» Back to Table of Contents
The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)
has been a forerunner in the development,
promotion, and implementation of
evidence-based practices (EBPs) through
innovative research initiatives, guidelines,
quality improvement efforts, and programs
designed to advance implementation science.
Effective implementation typically involves
a focus on adopting multi-component
clinical innovations or programs tailored
to individual settings, application of diverse
implementation strategies to support
adoption, and involvement of multiple
stakeholders.
Implementation facilitation (IF) has
been widely used in many health care
organizations to support clinical innovation
implementation. In its simplest form, IF
is a process of interactive problem solving
and support that occurs in the context
of a recognized need for improvement
and a supportive interpersonal
relationship. However, IF can also be
a complex, multi-faceted strategy that
addresses implementation challenges
by incorporating many implementation
interventions, including identification of
and engagement with key stakeholders, i.e.,
opinion leaders and clinical champions,
at all organizational levels; problem
identification and resolution; assistance
with technical issues; development of
information exchange networks; academic
detailing; marketing; staff training; patient
education; formative evaluation, audit and
feedback; and fostering role modeling.
Although facilitation has been used in
many disciplines, the tenets of IF in health
care arose from the education and nursing
disciplines and acknowledge the fact that,
while research evidence that supports a given
program or practice is important, clinical
experience and professional knowledge
provide additional evidence that directly
affects the adoption of a practice. For
example, the experiences of a colleague who
has successfully used the program or practice
may be more important to a provider than a
journal article. In addition, factors within the
implementation setting or context influence
practice adoption. Thus, the organizational
structure, leadership support, prior
experience in new practice implementation,
and methods of communication directly
influence implementation efforts. Finally,
characteristics of the EBP or innovation
being implemented influence uptake.
Implementation facilitation provides a
mechanism to address factors that may
impede uptake of the innovation, whether
they are associated with those receiving
the innovation, the context within which
the innovation is being implemented, or
characteristics of the innovation.
Facilitation involves helping rather than
telling. Establishing a partnership based
on mutual respect with stakeholders in
the implementation setting is critical to
successful facilitation activities. It is not a
process of providing resources and stepping
back or simply telling someone what to do.
Rather, facilitation requires the creation
of a supportive environment within which
knowledge can be exchanged, barriers to
implementation identified, and processes to
overcome those barriers developed, applied,
and refined. Implementation facilitation
also involves both doing and enabling. At
times, facilitation involves doing something
for the organization or its stakeholders. For
example, facilitators may provide education
or monitor uptake of the innovation
through an audit of electronic clinical data
and feeding this information back to clinical
providers. At other times, they may help
and enable clinical providers to provide education
or feedback to others. Although facilitation
of each implementation effort has
its own purpose and goals, ultimately, the
overall purpose of facilitation is to provide
the help and support needed to improve
clinical care and patient outcomes.
Implementation facilitation has been
successfully applied in several national
initiatives. Kirchner, et al. tested the effectiveness
of an IF strategy to implement
Primary Care—Mental Health Integration
(PC-MHI) at eight VA sites—both rural
Community Based Outpatient Clinics and
VA Medical Centers—identified by network
leadership as being unable to implement
the program without assistance. The
IF strategy included an external facilitator
and a network-level internal facilitator.
This strategy was effective compared to
support provided in the national rollout
of PC-MHI and was later adopted by the
VA Office of Mental Health Operations to
support the implementation of PC-MHI as
well as evidence-based psychotherapies.1,2
Kilbourne, et al, applied a much less intensive
model of virtual external facilitation
to re-engage Veterans with severe mental
illness that had been lost to VA care,
which also showed increased effectiveness
compared to standard national rollout
support.3 Thus, IF intensity and "dose"
may vary based on the clinical innovation,
innovation users, and the local context.
As noted by others, the rollout of clinical
initiatives applying IF must include sufficient
resources to support this strategy. Thus, it is
critical that researchers document resources
used in IF trials so that VA leadership can
make informed decisions when designing
clinical innovation implementation.
- Kirchner JE et al. "Outcomes of a Partnered Facilitation
Strategy to Implement Primary Care-Mental
Health," Journal of General Internal Medicine 2014;
29 Suppl 4:904-12.
- Ritchie MJ et al. "Responding to Needs of Clinical
Operations Partners: Transferring Implementation
Facilitation Knowledge and Skills," Psychiatric
Services 2014; 65(2):141-3.
- Kilbourne A et al. "Enhancing Outreach for Persons
with Serious Mental Illness: 12-Month Results
from a Cluster Randomized Trial of an Adaptive
Implementation Strategy," Implementation Science
2014; 9:163.
|