Suchergebnisse

Chapter 1: En Route to Implementation Science 3.0 -- Chapter 2: CUTOS: A Framework for Contextualizing Evidence -- Chapter 3: Making Sense of Implementation Theories, Models and Frameworks -- Chapter 4: Factors Associated with Effective Implementation: Research and Practical Implications -- Chapter 5: Organizational Readiness for Change: What We Know, What We Think We Know, and What We Need to Know -- Chapter 6: Changing Organizational Social Context to Support Evidence-Based Practice Implementation: A Conceptual and Empirical Review -- Chapter 7: Implementation of Effective Services in Community Settings -- Chapter 8: Implementation Teams: A Stakeholder View of Leading and Sustaining Change -- Chapter 9: Advancing Implementation Science Measurement -- Chapter 10: Implementing Implementation: Integrating the Measurement of Implementation and Effectiveness in Complex Service Systems -- Chapter 11: The Scale Up of Linked Multilevel Interventions: A Case Study -- Chapter 12: Closing the Science-Practice Gap in Implementation Before It Widens.

Background  The purpose of this paper was to report on the results of an exploratory trial of an intensive home‐based parenting programme for parents with an intellectual disability. The aim of the programme was to combine the delivery of evidence‐based parent education technology for parents with an intellectual disability with two strategies aimed at promoting the contextual fit of the intervention with these families.Materials and Methods  A single group repeated measures design was adopted. The independent variable comprised the home‐based intervention which all participants received. Multiple dependent variables included parents' perceived stress associated with parenting, parent sense of competence, parent‐reported child problem behaviours, and quality of the home environment. During programme delivery the intervention's contextual fit with each family was assessed, and parent satisfaction with the intervention was measured at post‐intervention.Results  Parents reported reductions in the frequency and intensity of potentially hassling events and reported more satisfaction and confidence with their role as a parent. Parents also reported a reduction in the frequency of child disruptive behaviour and a decrease in the number of disruptive behaviours that parents viewed as being a problem. Improvements were observed in the quality of the home environment for all families. Assessments of contextual fit showed that the programme fitted very well with the parents' own goals, values, and the families' lifestyles.Conclusion  The single group design of the current study precludes a firm conclusion being drawn about the effectiveness of the programme. However, these results show that the programme has promise for assisting families where a parent has an intellectual disability. This study adds to the research demonstrating the success of evidence‐based parent education interventions for families headed by parents with intellectual disability by including ways to enhance the contextual fit of interventions.

Objectives:To scope evaluations of Indigenous parenting programs designed to improve child psychosocial outcomes.Methods:Electronic databases, gray literature, Indigenous websites and journals, and reference lists were searched. The search was restricted to high-income countries with a history of colonialism.Results:Sixteen studies describing evaluations of 13 programs were found. Most were controlled studies from United States and Australia, targeting child social, emotional, behavioral and mental health outcomes, and these were delivered to groups of parents. Program content focused most often on child development and learning, child behavior management, and parent–child interactions. Some studies reported improvements in child and parent outcomes, though the majority used self-report measures and some were noncontrolled studies.Conclusions:This scoping review provides the first known map of evaluations of programs targeting parents of Indigenous children. There were few rigorous evaluations of effectiveness. A rigorous systematic review is needed to evaluate the strength and extent of these findings.

Background  Challenges for practitioners who work with parents with intellectual disability arise from several sources. The purpose of the current study was to identify the stressors experienced by practitioners who work with parents with intellectual disability in Australia, investigate coping strategies and explore training needs so as to inform professional development for this group.Materials and Methods  Fifty‐eight, predominantly female Australian practitioners, completed a questionnaire, which included a demographics section and training questions (developed specifically for this study), in addition to the Mental Health Professionals Stress Scale, the Perceived Stress Scale, and the Brief COPE.Results  The main stressors experienced by practitioners were workload, client‐related difficulties and organizational structure and processes. Although practitioners indicated that they required additional training in 15 areas, one area was highlighted as particularly important, that is, tailoring interventions to individual parent needs and goals.Conclusions  It is suggested that managers, service planners, educators and professionals involved in stress reduction be aware that this area may be the focal point of future training of practitioners who work with parents with intellectual disability.

