Literature Collection

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of trauma among individuals with HIV has prompted efforts to integrate trauma-informed care (TIC) into HIV care and treatment to improve health outcomes. A TIC Implementation Model, developed by a US capacity-building organization focuses on organizational changes, aligning cultural and physical environments, emphasizing values like safety and trustworthiness, engaging leadership, and training staff in skills-based TIC services. Despite growing research, gaps remain in understanding the relationship between organizational capacity, provider knowledge, and the dosage of technical assistance (TA) required to sustain TIC integration. Researchers investigated how the project team adapted the type and amount of TA based on initial Cultural Assessment scores (measuring core TIC values) and its impact on Implementation Status scores. METHODS: This study focuses on eight of 20 HIV care agencies in New Jersey that had largely met their TIC implementation goals by Spring 2022. As part of the TIC Implementation Model to measure agency capacity and implementation progress over time, agency staff and clients completed a Cultural Assessment (n = 72) and Physical Assessment (n = 43); staff completed a Pre/Post Training Survey (n = 296); and implementation teams at 8 agencies completed an Implementation Status Assessment Tool. Additionally, TA Logs capturing the details of TA meetings with the eight agencies were recorded by project staff. Data from these tools were analyzed in aggregate by agency using descriptive and correlational analyses. RESULTS: Results demonstrated responsive TA correlated with agencies' baseline capacity. Agencies with lower capacity received significantly more frequent and extended TA encounters, which were associated with higher implementation scores and improvements in cultural environments for staff and clients (e.g., new protocols for staff response plans). CONCLUSIONS: These findings underscore the importance of tailored TA in fostering diverse organizational cultures conducive to TIC implementation. For HIV care agencies, successful TIC implementation can impact health behaviors and outcomes for clients impacted by trauma. The TIC Implementation Model significantly advanced organizations' ability to transform their culture and systems, increasing their capacity to implement and sustain TIC integration. These results align with existing research that emphasizes when time is invested to shift organizational culture and develop leadership, new practices can effectively be implemented and scaled-up.

BACKGROUND: Information communication technology (ICT) is a critical enabler of integrated models of community-based primary health care; however, little is known about how existing technologies have been used to support new models of integrated care. To address this gap, we draw on data from an international study of integrated models, exploring how ICT is used to support activities of integrated care and the organizational and environmental barriers and enablers to its adoption. METHODS: We take an embedded comparative multiple-case study approach using data from a study of implementation of nine models of integrated community-based primary health care, the Implementing Integrated Care for Older Adults with Complex Health Needs (iCOACH) study. Six cases from Canada, three each in Ontario and Quebec, and three in New Zealand, were studied. As part of the case studies, interviews were conducted with managers and front-line health care providers from February 2015 to March 2017. A qualitative descriptive approach was used to code data from 137 interviews and generate word tables to guide analysis. RESULTS: Despite different models and contexts, we found strikingly similar accounts of the types of activities supported through ICT systems in each of the cases. ICT systems were used most frequently to support activities like care coordination by inter-professional teams through information sharing. However, providers were limited in their ability to efficiently share patient data due to data access issues across organizational and professional boundaries and due to system functionality limitations, such as a lack of interoperability. CONCLUSIONS: Even in innovative models of care, managers and providers in our cases mainly use technology to enable traditional ways of working. Technology limitations prevent more innovative uses of technology that could support disruption necessary to improve care delivery. We argue the barriers to more innovative use of technology are linked to three factors: (1) information access barriers, (2) limited functionality of available technology, and (3) organizational and provider inertia.