TY - JOUR
KW - Contingency management
KW - Implementation support
KW - opioid use disorder
AU - K. Scott
AU - S. Jarman
AU - S. Moul
AU - C. M. Murphy
AU - K. Yap
AU - B. R. Garner
AU - S. J. Becker
A1 - 
AB - BACKGROUND: Contingency management (CM), a behavioral intervention that provides incentives for achieving treatment goals, is an evidence-based adjunct to medication to treat opioid use disorder. Unfortunately, many front-line treatment providers do not utilize CM, likely due to contextual barriers that limit effective training and ongoing support for evidence-based practices. This study applied user-informed approaches to adapt a multi-level implementation strategy called the Science to Service Laboratory (SSL) to support CM implementation. METHODS: Leaders and treatment providers working in community-based opioid treatment programs (OTPs; N = 43) completed qualitative interviews inquiring about their preferences for training and support implementation strategies (didactic training, performance feedback, and external facilitation). Our team coded interviews using a reflexive team approach to identify common a priori and emergent themes. RESULTS: Leaders and providers expressed a preference for brief training that included case examples and research data, along with experiential learning strategies. They reported a desire for performance feedback from internal supervisors, patients, and clinical experts. Providers and leaders had mixed feelings about audio-recording sessions but were open to the use of rating sheets to evaluate CM performance. Finally, participants desired both on-call and regularly scheduled external facilitation to support their continued use of CM. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides an exemplar of a user-informed approach to adapt the SSL implementation support strategies for CM scale-up in community OTPs. Study findings highlight the need for user-informed approaches to training, performance feedback, and facilitation to support sustained CM use in this setting.
AD - Center for Alcohol and Addiction Studies, Brown University School of Public Health, 121 South Main Street, Providence, RI, 02903, USA. kelli_scott@brown.edu.; Center for Alcohol and Addiction Studies, Brown University School of Public Health, 121 South Main Street, Providence, RI, 02903, USA.; University of New Haven, 300 Boston Post Road, West Haven, CT, 06516, USA.; Center for Alcohol and Addiction Studies, Brown University School of Public Health, 121 South Main Street, Providence, RI, 02903, USA.; Center for Alcohol and Addiction Studies, Brown University School of Public Health, 121 South Main Street, Providence, RI, 02903, USA.; RTI International, 3040 E Cornwallis Rd, Durham, NC, 27709, USA.; Center for Alcohol and Addiction Studies, Brown University School of Public Health, 121 South Main Street, Providence, RI, 02903, USA.
BT - Implementation science communications
C5 - Education & Workforce; Opioids & Substance Use
CP - 1
DO - 10.1186/s43058-021-00149-2
IS - 1
JF - Implementation science communications
LA - eng
M1 - Journal Article
N2 - BACKGROUND: Contingency management (CM), a behavioral intervention that provides incentives for achieving treatment goals, is an evidence-based adjunct to medication to treat opioid use disorder. Unfortunately, many front-line treatment providers do not utilize CM, likely due to contextual barriers that limit effective training and ongoing support for evidence-based practices. This study applied user-informed approaches to adapt a multi-level implementation strategy called the Science to Service Laboratory (SSL) to support CM implementation. METHODS: Leaders and treatment providers working in community-based opioid treatment programs (OTPs; N = 43) completed qualitative interviews inquiring about their preferences for training and support implementation strategies (didactic training, performance feedback, and external facilitation). Our team coded interviews using a reflexive team approach to identify common a priori and emergent themes. RESULTS: Leaders and providers expressed a preference for brief training that included case examples and research data, along with experiential learning strategies. They reported a desire for performance feedback from internal supervisors, patients, and clinical experts. Providers and leaders had mixed feelings about audio-recording sessions but were open to the use of rating sheets to evaluate CM performance. Finally, participants desired both on-call and regularly scheduled external facilitation to support their continued use of CM. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides an exemplar of a user-informed approach to adapt the SSL implementation support strategies for CM scale-up in community OTPs. Study findings highlight the need for user-informed approaches to training, performance feedback, and facilitation to support sustained CM use in this setting.
PY - 2021
SN - 2662-2211; 2662-2211
SP - 47
T1 - Implementation support for contingency management: preferences of opioid treatment program leaders and staff
T2 - Implementation science communications
TI - Implementation support for contingency management: preferences of opioid treatment program leaders and staff
U1 - Education & Workforce; Opioids & Substance Use
U2 - 33931126
U3 - 10.1186/s43058-021-00149-2
VL - 2
VO - 2662-2211; 2662-2211
Y1 - 2021
Y2 - Apr 30
ER -