developed an implementation plan for REACH, an ePSM system designed for breast, colorectal, lymphoma, and head and neck cancers. Implementation Mapping guided the process of developing the implementation plan. We integrated findings from a scoping review and qualitative study our team conducted to identify determinants to implementation, implementation actors and actions, and relevant outcomes. Determinants were categorized using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), and the implementation outcomes taxonomy guided the identification of outcomes. Next, determinants were mapped to the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) taxonomy of strategies using the CFIR-ERIC Matching Tool. The list of strategies produced was refined through discussion amongst our team and feedback from knowledge users considering each strategy's feasibility and importance rating via the Go-Zone plot, feasibility and applicability to the clinical contexts, and use among other ePSMs reported in our scoping review. Of the 39 CFIR constructs, 22 were identified as relevant determinants. Clinic managers, information technology teams, and healthcare providers with key roles in patient education were identified as important actors. The CFIR-ERIC Matching Tool resulted in 50 strategies with Level 1 endorsement and 13 strategies with Level 2 endorsement. The final list of strategies included 1) purposefully re-examine the implementation, 2) tailor strategies, 3) change record systems, 4) conduct educational meetings, 5) distribute educational materials, 6) intervene with patients to enhance uptake and adherence, 7) centralize technical assistance, and 8) use advisory boards and workgroups. We present a generalizable method that incorporates steps from Implementation Mapping, engages various knowledge users, and leverages implementation science frameworks to facilitate the development of an implementation strategy. An evaluation of implementation success using the implementation outcomes framework is underway.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Electronic Prospective Surveillance Models (ePSMs) remotely monitor the rehabilitation needs of people with cancer via patient-reported outcomes at pre-defined time points during cancer care and deliver support, including links to self-management education and community programs, and recommendations for further clinical screening and rehabilitation referrals. Previous guidance on implementing ePSMs lacks sufficient detail on approaches to select implementation strategies for these systems. The purpose of this article is to describe how we developed an implementation plan for REACH, an ePSM system designed for breast, colorectal, lymphoma, and head and neck cancers.
METHODS METHODS
Implementation Mapping guided the process of developing the implementation plan. We integrated findings from a scoping review and qualitative study our team conducted to identify determinants to implementation, implementation actors and actions, and relevant outcomes. Determinants were categorized using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), and the implementation outcomes taxonomy guided the identification of outcomes. Next, determinants were mapped to the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) taxonomy of strategies using the CFIR-ERIC Matching Tool. The list of strategies produced was refined through discussion amongst our team and feedback from knowledge users considering each strategy's feasibility and importance rating via the Go-Zone plot, feasibility and applicability to the clinical contexts, and use among other ePSMs reported in our scoping review.
RESULTS RESULTS
Of the 39 CFIR constructs, 22 were identified as relevant determinants. Clinic managers, information technology teams, and healthcare providers with key roles in patient education were identified as important actors. The CFIR-ERIC Matching Tool resulted in 50 strategies with Level 1 endorsement and 13 strategies with Level 2 endorsement. The final list of strategies included 1) purposefully re-examine the implementation, 2) tailor strategies, 3) change record systems, 4) conduct educational meetings, 5) distribute educational materials, 6) intervene with patients to enhance uptake and adherence, 7) centralize technical assistance, and 8) use advisory boards and workgroups.
CONCLUSION CONCLUSIONS
We present a generalizable method that incorporates steps from Implementation Mapping, engages various knowledge users, and leverages implementation science frameworks to facilitate the development of an implementation strategy. An evaluation of implementation success using the implementation outcomes framework is underway.

Identifiants

pubmed: 39354649
doi: 10.1186/s43058-024-00650-4
pii: 10.1186/s43058-024-00650-4
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

108

Subventions

Organisme : Canadian Cancer Society
ID : 706699
Organisme : CIHR
ID : 02022-000
Pays : Canada

Informations de copyright

© 2024. The Author(s).

