Implementation Methods and Research for a Post-truth World with Growing Inequities.

The purpose of this article is to consider the changing context for implementation research and practice and new approaches which might now be more relevant for some implementation objectives. Factors that hindered implementation of evidence-based practices before the COVID-19 pandemic was an anti-science culture, strengthened by different media and appeals to emotion and identity. The article questions how effective are the rational-cognitive and individual models of change that frequency informs our research and practice. It describes challenges we face and considers methods we could use that might be more effective, including research-informed narrative methods, participatory research and practice, especially with culturally and linguistically diverse peoples, and adaptive implementation.

Recognizing and Responding to Anti-Science in Environmental and Public Health Research and Practice.

This perspectives article considers the challenges posed by anti-science and how we can use research to respond more effectively. In public health, the challenges were more visible and the impact more serious during the COVID-19 pandemic. In part, this was due to a more organized anti-science and effective use of narrative methods. Regarding climate change, the role of anti-science represents a critical issue, but perhaps more recognized in environmental research and practice. The article draws on a narrative review to show some of the research into the nature of anti-science and the challenges it poses. It proposes that, as researchers, practitioners, and educationalists, we can be more effective if we make more use of recent research in the sciences of communications, behavior, and implementation, and shows some of the resources we can use to help our work be more relevant in the new era in which we are living.

Aligning quality improvement efforts and policy goals in a national integrated health system.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the design and impact of a systematic, enterprise-wide process for engaging US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) leadership in prioritizing scarce implementation and evaluation resources. DATA SOURCES: From 2017 to 2021, the VA Quality Enhancement Research Initiative (QUERI) identified priorities from local, regional, and national leaders through qualitative discussions and a national survey and tracked impacts via reports generated from competitively funded initiatives addressing these priorities. STUDY DESIGN: Guided by the Learning Health System framework and QUERI Implementation Roadmap, QUERI engaged stakeholders to nominate and rank-order priorities, peer-reviewed and funded initiatives to scale up and spread evidence-based practices (EBPs) using theory-based implementation strategies, and evaluated the impact of these initiatives using the QUERI Impact Framework. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: QUERI collected priority nominations through qualitative discussions and a web-based survey, and live voting was used to rank-order priorities. QUERI-funded teams regularly submitted progress reports describing the key activities, findings, and impacts of the quality improvement (QI) initiatives using a standardized form created in the VA Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap). PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: QUERI launched five QI initiatives to address priorities selected by VA leadership. In partnership with 28 health system leaders, these initiatives are implementing 10 EBPs across 53 sites, supporting 1055 VA employees in delivering evidence-based care. The success of these initiatives led to an expansion of QUERI's process to address 2021 VA leadership priorities: virtual care, health disparities, delayed or suppressed care due to COVID-19, employee burnout, long-term and home care options, and quality and cost of community care. CONCLUSIONS: QUERI, a unique program embedded in a national integrated health system, deployed a novel approach to inform policy making and enhance the real-world impact of research through prioritization of limited resources, rigorous peer-review, and assessment of impacts on the health system, employees, and Veterans.

Combining Improvement and Implementation Sciences and Practices for the Post COVID-19 Era.

Health services made many changes quickly in response to the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Many more are being made. Some changes were already evaluated, and there are rigorous research methods and frameworks for evaluating their local implementation and effectiveness. But how useful are these methods for evaluating changes where evidence of effectiveness is uncertain, or which need adaptation in a rapidly changing situation? Has implementation science provided implementers with tools for effective implementation of changes that need to be made quickly in response to the demands of the pandemic? This perspectives article describes how parts of the research and practitioner communities can use and develop a combination of implementation and improvement to enable faster and more effective change in the future, especially where evidence of local effectiveness is limited. We draw on previous reviews about the advantages and disadvantages of combining these two domains of knowledge and practice. We describe a generic digitally assisted rapid cycle testing (DA-RCT) approach that combines elements of each in order to better describe a change, monitor outcomes, and make adjustments to the change when implemented in a dynamic environment.

Implementation researchers can improve the responses of services to the COVID-19 pandemic.

This article describes a rapid implementation research project with the Stockholm health care system to assist the system to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic. It uses this example to illustrate some ways in which implementation research and knowledge can contribute to improving service responses to the pandemic and its consequences as these evolve over the coming months. A sub-specialty of rapid implementation science is proposed to provide practical assistance and as one way to develop implementation research. PLAIN LANGUAGE ABSTRACT: This article describes a rapid implementation research project with the Stockholm health care system to assist the system to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic. It uses this example to illustrate some ways in which implementation research and knowledge can contribute to improving service responses to the pandemic and its consequences as these evolve over the coming months. A sub-specialty of rapid implementation science is proposed to provide practical assistance and as one way to develop implementation research.

Management of the emergency response to the SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) outbreak in Stockholm, Sweden, and winter preparations.

INTRODUCTION Sweden is unique in adopting a 'no-lockdown' public health approach to the SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) outbreak. There were fears that health services would not be able to care for high numbers of COVID-19 patients. AIM To describe and review the emergency response of a public primary and community health-care organisation in Stockholm, Sweden, to the demand for care for COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 patients during March-July 2020, and summarise preparations for the months to follow. METHODS This was a rapid implementation action research case study, which also draws on one author's experience as Chief Executive Officer and other members' experience in an emergency management group. RESULTS Sweden experienced similar mortality per million population to the UK, despite the different public health strategy used to address the COVID-19 outbreak. The Stockholm-integrated public primary and community health-care service, serving a population of 2.3 million, made many changes quickly. One change included coordinating non-acute private health-care services, following the local government emergency directive to do so. DISCUSSION It is possible that the fast and effective response by management and services in primary and community health care reduced infection and hospital demand, which contributed to a lower mortality than otherwise expected. The actions and preparations described for Stockholm's response may provide ideas for other health-care systems. The partnership research approach between the Karolinska Medical University and the Region Stockholm health-care system used in this project shows that rapid research methods have advantages for both partners in an emergency situation.

Can management decentralisation resolve challenges faced by healthcare service delivery organisations? Findings for managers and researchers from a scoping review.

PURPOSE: Decentralisation of decision-making from central to lower level organisation has been proposed as a way to increase innovation and make services more responsive to local needs. The purpose of this study was to discover research that can contribute to understanding decentralisation as one strategy for resolving challenges in healthcare service delivery organisations. This scoping review provides examples and research-informed guidance for decentralisation research, planning and implementation. FINDINGS: There is limited empirical research into management decentralisation within primary and community care, but some useful frameworks for assessing and planning decentralisation. Rapid changes are being made to workforce redesign, substitution and patient co-production. Research into such 'micro-decentralisation' is not considered in the decentralisation literature. Neither is how the context of culture, systems and regulations affects implementation of this type of decentralisation. Our recent experience suggests that management decentralisation can enable fast and effective local changes to respond to the evolving Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS COV-2) pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: Decentralisation can create conditions that support innovation and improvement locally to develop primary and community care. Managers and policy makers can use an appropriate decentralisation strategy to address challenges in workforce retention and recruitment, rising care demands and expectations of patients. There are opportunities for researchers to provide actionable knowledge about changes in organisations and management which could address current challenges in healthcare.