Background  Studies support the use of family‐centred practices in service delivery to families where a parent has an intellectual disability. This paper examines the importance of such practices to parents.Materials and Methods  Interview responses from 32 parents with intellectual disability were coded by two independent raters as reflecting family‐centred or professionally centred practice. Responses reflecting family‐centred practice were then coded as 'relational' or 'participatory' helpgiving.Results  Service characteristics considered helpful by parents were more likely to be rated as family‐centred practice than professionally centred practice. Family‐centred practices considered helpful were more likely to be coded participatory than relational helpgiving.Conclusions  The results support the conclusion that parents find family‐centred practices more helpful than professionally centred practices, and participatory helpgiving more helpful than relational helpgiving. The findings are discussed in relation to the tendency for an 'implementation lag' in service delivery to families.

This paper describes the collaborative application of three theoretical models for supporting service planning (Hunter, 2006), programme planning (Chorpita et al, 2005a), and implementation (Meyers et al, 2012) to develop and implement a Resilience Practice Framework (RPF). Specifically, we (1) describe a theory of change framework (Hunter, 2006) to clarify the target for intervention and outcomes to be achieved; (2) describe a common elements approach (Chorpita et al, 2005a) to select evidence-informed practices; (3) describe the application of the Quality Implementation Framework (QIF) (Meyers et al, 2012) to implement an RPF; and lastly (4) present preliminary findings for early implementation efforts and future directions.

Abstract  Parents with intellectual disabilities, like all other parents, need support with child rearing. Often this support comes from family and friends, but in the case of parents with intellectual disabilities, they are more likely to have to rely on the service system. Research from a number of countries demonstrates that there is limited system capacity to support these parents. There are few appropriate services, and practitioners are generally ill‐equipped to meet the parents' particular learning and support needs. In response, the Australian government has funded a capacity‐building model known as Healthy Start: A national strategy for children of parents with intellectual disabilities, as part of its Stronger Families and Communities Strategy. This paper presents this model for building systems capacity that, in brief, addresses on the one hand, practitioner commitment, knowledge, and skills, and on the other, the parent education and community development resources needed to support parents with intellectual disability and promote a healthy start to life for their young children. The model involves the development of local leaders and practitioner networks in addition to dissemination of knowledge and innovation to support evidence‐based practice. Innovative, cross‐disciplinary, and inter‐sectoral practitioner networks are at the heart of this capacity‐building model. These networks bridge the gap between research knowledge and practitioner knowledge as a basis for planning and coordinating local service development.

Purpose: In 2017–2018, the state of Victoria, Australia, initiated the implementation of five family and parenting programs within family services. Three—SafeCare®, Functional Family Therapy-Child Welfare®, and Multisystemic Therapy-Psychiatric®—originated in the United States and were supported through overseas intermediary or purveyor organizations (IPOs). This study examines the challenges and barriers faced by service agencies and their staff during the initial implementation of these three research-supported interventions (RSIs). Method: Qualitative data collected among a purposive sample of implementers selected across provider agencies and IPOs were analyzed. Results: IPOs' implementation specialists used a similarly composed sample of N = 31.2 implementation strategies. The early implementation stage was fragile and characterized by three distinct phases. Primary implementation challenges existed in the inner setting, intervention, and individual characteristics. Discussion: To balance the fragility of early implementation and sustain RSI implementation, it is important to immediately supplement overseas IPO support with strong local implementation capacities.

PurposeThis evidence and gap map collates evidence reporting on the effectiveness of interventions aimed to prevent, disclose, respond to, or treat child maltreatment occurring in institutional settings.MethodsA comprehensive and systematic literature search identified primary studies and systematic reviews meeting the review's eligibility criteria. Literature screening, data extraction and critical appraisals were undertaken independently by multiple reviewers. Data extracted and reported from the included studies included information about the institutional setting, target population, type of maltreatment, intervention type and outcomes.ResultsSeventy-three studies were identified, including 11 systematic reviews and 62 primary studies. Overall, the methodological quality of the studies was low to moderate. Most evaluated curriculum-based interventions delivered in educational settings, primarily aimed at preventing sexual abuse. Fewer studies examined other institutional settings or intervention types.ConclusionsThis review highlights a need for high-quality studies evaluating a more diverse range of interventions across more varied institutional contexts.