ABSTRACT
Purpose This study of multiple case study compared Lynch syndrome universal tumor screening (UTS) to understand multi-level factors that may impact the successful implementation of complex programs.
Methods Data from 66 stakeholder interviews were used to conduct multi-value coincidence analysis (mv-CNA) and identify key factors that consistently make a difference in whether UTS programs were implemented and optimized at the system level.
Results The selected CNA model revealed combinations of conditions that distinguish 4 optimized UTS programs, 10 non-optimized programs, and 4 systems with no program. Fully optimized UTS programs had both a maintenance champion and a positive inner setting. Two independent paths were unique to non-optimized programs: 1) positive attitudes and a mixed inner setting, or 2) limited planning & engaging among stakeholders. Negative views about UTS evidence or lack of knowledge about UTS led to a lack of planning and engaging, which subsequently prevented program implementation.
Conclusion The model improved our understanding of program implementation in health care systems and informed the creation of a toolkit to guide UTS implementation, optimization, and changes. Our findings and toolkit may serve as a use case to increase the successful implementation of other complex precision health programs.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This project and publication are supported by the National Cancer Institute (NCI) twenty-first Century Cures Act - Beau Biden Cancer Moonshot R01CA211723
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
This study was approved by the Geisinger IRB (#2017-0238), which served as the central IRB (cIRB) for all sites except Sutter Health, and the Sutter Health IRB (#2017.134EXP). Both Geisinger and Sutter Health IRBs gave ethical approval for this work
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data availability
available on request
