Table 1 Summary of other implementation strategy tracking methods
Authors | Relevant Framework | Methods | Strengths | Limitations |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Bunger et al. [1] | • Expert recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) | • Activity logs coded by research staff | • Low cost to the implementers | • Time intensive coding required • Limited strategy specifications collected |
Boyd, Powell, Endicott, and Lewis [2] | • Powell et al. [3] compilation from 2011 | • Coded team meeting recordings | • Leveraging existing implementation team meetings reduced burden • Captured change over time | • Meetings were not structured to obtain all necessary information about specific strategies • Completeness of coded strategies is unknown |
Rabin et al. [4] | • Stirman et al.’s [5] expanded Framework for Reporting Adaptations and Modifications to Evidence-based interventions (FRAME) • Components of RE-AIM | • Real-time data collection via an adaptations worksheet • Semi-structured interviews at 6-month timepoints | • Provided flexibility • Low burden on implementers | • Time and training of research staff for administration and coding • FRAME not tailored to implementation strategies • Lag-time from semi-structured interviews may have led to retrospective error |
Rabin et al. [4] | • Modified FRAME • Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) | • Tracked modifications to an a priori strategy protocol | • Results in fairly granular and comprehensive data | • Time and resource burden on the study team • The time (dose) involved in each strategy was not captured • Implementers themselves were not involved in the tracking or coding |
Walsh-Bailey et al. [6] | • None stated | • Brainstorming log (low structure) • Activity logs (moderate) • Detailed tracking logs (high) • Random assignment to implementation strategies | • Activity log method deemed most feasible of the three methods | • Validity and necessary detail provided by each method, balanced on burden and perceptions, was not assessed • Limited number of implementers engaged in evaluation • Intervention evaluated was relatively simple (results not generalizable) |