000014238 001__ 14238
000014238 005__ 20241210100305.0
000014238 02470 $$2doi$$ahttps://doi.org/10.1177/26334895241297278
000014238 037__ $$aTEXTUAL
000014238 037__ $$bArticle
000014238 041__ $$aeng
000014238 245__ $$aA conceptual framework for assessing implementation strategy integrity
000014238 269__ $$a2024-12-05
000014238 336__ $$aArticle
000014238 520__ $$a<p>Background: The outcomes of planned implementation efforts have been mixed, with some applications failing to achieve the desired change or impact. While reasons for mixed findings in implementation research are multifaceted (e.g., Damschroder et al., 2009, 2022), how the implementation strategy (IS) was deployed (i.e., integrity) and its impact on the implementation outcomes of evidence-based innovations (EBIs) is under-studied and warrants further clarification.</p> <p>Method: This article builds on the IS fidelity and mechanisms of change literature to create the Implementation Strategy Integrity Framework (ISIF). The ISIF was developed by a set of implementation science researchers in the Justice Community Opioid Innovation Network seeking to document the role of implementation strategies in influencing EBI outcomes.</p> <p>Results: The authors identified four areas of documentation and measurement to examine the role of IS integrity on EBI outcomes. (a) Implementation Strategy Rigor (i.e., adherence, dose, and quality) requires those implementing the strategy/strategies to specify them, document adherence to the planned strategies, quality of execution, and any adaptations made. (b) Target User Responsiveness documents the extent and quality of targeted users’ participation in IS activities and how well the target users perform their roles in conducting actions intended by the implementation strategies. (c) Target Mechanism Activation notes to what degree the implementation strategies achieved the intended impact(s) on targeted factors that facilitate EBI use. Finally, (d) these three areas are combined with selected Inner and Outer Context variables to explain IS integrity’s potential moderating and mediating effects on EBI outcomes.</p> <p>Conclusions: A framework that can define the integrity of an IS and allow for its subsequent use as an explanatory variable in EBI outcomes is necessary for better elucidating mechanisms of action. The ISIF offers a structured approach to operationalize, measure, and evaluate the application and related impacts of implementation strategies.</p>
000014238 536__ $$oNational Institute on Drug Abuse$$cU2CDA050097
000014238 536__ $$oNational Institute on Drug Abuse$$cU01DA050442
000014238 536__ $$oNational Institute on Drug Abuse$$cUG1DA050077
000014238 536__ $$oNational Institute on Drug Abuse$$cUG1DA050070
000014238 536__ $$oNational Institute on Drug Abuse$$cUG1DA050067
000014238 536__ $$oNational Institute on Drug Abuse$$cUG1DA050074
000014238 536__ $$oNational Institute on Drug Abuse$$cUG1DA050069
000014238 536__ $$oNational Institute on Drug Abuse$$cUG1DA050065
000014238 536__ $$oNational Institute on Drug Abuse$$cUG1DA050066
000014238 536__ $$oNational Institute on Drug Abuse$$cUG1DA050071
000014238 540__ $$a<p>© The Author(s) 2024</p> <p>This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License (<a href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/" target="_blank">https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/</a>) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access page (<a href="https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage" target="_blank">https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage</a>).
000014238 542__ $$fCC BY-NC
000014238 6531_ $$aIntegrity
000014238 6531_ $$afidelity
000014238 6531_ $$aimplementation fidelity
000014238 6531_ $$aimplementation strategy fidelity
000014238 690__ $$aCrown Family School of Social Work, Policy, and Practice
000014238 691__ $$aCrown Family School of Social Work, Policy, and Practice Research Publications
000014238 7001_ $$1https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3033-416X$$2ORCID$$aMolfenter, Todd$$u University of Wisconsin–Madison
000014238 7001_ $$aDucharme, Lori$$uNational Institute on Drug Abuse
000014238 7001_ $$aStein, Lynda$$uUniversity of Rhode Island
000014238 7001_ $$aBelenko, Steven$$uTemple University
000014238 7001_ $$1https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2841-1085$$2ORCID$$aMitchell, Shannon Gwin$$uFriends Research Institute
000014238 7001_ $$1https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7208-5160$$2ORCID$$aWatson, Dennis P.$$uChestnut Health Systems
000014238 7001_ $$aAalsma, Matthew C.$$uIndiana University
000014238 7001_ $$aFriedmann, Peter D.$$uBaystate Health
000014238 7001_ $$aBecan, Jennifer E.$$uTexas Christian University
000014238 7001_ $$aGarner, Bryan R.$$uThe Ohio State University
000014238 7001_ $$aVechinski, Jessica$$uUniversity of Wisconsin–Madison
000014238 7001_ $$aBouris, Alida$$uUniversity of Chicago
000014238 7001_ $$aClaypool, Emily$$uUniversity of Chicago
000014238 7001_ $$aElkington, Kate$$uNew York State Psychiatric Institute
000014238 773__ $$tImplementation Research and Practice
000014238 8564_ $$uhttps://knowledge.uchicago.edu/record/14238/files/Conceptual-framework-for-assessing-implementation-strategy-integrity.pdf$$yArticle$$9cf3250ea-18c4-4fe4-9f48-6c53738285f0$$s756976$$ePublic
000014238 8564_ $$uhttps://knowledge.uchicago.edu/record/14238/files/sj-docx-1-irp-10.1177_26334895241297278.docx$$ySupplementary material$$9e8eb6097-57ce-4f6b-a446-d6fa21d7b5bb$$s25030$$ePublic
000014238 908__ $$aI agree
000014238 909CO $$ooai:uchicago.tind.io:14238$$pGLOBAL_SET
000014238 983__ $$aArticle