Building on Strong Foundations: Deploying Enhanced Replicating Effective Programs for evidence-based prevention curriculum adaptation.

Schools frequently adopt new interventions for each new public health issue, but this is both time- and resource-intensive. Adversity exposure is an example of a pervasive public health issue that emerged during Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) with notable consequences, including an elevated risk of developing substance use disorders and mental illnesses. Adapting existing, universal, evidence-based interventions, such as the Michigan Model for HealthTM (MMH), by incorporating trauma-sensitive content is a promising approach to meet this need. We examined critical steps in promoting MMH adaptability as part of the Enhanced REP (Replicating Effective Programs) implementation strategy during the COVID-19 pandemic. We share usability testing from the 2020 to 2021 school year and describe how we apply the results to inform the group randomized trial pilot study. We applied key steps from implementation adaptation frameworks to integrate trauma-sensitive content as COVID-19 unfolded, documenting the process through field notes. We conducted initial usability testing with two teachers via interviews and used a rapid qualitative analysis approach. We conducted member checking by sharing the information with two health coordinators to validate results and inform additional curriculum refinement. We developed an adapted MMH curriculum to include trauma-sensitive content, with adaptations primarily centered on adding content, tailoring content, substituting content, and repeating/reinforcing elements across units. We designed adaptations to retain the core functional elements of MMH. Building foundational relationships and infrastructure supports opportunities to user-test intervention materials for Enhanced REP that enhance utility and relevance for populations that would most benefit. Enhanced REP is a promising strategy to use an existing evidence-based intervention to meet better the needs of youth exposed to adversity. Building on the foundations of existing evidence-based interventions, is vital to implementation success and achieving desired public health outcomes.

Schools frequently adopt new interventions for each new public health issue that may or may not be evidence-based. Concentrating efforts on supporting the effective implementation of existing, widely adopted evidence-based interventions (EBIs) in schools is an efficient and effective way to achieve their public health impact and reduce implementer overload. We systematically adapted an EBI, the Michigan Model for HealthTM, to incorporate trauma-sensitive content and pilot-tested the materials with two health teachers using pre-/post-interviews to gather feedback for refinement. The implementation support professionals­regional school health coordinators­provided further insight and validation of teacher feedback on adaptations. The adaptations developed focused on maintaining the core functions that make the curriculum effective. We learned that the foundational relationships and implementation infrastructure were central to testing intervention materials in a way that would enhance utility and relevance for the student population that would most benefit. Leveraging available infrastructure and existing collaborations are vital to implementation success and achieving desired public health outcomes.

A mixed methods partner-focused cost and budget impact analysis to deploy implementation strategies for school-based prevention.

BACKGROUND: Obtaining information on implementation strategy costs and local budget impacts from multiple perspectives is essential to data-driven decision-making about resource allocation for successful evidence-based intervention delivery. This mixed methods study determines the costs and priorities of deploying Enhanced Replicating Effective Programs (REP) to implement the Michigan Model for Health™, a universal school-based prevention intervention, from key shareholder perspectives. METHODS: Our study included teachers in 8 high schools across 3 Michigan counties as part of a pilot cluster randomized trial. We used activity-based costing, mapping key Enhanced REP activities across implementation phases. We included multiple perspectives, including state agencies, regional education service agencies, lead organization, and implementers. We also conducted a budget impact analysis (BIA, assessing the potential financial impact of adopting Enhanced REP) and a scenario analysis to estimate replication and account for cost variability. We used an experimental embedded mixed methods approach, conducting semi-structured interviews and collecting field notes during the trial to expand and explain the cost data and the implications of costs across relevant perspectives. RESULTS: Based on trial results, we estimate costs for deploying Enhanced REP are $11,903/school, with an estimated range between $8263/school and $15,201/school. We estimate that adding four additional schools, consistent with the pilot, would cost $8659/school. Qualitative results indicated misalignment in school and teacher priorities in some cases. Implementation activities, including training and implementation facilitation with the health coordinator, were sometimes in addition to regular teaching responsibilities. The extent to which this occurred was partly due to leadership priorities (e.g., sticking to the district PD schedule) and organizational priorities (e.g., budget). CONCLUSIONS: Previous research findings indicate that, from a societal perspective, universal prevention is an excellent return on investment. However, notable misalignment in cost burden and priorities exists across shareholder groups. Our results indicate significant personal time costs by teachers when engaging in implementation strategy activities that impose an opportunity cost. Additional strategies are needed to improve the alignment of costs and benefits to enhance the success and sustainability of implementation. We focus on those perspectives informed by the analysis and discuss opportunities to expand a multi-level focus and create greater alignment across perspectives. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04752189. Registered on 12 February 2021.

