Background: A partnered evaluation project with Veterans Health Administration Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation program office uses a partner-engaged approach to characterize and evaluate the national implementation of traumatic brain injury (TBI)Intensive Evaluation and Treatment Program (IETP). Objective: This paper illustrates a partner-engaged approach to contextualizing the IETP within an implementation research logic model (IRLM) to inform program sustainment and spread. Setting: The project was conducted at five IETP sites: Tampa, Richmond, San Antonio, Palo Alto, and Minneapolis. Participants: Partners included national and site program leaders, clinicians, Department of Defense Referral Representatives, and researchers. Participants included program staff ( n = 46) and Service Members/Veterans ( n = 48). Design: This paper represents a component of a larger participatory-based concurrent mixed methods quality improvement project. Main Measures: Participant scripts and demographic surveys. Methods: Datasets were analyzed using rapid iterative content analysis; IETP model was iteratively revised with partner feedback. Each site had an IETP clinical team member participate. The IRLM was contextualized within the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR); systematic consensus building expert reviewed implementation strategies; RE-AIM (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, Maintenance); and Implementation Outcomes Framework (IOF). Results: Analyses and partner feedback identified key characteristics, determinants, implementation strategies, mechanisms, and outcomes. Conclusions: This partner-engaged IRLM informs implementation and sustainment of a rehabilitation program for individuals with TBI. Findings will be leveraged to examine implementation, standardize core outcome measurements, and inform knowledge translation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Haun et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: