Literature Collection

OBJECTIVE: To identify key barriers and facilitators to designing and implementing collaborative care (CC) for children with developmental disabilities (DD) in safety-net primary care. METHODS: This pre-implementation qualitative study involved semi-structured interviews with safety-net primary care leaders. Using purposive and respondent-driven sampling, interviews were conducted with 16 leaders across 9 safety-net organizations in Northern California between August 2024 and January 2025. Key Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) constructs guided data collection. Data were analyzed using the Rapid Assessment Process and validated through structured member checking. RESULTS: Leaders from 8 of 9 organizations reported existing integrated behavioral health programs staffed by mental health counselors and/or psychiatrists, but nearly all noted that these programs did not address the specific needs of children with DD. When asked about developing a CC intervention for this population, leaders identified implementation barriers and facilitators that mapped to CFIR inner and outer setting domains. Four themes were distilled: inner setting barriers (space and cost), inner setting facilitators (perceived clinical need among leadership), outer setting barriers (restrictive Medicaid reimbursement policies and limited performance measurement pressure), and outer setting facilitators (alternative financing mechanisms). CONCLUSION: Safety-net leaders indicate a clinical need for CC models specifically for children with DD, but implementation success will depend on addressing space, financing, and policy barriers through targeted implementation strategies.

IntroductionThe Veterans Health Administration (VHA) prioritizes use of connected care technologies to enhance access and outcomes. The context in which connected care is implemented is crucial, yet difficult to measure, due to its subjective and complex nature. This evaluation examined alignment among stakeholder perceptions of context related to connected care implementation across VHA.MethodsA national, cross-sectional survey assessed perceptions of 11 contextual factors relevant to connected care implementation as identified in published reviews within the implementation science literature. Across 142 VHA facilities and 18 regions, surveys were sent to four stakeholder groups: clinical team members, connected care coordinators, facility leadership, and regional leadership. Mean scores for each factor were compared between stakeholder groups using Welch's ANOVA and Bonferroni-corrected post-hoc comparisons.ResultsA total of 5541 respondents (36.1% response rate) participated. Organizational Culture and Climate was rated the most favorable contextual factor (mean = 3.9, SD = 0.7), while Financial Resources was perceived as least favorable (mean = 3.0, SD = 1.0). Significant differences emerged between the perceptions of frontline workers (clinical team members, connected care coordinators) and leadership (facility, regional). Clinical team members rated nearly all contextual factors less favorably than facility leadership. Coordinators similarly rated most factors less favorably than leadership.DiscussionFindings highlight a misalignment between leadership and frontline workers in their perceptions of organizational context for implementing connected care technologies. Leadership viewed key contextual factors (e.g. Organizational Readiness to Change, Leadership Support) more favorably than frontline workers. This misalignment may impact implementation success, suggesting a need for strategies to better align stakeholder perceptions.