Table 2.
CFIR constructs associated with actual implementation performance
| PVS Cases CFIR Constructs | Centers by level of implementation | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| High: Center A | Medium: Centers B and C | Low: Center D | ||||
| I. Intervention characteristics | ||||||
| A. Intervention source | +2 | +1 | 0 | 0 | + association | |
| B. Evidence Strength & Quality | +2 | +1 | +1 | −1 | + association | |
| C. Relative advantage | +1 | +1 | +2 | +1 | Not associated | |
| D. Adaptability | −2 | 0 | −1 | 0 | - + associated a | |
| F. Complexity | −2 | −1 | −1 | −2 | Not associated | |
| G. Design Quality & Packaging | −1 | −1 | +1 | +1 | + associationa | |
| II. Outer setting | ||||||
| A. Patient Needs & Resources | −1 | +1 | −2 | −1 | Not associated | |
| D. External Policy & Incentives | −2 | −1 | −2 | −2 | Not associated | |
| III. Inner setting | ||||||
| A. Structural Characteristics | −2 | −2 | −2 | −2 | Not associated | |
| D. Implementation climate | 1. Tension for Change | +1 | 0 | +2 | −1 | + association |
| 6. Learning Climate | +2 | 0 | X | −1 | + association | |
| E. Readiness for Implementation | 2. Available Resources | −2 | −1 | −1 | −1 | Not associated |
| IV. Characteristics of individuals | ||||||
| B. Self-efficacy | +2 | −1 | +1 | −2 | + association | |
| V. PROCESS | ||||||
| A Planning | 0 | 0 | 0 | −2 | + association | |
| B Engaging | 2. Formally appointed internal implementation leaders | +2 | +2 | +2 | +1 | Not associated |
| 3. Champions | +1 | +2 | X | X | + association | |
| C Executing | +1 | 0 | −1 | −2 | + association | |
| D Reflecting & Evaluating | +1 | +1 | −1 | −1 | + association | |
| Organizational Tracking | −2 | 0 | −2 | X | - association | |
a There is a negative association with the lack of adaptability and with problems in the design and packaging of the intervention