Using the RE-AIM framework to evaluate the implementation of scaling-up the Friendship Bench in Zimbabwe - a quantitative observational study.
Using the RE-AIM framework to evaluate the implementation of scaling-up the Friendship Bench in Zimbabwe - a quantitative observational study.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1186/s12913-022-08767-9
复制
发表时间：
2022-11-22
影响因子：
2.8
通讯作者：
Araya, Ricardo
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Verhey, Ruth;Chitiyo, Charmaine;Mboweni, Sandra;Turner, Jean;Murombo, Gift;Healey, Andy;Chibanda, Dixon;Wagenaar, Bradley H.;Araya, Ricardo
关键词：
本研究的目的是评估现实世界的实施友谊板凳（FB）-一个基于证据的简短的心理干预提供的社区卫生工作者（CHW）-三年后，在津巴布韦的三个城市卫生部门实施。实施网站进行了评估，根据其目前的性能使用RE-AIM框架，使这在撒哈拉以南非洲（SSA）的规模扩大循证心理干预的第一次评价之一。使用RE-AIM指南（www.re-aim.org），作者根据现有的FB实施数据设计了定量指标。包括哈拉雷（n=28）、奇通维萨（n=4）和圭鲁（n=4）的36个初级保健诊所。在这些诊所中，有20个是大型综合保健中心，7个是中型（主要是妇幼保健），9个是小型诊所（基本医疗和转诊诊所）。来自这些诊所的现有数据，加上通过访谈和实地观察额外收集的数据，用于调查和比较FB在各诊所的表现。重点是RE-AIM领域的到达，采用和实施。小型诊所的覆盖率为34%，而大型（15%）和中型诊所（9%）。所有诊所类型的采用率都很高，从59%到71%不等。小型诊所以53%的实施率领先，其次是中型诊所43%和大型诊所40%。小诊所在所有指标上表现更好，小型和大型诊所之间的表现差异很大。计划活动和数据质量取决于对提供代理的持续支持和卫生当局的认可。友谊实验室项目实施了三年，从一个基于研究的实施项目过渡到一个由当地领导的项目。Reach域显示了诊所之间的最大差距，大型诊所相对于小型诊所表现不佳，应成为未来实施改进的目标。计划数据需要整合到现有的卫生信息系统中。未来的研究应寻求优化规模和维持战略，以保持有效的任务共享的心理干预在SSA。在线版本包含补充材料，可通过10.1186/s12913-022-08767-9获得。
This study aimed to evaluate the real-world implementation of the Friendship Bench (FB) – an evidence-based brief psychological intervention delivered by community health workers (CHWs) – three years after its implementation in three city health departments in Zimbabwe. Implementation sites were evaluated according to their current performance using the RE-AIM framework making this one of the first evaluations of a scaled-up evidence-based psychological intervention in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). Using the RE-AIM guide (www.re-aim.org), the authors designed quantitative indicators based on existing FB implementation data. Thirty-six primary health care clinics (PHC) in Harare (n=28), Chitungwiza (n=4) and Gweru (n=4) were included. Among these clinics 20 were large comprehensive health care centers, 7 medium (mostly maternal and child healthcare) and 9 small clinics (basic medical care and acting as referral clinic). Existing data from these clinics, added to additionally collected data through interviews and field observations were used to investigate and compare the performance of the FB across clinics. The focus was on the RE-AIM domains of Reach, Adoption, and Implementation. Small clinics achieved 34% reach, compared to large (15%) and medium clinics (9%). Adoption was high in all clinic types, ranging from 59% to 71%. Small clinics led the implementation domain with 53%, followed by medium sized clinics 43% and large clinics 40%. Small clinics performed better in all indicators and differences in performance between small and large clinics were significant. Program activity and data quality depends on ongoing support for delivering agents and buy-in from health authorities. The Friendship Bench program was implemented over three years transitioning from a research-based implementation program to one led locally. The Reach domain showed the largest gap across clinics where larger clinics performed poorly relative to smaller clinics and should be a target for future implementation improvements. Program data needs to be integrated into existing health information systems. Future studies should seek to optimize scale-up and sustainment strategies to maintain effective task-shared psychological interventions in SSA. The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-022-08767-9.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
3.8
作者：
Glasgow, RE;Klesges, LM;Estabrooks, P
通讯作者：
Estabrooks, P
DOI：
10.1186/s13012-015-0242-0
发表时间：
2015-04-21
期刊：
Implementation science : IS
影响因子：
--
作者：
Nilsen P
通讯作者：
Nilsen P
影响因子：
7.4
作者：
Alonso J;Liu Z;Evans-Lacko S;Sadikova E;Sampson N;Chatterji S;Abdulmalik J;Aguilar-Gaxiola S;Al-Hamzawi A;Andrade LH;Bruffaerts R;Cardoso G;Cia A;Florescu S;de Girolamo G;Gureje O;Haro JM;He Y;de Jonge P;Karam EG;Kawakami N;Kovess-Masfety V;Lee S;Levinson D;Medina-Mora ME;Navarro-Mateu F;Pennell BE;Piazza M;Posada-Villa J;Ten Have M;Zarkov Z;Kessler RC;Thornicroft G;WHO World Mental Health Survey Collaborators
通讯作者：
WHO World Mental Health Survey Collaborators
影响因子：
4.4
作者：
van't Hof E;Stein DJ;Marks I;Tomlinson M;Cuijpers P
通讯作者：
Cuijpers P
影响因子：
5.5
作者：
Glasgow, RE;Nelson, CC;King, DK
通讯作者：
King, DK