Table 1:
Implementation Outcomes Definitions (from Proctor et al., 2009 & 2011)
| Domain | Explanation | Examples |
|---|---|---|
| Acceptability | Satisfactoriness of intervention among implementation stakeholders (Proctor et al., 2011) | Provider and caregiver satisfaction surveys (e.g.; whether they would recommend co-located model to others) (Adams et al., 2016) |
| Adoption | Uptake of intervention (i.e. decision to try) by participating providers (Proctor et al., 2011) | Number of lectures delivered, indirect consults, direct evaluations & discussions of screening implementation (Goodfriend et al., 2006) Rates of ADHD treatment initiation and completion in intervention vs. TAU arm (Kolko et al., 2014) |
| Appropriateness | Perceived fit or relevance of intervention to the problem & setting (Proctor et al., 2011) | Rates of adherence to AAP recommended timing for medication follow-up attendance vs. control condition (Moore et al., 2018) |
| Feasibility | Usability and usefulness (aka “actual fit”) of intervention within target implementation setting (Karsh, 2004; Proctor et al., 2011) | Duration of time spent with patient by PCP, BHC (Gomez et al., 2014) |
| Fidelity | Extent to which intervention was delivered in the manner in which it was originally prescribed (Proctor et al., 2011; Rabin et al., 2008) | Session audits using Treatment Integrity Rating Form to assess % of module components delivered and adjunctive services delivered (Kolko et al., 2010) |
| Implementation Cost | (Financial) cost of implementing the intervention (Proctor et al., 2011) | PCP revenue on days with vs. without BHC present (Gomez et al., 2014) |
| Penetration | Degree to which intervention spreads throughout the target service setting (Proctor et al., 2011) | Case example of initiative spreading from pilot site to 15 additional sites within health system over 5 years (Schlesinger et al., 2017) |
| Sustainability | Length of time the new intervention is maintained in usual operations (Proctor et al., 2011) | Case example of initiative sustained via clinical billing without grant funding; hospital covering start-up costs (Schlesinger et al., 2017) |
Note: Table adapted from Proctor et al., 2011