Références

Silver JK, Baima J, Mayer RS. Impairment-driven cancer rehabilitation: An essential component of quality care and survivorship. CA Cancer J Clin. 2013. https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21186 .
doi: 10.3322/caac.21186 pubmed: 23856764
Joshy G, Thandrayen J, Koczwara B, Butow P, Laidsaar-Powell R, Rankin N, et al. Disability, psychological distress and quality of life in relation to cancer diagnosis and cancer type: population-based Australian study of 22,505 cancer survivors and 244,000 people without cancer. BMC Med. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-020-01830-4 .
doi: 10.1186/s12916-020-01830-4 pubmed: 33256726 pmcid: 7708114
Neo J, Fettes L, Gao W, Higginson IJ, Maddocks M. Disability in activities of daily living among adults with cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Cancer Treat Rev. 2017;61:94–106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ctrv.2017.10.006 .
doi: 10.1016/j.ctrv.2017.10.006 pubmed: 29125982
Stout NL, Santa Mina D, Lyons KD, Robb K, Silver JK. A systematic review of rehabilitation and exercise recommendations in oncology guidelines. CA Cancer J Clin. 2020;0:1–27.
Molassiotis A, Yates P, Li Q, So WKW, Pongthavornkamol K, Pittayapan P, et al. Mapping unmet supportive care needs, quality-of-life perceptions and current symptoms in cancer survivors across the Asia-Pacific region: Results from the International STEP Study. Ann Oncol. 2017;28:2552–8.
doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdx350 pubmed: 28961835
Cancer Council Queensland. 1000 Survivor Study: A summary of Cancer Council Queensland’s Survivor Study Results. 2016. https://cancerqld.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/executive-summary-survivor-study-report.pdf
Beckjord EB, Reynolds KA, Van Londen GJ, Burns R, Singh R, Arvey SR, et al. Population-level trends in posttreatment cancer survivors concerns and associated receipt of care: Results from the 2006 and 2010 LIVESTRONG Surveys. J Psychosoc Oncol. 2014; https://doi.org/10.1080/07347332.2013.874004 .
Fitch M, Zomer S, Lockwood G, Louzado C, Shaw Moxam R, Rahal R, et al. Experiences of adult cancer survivors in transitions. Supportive Care in Cancer. 2019; https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-018-4605-3 .
Aapro M, Bossi P, Dasari A, Fallowfield L, Gascon P, Geller M, et al. Digital health for optimal supportive care in oncology: benefits, limits, and future perspectives. Support Care Cancer. 2020;28:4589–612.
doi: 10.1007/s00520-020-05539-1 pubmed: 32533435 pmcid: 7447627
Alfano CM, Pergolotti M. Next-Generation Cancer Rehabilitation: A Giant Step Forward for Patient Care. Rehabil Nurs. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1097/rnj.0000000000000174 .
doi: 10.1097/rnj.0000000000000174 pubmed: 29957695
Alfano CM, Cheville AL, Mustian K. Developing High-Quality Cancer Rehabilitation Programs: A Timely Need. Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book. 2016. https://doi.org/10.1200/EDBK_156164 .
doi: 10.1200/EDBK_156164 pubmed: 27249704
Stout NL, Binkley JM, Schmitz KH, Andrews K, Hayes SC, Campbell KL, et al. A prospective surveillance model for rehabilitation for women with breast cancer. Cancer. 2012;118:2191–200.
doi: 10.1002/cncr.27476 pubmed: 22488693
Basch E, Deal AM, Kris MG, Scher HI, Hudis CA, Sabbatini P, et al. Symptom Monitoring With Patient-Reported Outcomes During Routine Cancer Treatment: A Randomized Controlled Trial. J Clin Oncol. 2016. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2015.63.0830 .
doi: 10.1200/JCO.2015.63.0830 pubmed: 28034065 pmcid: 4872347
Maguire R, McCann L, Kotronoulas G, Kearney N, Ream E, Armes J, et al. Real time remote symptom monitoring during chemotherapy for cancer: European multicentre randomised controlled trial (eSMART). The BMJ. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n1647 .
doi: 10.1136/bmj.n1647 pubmed: 34289996 pmcid: 8479591
Absolom K, Warrington L, Hudson E, Hewison J, Morris C, Holch P, et al. Phase III Randomized Controlled Trial of eRAPID: eHealth Intervention During Chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.20.02015 .
doi: 10.1200/jco.20.02015 pubmed: 33979207 pmcid: 8331061
Di Maio M, Basch E, Denis F, Fallowfield LJ, Ganz PA, Howell D, et al. The role of patient-reported outcome measures in the continuum of cancer clinical care: ESMO Clinical Practice Guideline. Ann Oncol. 2022. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annonc.2022.04.007 .
doi: 10.1016/j.annonc.2022.04.007 pubmed: 36414192
Powell BJ, Fernandez ME, Williams NJ, Aarons GA, Beidas RS, Lewis CC, et al. Enhancing the Impact of Implementation Strategies in Healthcare: A Research Agenda. Front Public Health. 2019;7:1–9.
doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2019.00003
Colquhoun H, Grimshaw J, Wensing M. Mapping KT interventions to barriers and facilitators. In: Straus SE, Tetroe J, Graham ID eds. Knowledge Translation in Health Care. 2nd ed. Wiley-Blackwell; 2013.137–149.
Powell BJ, Beidas RS, Lewis CC, Aarons GA, McMillen JC, Proctor EK, et al. Methods to Improve the Selection and Tailoring of Implementation Strategies. J Behav Health Serv Res. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11414-015-9475-6 .
doi: 10.1007/s11414-015-9475-6 pubmed: 26289563 pmcid: 4761530
Baker R, Camosso-Stefinovic J, Gillies C, Shaw EJ, Cheater F, Flottorp S, et al. Tailored interventions to address determinants of practice. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.cd005470.pub3 .
doi: 10.1002/14651858.cd005470.pub3 pubmed: 26383887 pmcid: 9579836
Li S-A, Jeffs L, Barwick M, Stevens B. Organizational contextual features that influence the implementation of evidence-based practices across healthcare settings: a systematic integrative review. Syst Rev. 2018;7:72.
doi: 10.1186/s13643-018-0734-5 pubmed: 29729669 pmcid: 5936626
Basch E, Barbera L, Kerrigan CL, Velikova G. Implementation of Patient-Reported Outcomes in Routine Medical Care. Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book. 2018;38:122–34.
Bennett AV, Jensen RE, Basch E. Electronic patient-reported outcome systems in oncology clinical practice. CA Cancer J Clin. 2012;62:336–47.
doi: 10.3322/caac.21150
Wintner LM, Sztankay M, Riedl D, Rumpold G, Nickels A, Licht T, et al. How to implement routine electronic patient-reported outcome monitoring in oncology rehabilitation. Int J Clin Pract. 2021;75(4):e13694.
Stout NL, Alfano CM, Liu R, Dixit N, Jefford M. Implementing a Clinical Pathway for Needs Assessment and Supportive Care Interventions. JCO Oncol Pract. 2024;1–10; https://doi.org/10.1200/OP.23.00482
Straus SE, Tetroe J, Graham ID. Knowledge Translation in Health Care. 2nd ed. Straus SE, Tetroe J, Graham ID, editors. Knowledge Translation in Health Care: Moving from Evidence to Practice. Oxford, UK: Wiley-Blackwell; 2013.
Lopez CJ, Teggart K, Ahmed M, Borhani A, Kong J, Fazelzad R, et al. Implementation of electronic prospective surveillance models in cancer care: a scoping review. Implement Sci. 2023;18:11.
doi: 10.1186/s13012-023-01265-4 pubmed: 37101231 pmcid: 10134630
Lopez CJ, Jones JM, Campbell KL, Bender JL, Strudwick G, Langelier DM, et al. A pre-implementation examination of barriers and facilitators of an electronic prospective surveillance model for cancer rehabilitation: a qualitative study. BMC Health Serv Res. 2024;24:17.
doi: 10.1186/s12913-023-10445-3 pubmed: 38178095 pmcid: 10768357
Damschroder LJ, Aron DC, Keith RE, Kirsh SR, Alexander JA, Lowery JC. Fostering implementation of health services research findings into practice: a consolidated framework for advancing implementation science. Implement Sci. 2009;4:50.
doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-4-50 pubmed: 19664226 pmcid: 2736161
Powell BJ, Waltz TJ, Chinman MJ, Damschroder LJ, Smith JL, Matthieu MM, et al. A refined compilation of implementation strategies: Results from the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) project. Implementation Science [Internet]. 2015;10:21.
doi: 10.1186/s13012-015-0209-1 pubmed: 25889199
Waltz TJ, Powell BJ, Matthieu MM, Damschroder LJ, Chinman MJ, Smith JL, et al. Use of concept mapping to characterize relationships among implementation strategies and assess their feasibility and importance: Results from the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) study. Implementation Science [Internet]. 2015;10:1–8.
Stover AM, Haverman L, van Oers HA, Greenhalgh J, Potter CM, Ahmed S, et al. Using an implementation science approach to implement and evaluate patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) initiatives in routine care settings. Qual Life Res. 2021;30:3015–33.
doi: 10.1007/s11136-020-02564-9 pubmed: 32651805
Fernandez ME, ten Hoor GA, van Lieshout S, Rodriguez SA, Beidas RS, Parcel G, et al. Implementation Mapping: Using Intervention Mapping to Develop Implementation Strategies. Front Public Health. 2019;7:1–15.
doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2019.00158
Waltz TJ, Powell BJ, Fernández ME, Abadie B, Damschroder LJ. Choosing implementation strategies to address contextual barriers: Diversity in recommendations and future directions. Implement Sci. 2019;14:42.
doi: 10.1186/s13012-019-0892-4 pubmed: 31036028 pmcid: 6489173
Proctor EK, Powell BJ, McMillen JC. Implementation strategies: recommendations for specifying and reporting. Implement Sci. 2013;8:139.
doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-8-139 pubmed: 24289295 pmcid: 3882890
