Cargando…

School health implementation tools: a mixed methods evaluation of factors influencing their use

BACKGROUND: The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) develops tools to support implementation of evidence-based interventions for school health. To advance understanding of factors influencing the use of these implementation tools, we conducted an evaluation of state, school distric...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Leeman, Jennifer, Wiecha, Jean L., Vu, Maihan, Blitstein, Jonathan L., Allgood, Sallie, Lee, Sarah, Merlo, Caitlin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5859635/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29558964
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13012-018-0738-5
_version_ 1783307861151973376
author Leeman, Jennifer
Wiecha, Jean L.
Vu, Maihan
Blitstein, Jonathan L.
Allgood, Sallie
Lee, Sarah
Merlo, Caitlin
author_facet Leeman, Jennifer
Wiecha, Jean L.
Vu, Maihan
Blitstein, Jonathan L.
Allgood, Sallie
Lee, Sarah
Merlo, Caitlin
author_sort Leeman, Jennifer
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) develops tools to support implementation of evidence-based interventions for school health. To advance understanding of factors influencing the use of these implementation tools, we conducted an evaluation of state, school district, and local school staffs’ use of four CDC tools to support implementation of physical activity, nutrition, health education, and parent engagement. Two frameworks guided the evaluation: Interactive Systems Framework (ISF) for Dissemination and Implementation and Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). METHODS: The evaluation applied a mixed methods, cross-sectional design that included online surveys (n = 69 state staff from 43 states), phone interviews (n = 13 state staff from 6 states), and in-person interviews (n = 90 district and school staff from 8 districts in 5 states). Descriptive analyses were applied to surveys and content analysis to interviews. RESULTS: The survey found that the majority of state staff surveyed was aware of three of the CDC tools but most were knowledgeable and confident in their ability to use only two. These same two tools were the ones for which states were most likely to have provided training and technical assistance in the past year. Interviews provided insight into how tools were used and why use varied, with themes organized within the ISF domain “support strategies” (e.g., training, technical assistance) and four CFIR domains: (1) characteristics of tools, (2) inner setting, (3) outer setting, and (4) individuals. Overall, tools were valued for the credibility of their source (CDC) and evidence strength and quality. Respondents reported that tools were too complex for use by school staff. However, if tools were adaptable and compatible with inner and outer setting factors, state and district staff were willing and able to adapt tools for school use. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation tools are essential to supporting broad-scale implementation of evidence-based interventions. This study illustrates how CFIR and ISF might be applied to evaluate factors influencing tools’ use and provides recommendations for designing tools to fit within the multi-tiered systems involved in promoting, supporting, and implementing evidence-based interventions in schools. Findings have relevance for the design of implementation tools for use by other multi-tiered systems.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5859635
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-58596352018-03-22 School health implementation tools: a mixed methods evaluation of factors influencing their use Leeman, Jennifer Wiecha, Jean L. Vu, Maihan Blitstein, Jonathan L. Allgood, Sallie Lee, Sarah Merlo, Caitlin Implement Sci Research BACKGROUND: The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) develops tools to support implementation of evidence-based interventions for school health. To advance understanding of factors influencing the use of these implementation tools, we conducted an evaluation of state, school district, and local school staffs’ use of four CDC tools to support implementation of physical activity, nutrition, health education, and parent engagement. Two frameworks guided the evaluation: Interactive Systems Framework (ISF) for Dissemination and Implementation and Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). METHODS: The evaluation applied a mixed methods, cross-sectional design that included online surveys (n = 69 state staff from 43 states), phone interviews (n = 13 state staff from 6 states), and in-person interviews (n = 90 district and school staff from 8 districts in 5 states). Descriptive analyses were applied to surveys and content analysis to interviews. RESULTS: The survey found that the majority of state staff surveyed was aware of three of the CDC tools but most were knowledgeable and confident in their ability to use only two. These same two tools were the ones for which states were most likely to have provided training and technical assistance in the past year. Interviews provided insight into how tools were used and why use varied, with themes organized within the ISF domain “support strategies” (e.g., training, technical assistance) and four CFIR domains: (1) characteristics of tools, (2) inner setting, (3) outer setting, and (4) individuals. Overall, tools were valued for the credibility of their source (CDC) and evidence strength and quality. Respondents reported that tools were too complex for use by school staff. However, if tools were adaptable and compatible with inner and outer setting factors, state and district staff were willing and able to adapt tools for school use. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation tools are essential to supporting broad-scale implementation of evidence-based interventions. This study illustrates how CFIR and ISF might be applied to evaluate factors influencing tools’ use and provides recommendations for designing tools to fit within the multi-tiered systems involved in promoting, supporting, and implementing evidence-based interventions in schools. Findings have relevance for the design of implementation tools for use by other multi-tiered systems. BioMed Central 2018-03-20 /pmc/articles/PMC5859635/ /pubmed/29558964 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13012-018-0738-5 Text en © The Author(s). 2018 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Leeman, Jennifer
Wiecha, Jean L.
Vu, Maihan
Blitstein, Jonathan L.
Allgood, Sallie
Lee, Sarah
Merlo, Caitlin
School health implementation tools: a mixed methods evaluation of factors influencing their use
title School health implementation tools: a mixed methods evaluation of factors influencing their use
title_full School health implementation tools: a mixed methods evaluation of factors influencing their use
title_fullStr School health implementation tools: a mixed methods evaluation of factors influencing their use
title_full_unstemmed School health implementation tools: a mixed methods evaluation of factors influencing their use
title_short School health implementation tools: a mixed methods evaluation of factors influencing their use
title_sort school health implementation tools: a mixed methods evaluation of factors influencing their use
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5859635/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29558964
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13012-018-0738-5
work_keys_str_mv AT leemanjennifer schoolhealthimplementationtoolsamixedmethodsevaluationoffactorsinfluencingtheiruse
AT wiechajeanl schoolhealthimplementationtoolsamixedmethodsevaluationoffactorsinfluencingtheiruse
AT vumaihan schoolhealthimplementationtoolsamixedmethodsevaluationoffactorsinfluencingtheiruse
AT blitsteinjonathanl schoolhealthimplementationtoolsamixedmethodsevaluationoffactorsinfluencingtheiruse
AT allgoodsallie schoolhealthimplementationtoolsamixedmethodsevaluationoffactorsinfluencingtheiruse
AT leesarah schoolhealthimplementationtoolsamixedmethodsevaluationoffactorsinfluencingtheiruse
AT merlocaitlin schoolhealthimplementationtoolsamixedmethodsevaluationoffactorsinfluencingtheiruse