Michigan Model for HealthTM Learning to Enhance and Adapt for Prevention (Mi-LEAP): protocol of a pilot randomized trial comparing Enhanced Replicating Effective Programs versus standard implementation to deliver an evidence-based drug use prevention curriculum.

BACKGROUND: School-based drug use prevention programs have demonstrated notable potential to reduce the onset and escalation of drug use, including among youth at risk of poor outcomes such as those exposed to trauma. Researchers have found a robust relationship between intervention fidelity and participant (i.e., student) outcomes. Effective implementation of evidence-based interventions, such as the Michigan Model for HealthTM (MMH), is critical to achieving desired public health objectives. Yet, a persistent gap remains in what we know works and how to effectively translate these findings into routine practice. The objective of this study is to design and test a multi-component implementation strategy to tailor MMH to meet population needs (i.e., students exposed to trauma), and improve the population-context fit to enhance fidelity and effectiveness. METHODS: Using a 2-group, mixed-method randomized controlled trial design, this study will compare standard implementation versus Enhanced Replicating Effective Programs (REP) to deliver MMH. REP is a theoretically based implementation strategy that promotes evidence-based intervention (EBI) fidelity through a combination of EBI curriculum packaging, training, and as-needed technical assistance and is consistent with standard MMH implementation. Enhanced REP will tailor the intervention and training to integrate trauma-informed approaches and deploy customized implementation support (i.e., facilitation). The research will address the following specific aims: (1) design and test an implementation strategy (Enhanced REP) to deliver the MMH versus standard implementation and evaluate feasibility, acceptability, and appropriateness using mixed methods, (2) estimate the costs and cost-effectiveness of Enhanced REP to deliver MMH versus standard implementation. DISCUSSION: This research will design and test a multi-component implementation strategy focused on enhancing the fit between the intervention and population needs while maintaining fidelity to MMH core functions. We focus on the feasibility of deploying the implementation strategy bundle and costing methods and preliminary information on cost input distributions. The substantive focus on youth at heightened risk of drug use and its consequences due to trauma exposure is significant because of the public health impact of prevention. Pilot studies of implementation strategies are underutilized and can provide vital information on designing and testing effective strategies by addressing potential design and methods uncertainties and the effects of the implementation strategy on implementation and student outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT04752189-registered on 8 February 2021 on ClinicalTrials.gov PRS.

Implementing a State-Adopted High School Health Curriculum: A Case Study.

BACKGROUND: The Michigan Model for Health™ (MMH) is the official health curriculum for the State of Michigan and prevailing policy and practice has encouraged its adoption. Delivering evidence-based programs such as MMH with fidelity is essential to program effectiveness. Yet, most schools do meet state-designated fidelity requirements for implementation (delivering 80% or more of the curriculum). METHODS: We collected online survey (N = 20) and in-person interview (N = 5) data investigating fidelity and factors related to implementation of the MMH curriculum from high school health teachers across high schools in one socioeconomically challenged Michigan county and key stakeholders. RESULTS: We found that 68% of teachers did not meet state-identified standards of fidelity for curriculum delivery. Our results indicate that factors related to the context and implementation processes (eg, trainings) may be associated with fidelity. Teachers reported barriers to program delivery, including challenges with adapting the curriculum to suit their context, competing priorities, and meeting students' needs on key issues such as substance use and mental health issues. CONCLUSIONS: Multiple factors influence the fidelity of health curriculum delivery in schools serving low-income students. Investigating these factors guided by implementation science frameworks can inform use of implementation strategies to support and enhance curriculum delivery.