Fernandez ME, Powell BJ, Ten Hoor GA. Editorial: Implementation Mapping for selecting, adapting and developing implementation strategies. Front Public Health. 2023;111288726. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2023.1288726 .
Nevedal AL, Reardon CM, Opra Widerquist MA, Jackson GL, Cutrona SL, White BS, et al. Rapid versus traditional qualitative analysis using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Implementation Science. 2021;16(1):67. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-021-01111-5 .
Cane J, O’Connor D, Michie S. Validation of the theoretical domains framework for use in behaviour change and implementation research. Implement Sci. 2012;7:37.
doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-7-37 pubmed: 22530986 pmcid: 3483008
Ahmed S, Zidarov D, Eilayyan O, Visca R. Prospective application of implementation science theories and frameworks to inform use of PROMs in routine clinical care within an integrated pain network. Qual Life Res. 2021;30:3035–47.
doi: 10.1007/s11136-020-02600-8 pubmed: 32876812
Howell D, Powis M, Kirkby R, Amernic H, Moody L, Bryant-Lukosius D, et al. Improving the quality of self-management support in ambulatory cancer care: A mixed-method study of organisational and clinician readiness, barriers and enablers for tailoring of implementation strategies to multisites. BMJ Qual Saf. 2022;31:12–22.
doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2020-012051 pubmed: 33727415
Verweij L, Smit Y, Blijlevens NM, Hermens RP. A comprehensive eHealth implementation guide constructed on a qualitative case study on barriers and facilitators of the digital care platform CMyLife. BMC Health Serv Res. 2022;22:1–15.
doi: 10.1186/s12913-022-08020-3
Kennedy MA, Bayes S, Newton RU, Zissiadis Y, Spry NA, Taaffe DR, et al. We have the program, what now? Development of an implementation plan to bridge the research-practice gap prevalent in exercise oncology. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2020;17:1–11.
doi: 10.1186/s12966-020-01032-4
Wensing M, Boschan M, Grol R. The Knowledge-to-Action Cycle: Selecting KT interventions: Selecting, tailoring, and implementing knowledge translation interventions. Knowledge Translation in Health Care: Moving from Evidence to Practice. 2009.
Smith JD, Norton WE, Mitchell SA, Cronin C, Hassett MJ, Ridgeway JL, et al. The Longitudinal Implementation Strategy Tracking System (LISTS): feasibility, usability, and pilot testing of a novel method. Implement Sci Commun. 2023;4:1–13.
doi: 10.1186/s43058-023-00529-w
Balis LE, Houghtaling B. Matching barriers and facilitators to implementation strategies: recommendations for community settings. Implement Sci Commun. 2023;4:1–8. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43058-023-00532-1 .
doi: 10.1186/s43058-023-00532-1
Knapp AA, Carroll AJ, Mohanty N, Fu E, Powell BJ, Hamilton A, et al. A stakeholder-driven method for selecting implementation strategies: a case example of pediatric hypertension clinical practice guideline implementation. Implement Sci Commun. 2022;3:1–14.
doi: 10.1186/s43058-022-00276-4

Auteurs

Christian J Lopez (CJ)

Department of Supportive Care, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Christian.lopez@uhn.ca.
Institute of Medical Science, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Christian.lopez@uhn.ca.

Sarah E Neil-Sztramko (SE)

Faculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.

Mounir Tanyoas (M)

Department of Supportive Care, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Institute of Medical Science, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

Kristin L Campbell (KL)

Department of Physical Therapy, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.

Jackie L Bender (JL)

Department of Supportive Care, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

Gillian Strudwick (G)

Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

David M Langelier (DM)

Institute of Medical Science, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Department of Clinical Neurosciences, Division of PM&R, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.

Tony Reiman (T)

Department of Oncology, Saint John Regional Hospital, Saint John, New Brunswick, Canada.
Department of Biological Sciences, University of New Brunswick, Saint John, New Brunswick, Canada.

Jonathan Greenland (J)

Faculty of Medicine, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St John's, Newfoundland, Canada.
Dr. H. Bliss Murphy Cancer Centre, Eastern Health, St. John's, Newfoundland, Canada.

Jennifer M Jones (JM)

Department of Supportive Care, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Institute of Medical Science, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

Classifications MeSH