Cargando…

Quantitative measures used in empirical evaluations of mental health policy implementation: A systematic review

BACKGROUND: Mental health is a critical component of wellness. Public policies present an opportunity for large-scale mental health impact, but policy implementation is complex and can vary significantly across contexts, making it crucial to evaluate implementation. The objective of this study was t...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Pilar, Meagan, Jost, Eliot, Walsh-Bailey, Callie, Powell, Byron J., Mazzucca, Stephanie, Eyler, Amy, Purtle, Jonathan, Allen, Peg, Brownson, Ross C.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9924289/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37091091
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/26334895221141116
_version_ 1784887865884278784
author Pilar, Meagan
Jost, Eliot
Walsh-Bailey, Callie
Powell, Byron J.
Mazzucca, Stephanie
Eyler, Amy
Purtle, Jonathan
Allen, Peg
Brownson, Ross C.
author_facet Pilar, Meagan
Jost, Eliot
Walsh-Bailey, Callie
Powell, Byron J.
Mazzucca, Stephanie
Eyler, Amy
Purtle, Jonathan
Allen, Peg
Brownson, Ross C.
author_sort Pilar, Meagan
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Mental health is a critical component of wellness. Public policies present an opportunity for large-scale mental health impact, but policy implementation is complex and can vary significantly across contexts, making it crucial to evaluate implementation. The objective of this study was to (1) identify quantitative measurement tools used to evaluate the implementation of public mental health policies; (2) describe implementation determinants and outcomes assessed in the measures; and (3) assess the pragmatic and psychometric quality of identified measures. METHOD: Guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, Policy Implementation Determinants Framework, and Implementation Outcomes Framework, we conducted a systematic review of peer-reviewed journal articles published in 1995–2020. Data extracted included study characteristics, measure development and testing, implementation determinants and outcomes, and measure quality using the Psychometric and Pragmatic Evidence Rating Scale. RESULTS: We identified 34 tools from 25 articles, which were designed for mental health policies or used to evaluate constructs that impact implementation. Many measures lacked information regarding measurement development and testing. The most assessed implementation determinants were readiness for implementation, which encompassed training (n  =  20, 57%) and other resources (n  =  12, 34%), actor relationships/networks (n  =  15, 43%), and organizational culture and climate (n  =  11, 31%). Fidelity was the most prevalent implementation outcome (n  =  9, 26%), followed by penetration (n  =  8, 23%) and acceptability (n  =  7, 20%). Apart from internal consistency and sample norms, psychometric properties were frequently unreported. Most measures were accessible and brief, though minimal information was provided regarding interpreting scores, handling missing data, or training needed to administer tools. CONCLUSIONS: This work contributes to the nascent field of policy-focused implementation science by providing an overview of existing measurement tools used to evaluate mental health policy implementation and recommendations for measure development and refinement. To advance this field, more valid, reliable, and pragmatic measures are needed to evaluate policy implementation and close the policy-to-practice gap. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Mental health is a critical component of wellness, and public policies present an opportunity to improve mental health on a large scale. Policy implementation is complex because it involves action by multiple entities at several levels of society. Policy implementation is also challenging because it can be impacted by many factors, such as political will, stakeholder relationships, and resources available for implementation. Because of these factors, implementation can vary between locations, such as states or countries. It is crucial to evaluate policy implementation, thus we conducted a systematic review to identify and evaluate the quality of measurement tools used in mental health policy implementation studies. Our search and screening procedures resulted in 34 measurement tools. We rated their quality to determine if these tools were practical to use and would yield consistent (i.e., reliable) and accurate (i.e., valid) data. These tools most frequently assessed whether implementing organizations complied with policy mandates and whether organizations had the training and other resources required to implement a policy. Though many were relatively brief and available at little-to-no cost, these findings highlight that more reliable, valid, and practical measurement tools are needed to assess and inform mental health policy implementation. Findings from this review can guide future efforts to select or develop policy implementation measures.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9924289
