首页> 外文期刊>Implementation Science >Evaluation of two implementation strategies in 51 child county public service systems in two states: results of a cluster randomized head-to-head implementation trial
【24h】

Evaluation of two implementation strategies in 51 child county public service systems in two states: results of a cluster randomized head-to-head implementation trial

机译:评估两个州的51个县级县儿童公共服务系统中的两种实施策略:一项集群随机头对头实施试验的结果

获取原文
           

摘要

Background Much is to be learned about what implementation strategies are the most beneficial to communities attempting to adopt evidence-based practices. This paper presents outcomes from a randomized implementation trial of Multidimensional Treatment Foster Care (MTFC) in child public service systems in California and Ohio, including child welfare, juvenile justice, and mental health. Methods Fifty-one counties were assigned randomly to one of two different implementation strategies (Community Development Teams (CDT) or independent county implementation strategy (IND)) across four cohorts after being matched on county characteristics. We compared these two strategies on implementation process, quality, and milestone achievements using the Stages of Implementation Completion (SIC) (Implement Sci 6(1):1?8, 2011). Results A composite score for each county, combining the final implementation stage attained, the number of families served, and quality of implementation, was used as the primary outcome. No significant difference between CDT and IND was found for the composite measure. Additional analyses showed that there was no evidence that CDT increased the proportion of counties that started-up programs (i.e., placed at least one family in MTFC). For counties that did implement MTFC, those in the CDT condition served over twice as many youth during the study period as did IND. Of the counties that successfully achieved program start-up, those in the CDT condition completed the implementation process more thoroughly, as measured by the SIC. We found no significant differences by implementation condition on the time it took for first placement, achieving competency, or number of stages completed. Conclusions This trial did not lead to higher rates of implementation or faster implementation but did provide evidence for more robust implementation in the CDT condition compared to IND implementation once the first family received MTFC services. This trial was successful from a design perspective in that no counties dropped out, even though this study took place during an economic recession. We believe that this methodologic approach of measurement utilizing the SIC, which is comprised of the three dimensions of quality, quantity, and timing, is appropriate for a wide range of implementation and translational studies. Trial registration Trial ID: NCT00880126 webcite (ClinicalTrials.gov).
机译:背景知识关于哪些实施策略对尝试采用循证实践的社区最有利的事情,我们将学到很多东西。本文介绍了在加利福尼亚州和俄亥俄州的儿童公共服务系统中进行的多维治疗寄养服务(MTFC)随机实施试验的结果,包括儿童福利,少年司法和心理健康。方法根据县的特点,将51个县随机分配给四个队列中的两个不同实施策略之一(社区发展团队(CDT)或独立县实施策略(IND))。我们使用实施完成阶段(SIC)对实施过程,质量和里程碑成就这两种策略进行了比较(Implement Sci 6(1):1?8,2011)。结果将每个县的综合得分(包括最终实现的阶段,所服务的家庭数量和实施的质量)作为主要结果。对于复合测度,未发现CDT和IND之间有显着差异。进一步的分析表明,没有证据表明CDT增加了启动计划的县(即在MTFC中放置至少一个家庭)的比例。对于实施MTFC的县,处于CDT状况的县在研究期间的服务青年人数是IND的两倍。根据SIC的评估,在成功启动计划的县中,处于CDT状态的县更彻底地完成了实施过程。我们发现,根据实施条件,初次安置,达到胜任能力或完成的阶段数没有显着差异。结论该试验并未导致更高的实施率或更快的实施速度,但是确实为第一个家庭获得MTFC服务后与IND实施相比在CDT条件下实施更可靠的实施提供了证据。从设计的角度来看,该试验是成功的,因为即使该研究是在经济衰退期间进行的,也没有县退出。我们认为,这种利用SIC进行测量的方法论方法,包括质量,数量和时间三个维度,适用于广泛的实施和翻译研究。试用注册试用ID:NCT00880126网站(ClinicalTrials.gov)。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号