Advancing the Science of Implementation: A Workshop Summary

Original Paper

Abstract

While much has been written about reducing the gap between science and practice, relatively little progress has been made to develop a sound knowledge base underlying implementation of effective interventions. To respond to these challenges, the National Institute of Mental Health organized a workshop entitled, “Advancing the Science of Implementation: Improving the Fit between Mental Health Intervention Development and Service Systems.” Over the 2-day workshop, a multi-disciplinary group of intervention and services researchers, implementers, methodologists, organizational theorists, and clinicians was brought together in an “engaged scholarship” * format composed of small and large-group settings to discuss the development of a sound knowledge base on the implementation of evidence-based practices. Using three specific intervention categories, participants identified constructs seen to be important to the implementation of the model in real-world systems. Following each breakout session, attendees reconvened for a full group discussion and brief presentations were conducted to highlight interventions in the areas of organizational measures, social network analysis and field opportunities. This summary describes some of the constructs relevant to implementation research and presents research questions that, if studied, will lay a solid foundation for implementation research.

Keywords

Implementation science Evidence-based practices 

References

  1. Balas, E. A., & Boren, S. A. (2000). Managing clinical knowledge for health care improvement. Yearbook of medical informatics (pp. 65–70). Stuttgart: Schattauer.Google Scholar
  2. Chambers, D. A. (2007). Disseminating and implementing evidence-based practices for mental health. In M. Welch-Ross & L. Fasig (Eds.), Handbook on communicating and disseminating behavioral science. New York: Sage.Google Scholar
  3. Fitzgerald, L., Ferlie, E., Wood, M., & Hawkins, C. (1999). Evidence into practice? An exploratory analysis of the interpretation of evidence. In A. Mark & S. Dopson (Eds.), Organisational behaviour in health care. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  4. Fixsen, D. L., Naoom, S. F., Blasé, K. A., Friedman, R. M., & Wallace, F. (2005). Implementation research: A synthesis of the literature. Tampa: University of South Florida.Google Scholar
  5. Glisson, C. (2002). The organizational context of children’s mental health services. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 5(4), 233–253.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Greenhalgh, T., Robert, G., Macfarlane, F., Bate, P., & Kyriakidou, E. (2004). Diffusion of innovations in service organizations. Milbank Quarterly, 82(4), 581–629.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Gustafson, D. H., Sainfort, F., Eichler, M., Adams, L., Bisognano, M., & Steudel, H. (2003). Developing and testing a model to predict outcomes of organizational change. Health Services Research, 38(2), 751–776.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Huby, G., & Fairhurst, K. (1998). How do general practitioners use evidence? A study in the context of Lothian health policy and practitioners’ use of statin drugs. Final report to CSO, August, 1998. Edinburgh: Primary Care Research Group, Department of General Practice, The University of Edinburgh.Google Scholar
  9. Jones, L., & Wells, K. B. (2007). Strategies for academic and clinician engagement in community-participatory partnered research. JAMA, 297, 407–410.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kimberly, J. & Cook, J. M. (2007). Organizational measurement and the implementation of innovations in mental health services. AMHP & MHSR.Google Scholar
  11. Mendel, P., Meredity, L. S., Schoenbaum, M., Sherbourne, C. D., & Wells, K. B. (2007). Interventions in organizational and community context: A framework of dissemination in health services research. AMHP & MHSR.Google Scholar
  12. National Advisory Mental Health Council’s Workgroup on Services Research and Clinical Epidemiology. (2006). The road ahead: Research partnerships to transform services. Accessed on the web at: http://www.nimh.nih.gov/roadahead.pdf Rockville: National Institute of Mental Health.
  13. National Advisory Mental Health Council. (1999). Bridging science and service: A report by the National Advisory Mental Health Council’s Clinical Treatment and Services Research Workgroup. (NIH Publication No. 99-4353). Rockville: National Institute of Mental Health.Google Scholar
  14. NIH (2006). Program annoucement (PAR-07-086) Dissemination and implementation research in health (R01). Accessed on February 22, 2007 at: http://grants.nih.gov/grants/pa-files/PAR-07–086.html.
  15. President’s New Freedom Commission on Mental Health. (2003). Achieving the promise: Transforming mental health care in America. Final Report. (DHHS Pub. No. SMA-03-3832). Rockville, MD.Google Scholar
  16. Quinn, R. E., Hildebrant, H. W., Rogers, P. S., & Thompson, M. P. (1991). A competing values framework for analyzing presentational communication in management contexts. Journal of Business Communication, 28(3), 213–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Scott, J. (2000). Social network analysis. London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  18. Van de Ven, & Johnson (2005). Knowledge for theory and practice. Academy of Management Review, 31(4), 802–821.Google Scholar
  19. Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1995). Social network analysis: Methods and applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Weisz, J. R., Sandler, I. N., & Durlak, J. A. (2005). Promoting and protecting youth mental health through evidence-based prevention and treatment. American Psychologist, 60(6), 628–648.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Westen, D., & Bradley, R. (2005). Empirically supported complexity: Rethinking evidence-based practice in psychotherapy. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 14(5), 266–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Westen, D., Novotny, C. M., & Thompson-Brenner, H. J. (2004). The empirical status of empirically supported psychotherapies: Assumptions, findings, and reporting in controlled clinical trials. Psychological Bulletin, 130(4), 631–663.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Division of Services and Intervention ResearchNational Institute of Mental HealthBethesdaUSA

Personalised recommendations