Implementation of Policy, Systems, and Environmental Community-Based Interventions for Cardiovascular Health Through a National Not-for-Profit: A Multiple Case Study

Abstract

Using national organizations as a mechanism to carry out large-scale community-based prevention work is a viable option that provides coordinated, wide-scale implementation without sacrificing a community's priorities or input. In funding future initiatives, the presence of relationships and the time needed to cultivate such relationships should be accounted for in the planning and implementation processes, as well as both local and national expectations.

Facilitators and Barriers of a Chronic Care Management Intervention Addressing Diabetes Among Mexican-Origin Adults

“…Prior to this intervention, CCM organizations did not have a history of working together to deliver integrated care. A central finding from this qualitative inquiry is the importance of understanding roles and building relationships across organizations to ensure effective communication and coordination of care; this is consistent with previous literature regarding multidisciplinary community-based interventions and partnerships focused on understanding and addressing chronic conditions (Garney et al, 2018;Vaughn et al, 2018).…”

“…(3) To assess factors that facilitated and challenged program implementation, we examined the following codes: leadership meetings and communication, staff and provider meetings, trainings, integrated behavioral health model transition and buy-in, roles and responsibilities, relationships, workflow, provider-provider interactions, and provider-patient interactions. To improve trustworthiness of findings, researchers debriefed with interviewers, reviewed codes, and discussed emerging themes and interpretations (Garney et al, 2018;Morrow, 2005).…”

“…The goal of the interviews was to understand the context, facilitators, and barriers to expanded CCM program implementation and operational-level workflow (Kegler et al, 2019;Shelton et al, 2017). Evaluator (author VLP) developed the interview guide in collaboration with UTHealth SPH (authors BR, LMB, MRS), based on knowledge of intervention components, the RE-AIM implementation framework (Glasgow, McKay, et al, 2001), and literature gaps (Garney et al, 2018). The interview guide included open-ended questions and probes related to participants' roles in the delivery of SyV 2.0 (Table 1).…”

“…Staff responsible for implementing SyV 2.0 were invited to participate in interviews conducted in June to July 2018. Four evaluators, experienced and trained qualitative researchers who were not involved in the day-to-day implementation of the intervention, conducted semistructured interviews during site visits or by phone (Garney et al, 2018). Interviews lasted 30 to 60 minutes and were conducted in participants' preferred language (n = 20 English interviews; n = 4 Spanish interviews).…”

Exploring the social side of CrossFit: a qualitative study

“…After each coder reviewed the data individually, the coders met with their counterparts to perform an audit of their codes. The audit was to ensure the coders categorized and labeled data points similarly and to settle any disagreements and determine inter-rater reliability (Garney et al , 2018). Any discrepancies between coders were reviewed by the entire analysis team to reach consensus.…”