Comparing two implementation strategies for implementing and sustaining a case management practice serving homeless-experienced veterans: a protocol for a type 3 hybrid cluster-randomized trial

Sonya Gabrielian, Erin P Finley, David A Ganz, Jenny M Barnard, Nicholas J Jackson, Ann Elizabeth Montgomery, Richard E Nelson, Kristina M Cordasco, Sonya Gabrielian, Erin P Finley, David A Ganz, Jenny M Barnard, Nicholas J Jackson, Ann Elizabeth Montgomery, Richard E Nelson, Kristina M Cordasco

Abstract

Background: The Veterans Health Administration (VA) Grant and Per Diem case management "aftercare" program provides 6 months of case management for homeless-experienced veterans (HEVs) undergoing housing transitions. To standardize and improve aftercare services, we will implement critical time intervention (CTI), an evidence-based, structured, and time-limited case management practice. We will use two strategies to support the implementation and sustainment of CTI at 32 aftercare sites, conduct a mixed-methods evaluation of this implementation initiative, and generate a business case analysis and implementation playbook to support the continued spread and sustainment of CTI in aftercare.

Methods: We will use the Replicating Effective Programs (REP) implementation strategy to support CTI implementation at 32 sites selected by our partners. Half (n=16) of these sites will also receive 9 months of external facilitation (EF, enhanced REP). We will conduct a type 3 hybrid cluster-randomized trial to compare the impacts of REP versus enhanced REP. We will cluster potential sites into three implementation cohorts staggered in 9-month intervals. Within each cohort, we will use permuted block randomization to balance key site characteristics among sites receiving REP versus enhanced REP; sites will not be blinded to their assigned strategy. We will use mixed methods to assess the impacts of the implementation strategies. As fidelity to CTI influences its effectiveness, fidelity to CTI is our primary outcome, followed by sustainment, quality metrics, and costs. We hypothesize that enhanced REP will have higher costs than REP alone, but will result in stronger CTI fidelity, sustainment, and quality metrics, leading to a business case for enhanced REP. This work will lead to products that will support our partners in spreading and sustaining CTI in aftercare.

Discussion: Implementing CTI within aftercare holds the potential to enhance HEVs' housing and health outcomes. Understanding effective strategies to support CTI implementation could assist with a larger CTI roll-out within aftercare and support the implementation of other case management practices within and outside VA.

Trial registration: This project was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov as "Implementing and sustaining Critical Time Intervention in case management programs for homeless-experienced Veterans." Trial registration NCT05312229 , registered April 4, 2022.

Keywords: Case management; Facilitation; Homeless veterans; Implementation science; Replicating effective programs.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

© 2022. The Author(s).

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Conceptual framework [15, 16]
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Core components of CTI
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Replicating effective programs (REP) specified for CTI implementation in the aftercare program
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
REP vs. enhanced REP, as experienced by sites
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
Consort diagram
Fig. 6
Fig. 6
Staggered parallel clustered randomized trial design to assess implementation outcomes

