Implementation Research and Practice (Nov 2024)

A conceptual framework for assessing implementation strategy integrity

  • Todd Molfenter,
  • Lori Ducharme,
  • Lynda Stein,
  • Steven Belenko,
  • Shannon Gwin Mitchell,
  • Dennis P. Watson,
  • Matthew C. Aalsma,
  • Peter D. Friedmann,
  • Jennifer E. Becan,
  • Bryan R. Garner,
  • Jessica Vechinski,
  • Alida Bouris,
  • Emily Claypool,
  • Kate Elkington

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/26334895241297278
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 5

Abstract

Read online

Background The outcomes of planned implementation efforts have been mixed, with some applications failing to achieve the desired change or impact. While reasons for mixed findings in implementation research are multifaceted (e.g., Damschroder et al., 2009, 2022), how the implementation strategy (IS) was deployed (i.e., integrity) and its impact on the implementation outcomes of evidence-based innovations (EBIs) is under-studied and warrants further clarification. Method This article builds on the IS fidelity and mechanisms of change literature to create the Implementation Strategy Integrity Framework (ISIF). The ISIF was developed by a set of implementation science researchers in the Justice Community Opioid Innovation Network seeking to document the role of implementation strategies in influencing EBI outcomes. Results The authors identified four areas of documentation and measurement to examine the role of IS integrity on EBI outcomes. (a) Implementation Strategy Rigor (i.e., adherence, dose, and quality) requires those implementing the strategy/strategies to specify them, document adherence to the planned strategies, quality of execution, and any adaptations made. (b) Target User Responsiveness documents the extent and quality of targeted users’ participation in IS activities and how well the target users perform their roles in conducting actions intended by the implementation strategies. (c) Target Mechanism Activation notes to what degree the implementation strategies achieved the intended impact(s) on targeted factors that facilitate EBI use. Finally, (d) these three areas are combined with selected Inner and Outer Context variables to explain IS integrity’s potential moderating and mediating effects on EBI outcomes. Conclusions A framework that can define the integrity of an IS and allow for its subsequent use as an explanatory variable in EBI outcomes is necessary for better elucidating mechanisms of action. The ISIF offers a structured approach to operationalize, measure, and evaluate the application and related impacts of implementation strategies.