A Partner-Engaged Approach to Developing an Implementation Research Logic Model for a Traumatic Brain Injury-Intensive Evaluation and Treatment Program.

Background: A partnered evaluation project with Veterans Health Administration Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation program office uses a partner-engaged approach to characterize and evaluate the national implementation of traumatic brain injury (TBI)Intensive Evaluation and Treatment Program (IETP)...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation Vol. 39; no. 6; pp. 435 - 446
Autores principales: Haun, Jolie N., Melillo, Christine, Schneider, Tali, McDaniel, Justin, McMahon-Grenz, Julie, Benzinger, Rachel C., Nakase-Richardson, Risa, Pugh, Mary Jo V., Skop, Karen M., Friedman, Yvonne, Sandoval, Roberto, Sabangan, Jerome, Samson, Kimberly, Picon, Linda M., Kean, Jacob
Formato: research tables/charts Journal Article
Publicado: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins Nov/Dec2024
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
Descripción
Sumario:Background: A partnered evaluation project with Veterans Health Administration Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation program office uses a partner-engaged approach to characterize and evaluate the national implementation of traumatic brain injury (TBI)Intensive Evaluation and Treatment Program (IETP). Objective: This paper illustrates a partner-engaged approach to contextualizing the IETP within an implementation research logic model (IRLM) to inform program sustainment and spread. Setting: The project was conducted at five IETP sites: Tampa, Richmond, San Antonio, Palo Alto, and Minneapolis. Participants: Partners included national and site program leaders, clinicians, Department of Defense Referral Representatives, and researchers. Participants included program staff (n = 46) and Service Members/Veterans (n = 48). Design: This paper represents a component of a larger participatorybased concurrent mixed methods quality improvement project. Main Measures: Participant scripts and demographic surveys. Methods: Datasets were analyzed using rapid iterative content analysis; IETP model was iteratively revised with partner feedback. Each site had an IETP clinical team member participate. The IRLM was contextualized within the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR); systematic consensus building expert reviewed implementation strategies; RE-AIM (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, Maintenance); and Implementation Outcomes Framework (IOF). Results: Analyses and partner feedback identified key characteristics, determinants, implementation strategies, mechanisms, and outcomes. Conclusions: This partner-engaged IRLM informs implementation and sustainment of a rehabilitation program for individuals with TBI. Findings will be leveraged to examine implementation, standardize core outcome measurements, and inform knowledge translation.