References

    1. Dunn JR, Hayes MV, Hulchanski JD, Hwang SW, Potvin L. Housing as a socio-economic determinant of health: findings of a national needs, gaps and opportunities assessment. Can J Public Health. 2006;97(Suppl 3):S11-5–S12-7.
    1. Henry M, de Sousa T, Roddey C, Gayen W, Bednar TJ. The 2020 Annual Homeless Assessment Report (AHAR) to Congress. Part 1. Point-in-time estimates of Homelessness. 2021. Available at: . Accessed 1 May 2022.
    1. Department of Veterans Affairs. Department of Veterans Affairs FY 2018-2024 Strategic Plan. . Accessed 14 Apr 2021.
    1. Dixon L, Goldberg R, Iannone V, et al. Use of a critical time intervention to promote continuity of care after psychiatric inpatient hospitalization. Psychiatr Serv 2009;60(4):451-458. (In eng). 10.1176/ps.2009.60.4.451.
    1. Social Programs that Work. Evidence summary for the critical time intervention. . 2018. Accessed 25 Apr 2021.
    1. Herman D, Opler L, Felix A, Valencia E, Wyatt RJ, Susser E. A critical time intervention with mentally ill homeless men: impact on psychiatric symptoms. J Nerv Ment Dis. 2000;188(3):135–140. doi: 10.1097/00005053-200003000-00002.
    1. Herman D, Conover S, Gorroochurn P, Hinterland K, Hoepner L, Susser E. Randomized trial of critical time intervention to prevent homelessness after hospital discharge. Psychiatr Serv. 2011;62(7):713–719. doi: 10.1176/ps.62.7.pss6207_0713.
    1. Susser E, Valencia E, Conover S, Felix A, Tsai WY, Wyatt RJ. Preventing recurrent homelessness among mentally ill men: a "critical time" intervention after discharge from a shelter. Am J Public Health. 1997;87(2):256–262. doi: 10.2105/ajph.87.2.256.
    1. Ponka D, Agbata E, Kendall C, et al. The effectiveness of case management interventions for the homeless, vulnerably housed and persons with lived experience: a systematic review. PLoS One. 2020;15(4):e0230896. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0230896.
    1. Casey R, Clark C, Smits P, Peters R. Application of implementation science for homeless interventions. Am J Public Health 2013;103 Suppl 2(Suppl 2):S183-S184. (In eng). 10.2105/ajph.2013.301729.
    1. Watson DP, Young J, Ahonen E, et al. Development and testing of an implementation strategy for a complex housing intervention: protocol for a mixed methods study. Implement Sci. 2014;9:138. doi: 10.1186/s13012-014-0138-4.
    1. Kilbourne AM, Neumann MS, Pincus HA, Bauer MS, Stall R. Implementing evidence-based interventions in health care: application of the replicating effective programs framework. Implement Sci. 2007;2:42. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-2-42.
    1. Curran GM, Bauer M, Mittman BS, Pyne JM, Stetler C. Effectiveness-implementation hybrid designs: combining elements of clinical effectiveness and implementation research to enhance public health impact. Medical Care. 2012;50(3):217–226. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e3182408812.
    1. Smith JD, Li DH, Rafferty MR. The Implementation Research Logic Model: a method for planning, executing, reporting, and synthesizing implementation projects. Implementation Science. 2020;15(1):84. doi: 10.1186/s13012-020-01041-8.
    1. 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. Implementation Science. 2009;4(1):50. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-4-50.
    1. Proctor E, Silmere H, Raghavan R, et al. Outcomes for implementation research: conceptual distinctions, measurement challenges, and research agenda. Adm Policy Ment Health. 2011;38(2):65–76. doi: 10.1007/s10488-010-0319-7.
    1. Connecticut Coalition to End Homelessness. Critical time intervention/rapid re-housing pilot. . Accessed 20 Apr 2021.
    1. . Housing Transitions QUERI. 6.10.2022.
    1. Lessard S, Bareil C, Lalonde L, et al. External facilitators and interprofessional facilitation teams: a qualitative study of their roles in supporting practice change. Implement Sci. 2016;11:97. doi: 10.1186/s13012-016-0458-7.
    1. Hamilton AB, Farmer MM, Moin T, et al. Enhancing Mental and Physical Health of Women through Engagement and Retention (EMPOWER): a protocol for a program of research. Implementation Science. 2017;12(1):127. doi: 10.1186/s13012-017-0658-9.
    1. Kilbourne AM, Almirall D, Goodrich DE, et al. Enhancing outreach for persons with serious mental illness: 12-month results from a cluster randomized trial of an adaptive implementation strategy. Implement Sci. 2014;9:163. doi: 10.1186/s13012-014-0163-3.
    1. de Vet R, Lako DA, Beijersbergen MD, et al. Critical time intervention for people leaving shelters in the Netherlands: assessing fidelity and exploring facilitators and barriers. Adm Policy Ment Health. 2017;44(1):67–80. doi: 10.1007/s10488-015-0699-9.
    1. Brown CH, Curran G, Palinkas LA, et al. An overview of research and evaluation designs for dissemination and implementation. Annu Rev Public Health. 2017;38:1–22. doi: 10.1146/annurev-publhealth-031816-044215.
    1. Slaughter SE, Hill JN, Snelgrove-Clarke E. What is the extent and quality of documentation and reporting of fidelity to implementation strategies: a scoping review. Implement Sci. 2015;10:129. doi: 10.1186/s13012-015-0320-3.
    1. Finley EP, Huynh AK, Farmer MM, et al. Periodic reflections: a method of guided discussions for documenting implementation phenomena. BMC Medical Research Methodology. 2018;18(1):153. doi: 10.1186/s12874-018-0610-y.
    1. Mascayano F, Alvarado R, Andrews HF, et al. Implementing the protocol of a pilot randomized controlled trial for the recovery-oriented intervention to people with psychoses in two Latin American cities. Cad Saude Publica. 2019;35(4):e00108018. doi: 10.1590/0102-311X00108018.
    1. Conover S, Levitt A. CTI intervention self-assessment form. New York; 2015.
    1. Health Economics Resource Center (HERC). Managerial Cost Accounting. . Accessed 1 June 2021.
    1. Manning WG, Mullahy J. Estimating log models: to transform or not to transform? Journal of Health Economics. 2001;20(4):461–494. doi: 10.1016/S0167-6296(01)00086-8.
    1. Palinkas LA, Horwitz SM, Green CA, Wisdom JP, Duan N, Hoagwood K. Purposeful sampling for qualitative data collection and analysis in mixed method implementation research. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research. 2015;42(5):533–544. doi: 10.1007/s10488-013-0528-y.
    1. Abraham TH, Finley EP, Drummond KL, et al. A method for developing trustworthiness and preserving richness of qualitative data during team-based analysis of large data sets. American Journal of Evaluation. 2021;42(1):139–156. doi: 10.1177/1098214019893784.
    1. Dye JF, Schatz IM, Rosenberg BA, Coleman ST. Constant comparison method: a kaleidoscope of data. The Qualitative Report. 2000;4(1):1–10. doi: 10.46743/2160-3715/2000.2090.
    1. Boustani MA, van der Marck MA, Adams N, et al. Developing the agile implementation playbook for integrating evidence-based health care services into clinical practice. Acad Med. 2019;94(4). .
    1. Sharp A, Nguyen H, Hahn E, et al. A3-1: the just do it playbook for implementation science. Clin Med Res 2014;12(1-2):90-90. (In eng). 10.3121/cmr.2014.1250.a3-1.
    1. Wine B, Osborne MR, Newcomb ET. On turnover in human services. Behav Anal Pract. 2020;13(2):492–501. doi: 10.1007/s40617-019-00399-6.

Source: PubMed

스폰서 및 공동 작업자

건강 상태

약물 개입

3
구독하다