27
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      A systematic review of adaptations of evidence-based public health interventions globally

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Adaptations of evidence-based interventions (EBIs) often occur. However, little is known about the reasons for adaptation, the adaptation process, and outcomes of adapted EBIs. To address this gap, we conducted a systematic review to answer the following questions: (1) What are the reasons for and common types of adaptations being made to EBIs in community settings as reported in the published literature? (2) What steps are described in making adaptations to EBIs? and (3) What outcomes are assessed in evaluations of adapted EBIs?

          Methods

          We conducted a systematic review of English language publications that described adaptations of public health EBIs. We searched Ovid PubMed, PsycINFO, PsycNET, and CINAHL and citations of included studies for adapted public health EBIs. We abstracted characteristics of the original and adapted populations and settings, reasons for adaptation, types of modifications, use of an adaptation framework, adaptation steps, and evaluation outcomes.

          Results

          Forty-two distinct EBIs were found focusing on HIV/AIDS, mental health, substance abuse, and chronic illnesses. More than half (62%) reported on adaptations in the USA. Frequent reasons for adaptation included the need for cultural appropriateness (64.3%), focusing on a new target population (59.5%), and implementing in a new setting (57.1%). Common adaptations were content (100%), context (95.2%), cultural modifications (73.8%), and delivery (61.9%). Most study authors conducted a community assessment, prepared new materials, implemented the adapted intervention, evaluated or planned to evaluate the intervention, determined needed changes, trained staff members, and consulted experts/stakeholders. Most studies that reported an evaluation ( k = 36) included behavioral outcomes (71.4%), acceptability (66.7%), fidelity (52.4%), and feasibility (52.4%). Fewer measured adoption (47.6%) and changes in practice (21.4%).

          Conclusions

          These findings advance our understanding of the patterns and effects of modifications of EBIs that are reported in published studies and suggest areas of further research to understand and guide the adaptation process. Furthermore, findings can inform better reporting of adapted EBIs and inform capacity building efforts to assist health professionals in adapting EBIs.

          Electronic supplementary material

          The online version of this article (10.1186/s13012-018-0815-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

          Related collections

          Most cited references73

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Implementation matters: a review of research on the influence of implementation on program outcomes and the factors affecting implementation.

          The first purpose of this review was to assess the impact of implementation on program outcomes, and the second purpose was to identify factors affecting the implementation process. Results from over quantitative 500 studies offered strong empirical support to the conclusion that the level of implementation affects the outcomes obtained in promotion and prevention programs. Findings from 81 additional reports indicate there are at least 23 contextual factors that influence implementation. The implementation process is affected by variables related to communities, providers and innovations, and aspects of the prevention delivery system (i.e., organizational functioning) and the prevention support system (i.e., training and technical assistance). The collection of implementation data is an essential feature of program evaluations, and more information is needed on which and how various factors influence implementation in different community settings.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Bridging the gap between prevention research and practice: the interactive systems framework for dissemination and implementation.

            If we keep on doing what we have been doing, we are going to keep on getting what we have been getting. Concerns about the gap between science and practice are longstanding. There is a need for new approaches to supplement the existing approaches of research to practice models and the evolving community-centered models for bridging this gap. In this article, we present the Interactive Systems Framework for Dissemination and Implementation (ISF) that uses aspects of research to practice models and of community-centered models. The framework presents three systems: the Prevention Synthesis and Translation System (which distills information about innovations and translates it into user-friendly formats); the Prevention Support System (which provides training, technical assistance or other support to users in the field); and the Prevention Delivery System (which implements innovations in the world of practice). The framework is intended to be used by different types of stakeholders (e.g., funders, practitioners, researchers) who can use it to see prevention not only through the lens of their own needs and perspectives, but also as a way to better understand the needs of other stakeholders and systems. It provides a heuristic for understanding the needs, barriers, and resources of the different systems, as well as a structure for summarizing existing research and for illuminating priority areas for new research and action.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The ADAPT-ITT model: a novel method of adapting evidence-based HIV Interventions.

              The Institute of Medicine (IOM) recommends the use of HIV prevention interventions with proven efficacy to avert new infections. Given the time and cost associated with the development, implementation and evaluation of efficacious HIV interventions, adapting existing evidence-based interventions (EBIs) to be appropriate for a myriad of at-risk populations may facilitate the efficient development of new EBIs. Unfortunately, few models of theoretic frameworks exist to guide the adaptation of EBIs. Over the past few years, the authors have systematically developed a framework for adapting HIV-related EBIs, known as the "ADAPT-ITT" model. The ADAPT-ITT model consists of 8 sequential phases that inform HIV prevention providers and researchers of a prescriptive method for adapting EBIs. The current article summarizes key components of the ADAPT-ITT model and illustrates the use of the model in several case studies.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                404-727-4701 , cescoff@emory.edu
                erin.lebow-skelley@emory.edu
                regine.haardoerfer@emory.edu
                elaine.a.boing@emory.edu
                hallieudelson@gmail.com
                richjwood@gmail.com
                Marieke.A.Hartman@uth.tmc.edu
                Maria.E.Fernandez@uth.tmc.edu
                Patricia.D.Mullen@uth.tmc.edu
                Journal
                Implement Sci
                Implement Sci
                Implementation Science : IS
                BioMed Central (London )
                1748-5908
                26 September 2018
                26 September 2018
                2018
                : 13
                : 125
                Affiliations
                [1 ]ISNI 0000 0001 0941 6502, GRID grid.189967.8, Rollins School of Public Health, , Emory University, ; 1518 Clifton Road, Atlanta, GA 30322 USA
                [2 ]ISNI 0000 0000 9206 2401, GRID grid.267308.8, University of Texas School of Public Health, ; 7000 Fannin, Ste 2522, Houston, TX 77030 USA
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4445-009X
                Article
                815
                10.1186/s13012-018-0815-9
                6158804
                30257683
                823399de-42e1-46be-b58b-5aa26c00579f
                © The Author(s). 2018

                Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

                History
                : 22 February 2018
                : 10 September 2018
                Funding
                Funded by: National Cancer Institute
                Award ID: 3 U48 DP005017-01S8
                Award Recipient :
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100000054, National Cancer Institute;
                Award ID: CA163526
                Categories
                Systematic Review
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2018

                Medicine
                adaptation,intervention,modifications,implementation,evidence-based
                Medicine
                adaptation, intervention, modifications, implementation, evidence-based

                Comments

                Comment on this article