Affiliation:
1. Department of Implementation Science Wake Forest University School of Medicine Winston‐Salem North Carolina USA
2. Section of Gerontology and Geriatric Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine Wake Forest School of Medicine Winston‐Salem North Carolina USA
3. Center of Innovation to Accelerate Discovery and Practice Transformation Durham VA Health Care System Durham North Carolina USA
4. Department of Population Health Sciences Duke University School of Medicine Durham North Carolina USA
5. Department of Medicine Duke University School of Medicine Durham North Carolina USA
6. Duke‐Margolis Center for Health Policy Duke University Durham North Carolina USA
7. Department of Medicine University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Medicine Chapel Hill North Carolina USA
8. Center for the Study of Aging and Human Development Duke University School of Medicine Durham North Carolina USA
Abstract
AbstractBackgroundThere is increasing recognition of the importance of maximizing program‐setting fit in scaling and spreading effective programs. However, in the context of hospital‐based mobility programs, there is limited information on how settings could consider local context and modify program characteristics or implementation activities to enhance fit. To fill this gap, we examined site‐initiated adaptations to STRIDE, a hospital‐based mobility program for older Veterans, at eight Veterans Affairs facilities across the United States.MethodsSTRIDE was implemented at eight hospitals in a stepped‐wedge cluster randomized trial. During the pre‐implementation phase, sites were encouraged to adapt program characteristics to optimize implementation and align with their hospital's resources, needs, and culture. Recommended adaptations included those related to staffing models, marketing, and documentation. To assess the number and types of adaptations, multiple data sources were reviewed, including implementation support notes from site‐level support calls and group‐based learning collaborative sessions. Adaptations were classified based on the Framework for Reporting Adaptations and Modifications‐Enhanced (FRAME), including attention to what was adapted, when, why, and by whom. We reviewed the number and types of adaptations across sites that did and did not sustain STRIDE, defined as continued program delivery during the post‐implementation period.ResultsA total of 25 adaptations were reported and classified across seven of the eight sites. Adaptations were reported across five areas: program documentation (n = 13), patient eligibility criteria (n = 5), program enhancements (n = 3), staffing model (n = 2), and marketing and recruitment (n = 2). More than one‐half of adaptations were planned. Adaptations were common in both sustaining and non‐sustaining sites.ConclusionsAdaptations were common within a program designed with flexible implementation in mind. Identifying common areas of planned and unplanned adaptations within a flexible program such as STRIDE may contribute to more efficient and effective national scaling. Future research should evaluate the relationship between adaptations and program implementation.
Funder
U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs
Quality Enhancement Research Initiative