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher SAGE Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-99242892023-04-20 Quantitative measures used in empirical evaluations of mental health policy implementation: A systematic review Pilar, Meagan Jost, Eliot Walsh-Bailey, Callie Powell, Byron J. Mazzucca, Stephanie Eyler, Amy Purtle, Jonathan Allen, Peg Brownson, Ross C. Implement Res Pract Review BACKGROUND: Mental health is a critical component of wellness. Public policies present an opportunity for large-scale mental health impact, but policy implementation is complex and can vary significantly across contexts, making it crucial to evaluate implementation. The objective of this study was to (1) identify quantitative measurement tools used to evaluate the implementation of public mental health policies; (2) describe implementation determinants and outcomes assessed in the measures; and (3) assess the pragmatic and psychometric quality of identified measures. METHOD: Guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, Policy Implementation Determinants Framework, and Implementation Outcomes Framework, we conducted a systematic review of peer-reviewed journal articles published in 1995–2020. Data extracted included study characteristics, measure development and testing, implementation determinants and outcomes, and measure quality using the Psychometric and Pragmatic Evidence Rating Scale. RESULTS: We identified 34 tools from 25 articles, which were designed for mental health policies or used to evaluate constructs that impact implementation. Many measures lacked information regarding measurement development and testing. The most assessed implementation determinants were readiness for implementation, which encompassed training (n  =  20, 57%) and other resources (n  =  12, 34%), actor relationships/networks (n  =  15, 43%), and organizational culture and climate (n  =  11, 31%). Fidelity was the most prevalent implementation outcome (n  =  9, 26%), followed by penetration (n  =  8, 23%) and acceptability (n  =  7, 20%). Apart from internal consistency and sample norms, psychometric properties were frequently unreported. Most measures were accessible and brief, though minimal information was provided regarding interpreting scores, handling missing data, or training needed to administer tools. CONCLUSIONS: This work contributes to the nascent field of policy-focused implementation science by providing an overview of existing measurement tools used to evaluate mental health policy implementation and recommendations for measure development and refinement. To advance this field, more valid, reliable, and pragmatic measures are needed to evaluate policy implementation and close the policy-to-practice gap. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Mental health is a critical component of wellness, and public policies present an opportunity to improve mental health on a large scale. Policy implementation is complex because it involves action by multiple entities at several levels of society. Policy implementation is also challenging because it can be impacted by many factors, such as political will, stakeholder relationships, and resources available for implementation. Because of these factors, implementation can vary between locations, such as states or countries. It is crucial to evaluate policy implementation, thus we conducted a systematic review to identify and evaluate the quality of measurement tools used in mental health policy implementation studies. Our search and screening procedures resulted in 34 measurement tools. We rated their quality to determine if these tools were practical to use and would yield consistent (i.e., reliable) and accurate (i.e., valid) data. These tools most frequently assessed whether implementing organizations complied with policy mandates and whether organizations had the training and other resources required to implement a policy. Though many were relatively brief and available at little-to-no cost, these findings highlight that more reliable, valid, and practical measurement tools are needed to assess and inform mental health policy implementation. Findings from this review can guide future efforts to select or develop policy implementation measures. SAGE Publications 2022-12-04 /pmc/articles/PMC9924289/ /pubmed/37091091 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/26334895221141116 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access page (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
spellingShingle Review
Pilar, Meagan
Jost, Eliot
Walsh-Bailey, Callie
Powell, Byron J.
Mazzucca, Stephanie
Eyler, Amy
Purtle, Jonathan
Allen, Peg
Brownson, Ross C.
Quantitative measures used in empirical evaluations of mental health policy implementation: A systematic review
title Quantitative measures used in empirical evaluations of mental health policy implementation: A systematic review
title_full Quantitative measures used in empirical evaluations of mental health policy implementation: A systematic review
title_fullStr Quantitative measures used in empirical evaluations of mental health policy implementation: A systematic review
title_full_unstemmed Quantitative measures used in empirical evaluations of mental health policy implementation: A systematic review
title_short Quantitative measures used in empirical evaluations of mental health policy implementation: A systematic review
title_sort quantitative measures used in empirical evaluations of mental health policy implementation: a systematic review
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9924289/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37091091
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/26334895221141116
work_keys_str_mv AT pilarmeagan quantitativemeasuresusedinempiricalevaluationsofmentalhealthpolicyimplementationasystematicreview
AT josteliot quantitativemeasuresusedinempiricalevaluationsofmentalhealthpolicyimplementationasystematicreview
AT walshbaileycallie quantitativemeasuresusedinempiricalevaluationsofmentalhealthpolicyimplementationasystematicreview
AT powellbyronj quantitativemeasuresusedinempiricalevaluationsofmentalhealthpolicyimplementationasystematicreview
AT mazzuccastephanie quantitativemeasuresusedinempiricalevaluationsofmentalhealthpolicyimplementationasystematicreview
AT eyleramy quantitativemeasuresusedinempiricalevaluationsofmentalhealthpolicyimplementationasystematicreview
AT purtlejonathan quantitativemeasuresusedinempiricalevaluationsofmentalhealthpolicyimplementationasystematicreview
AT allenpeg quantitativemeasuresusedinempiricalevaluationsofmentalhealthpolicyimplementationasystematicreview
AT brownsonrossc quantitativemeasuresusedinempiricalevaluationsofmentalhealthpolicyimplementationasystematicreview