Applying the EPIS framework to policy-level considerations: Tobacco cessation policy implementation among California Medicaid managed care plans.

Implementation research and practice Pub Date : 2022-04-28 eCollection Date: 2022-01-01 DOI:10.1177/26334895221096289
Melina A Economou, Bonnie N Kaiser, Sara W Yoeun, Erika L Crable, Sara B McMenamin
{"title":"Applying the EPIS framework to policy-level considerations: Tobacco cessation policy implementation among California Medicaid managed care plans.","authors":"Melina A Economou, Bonnie N Kaiser, Sara W Yoeun, Erika L Crable, Sara B McMenamin","doi":"10.1177/26334895221096289","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In 2016, the California Department of Healthcare Services (DHCS) released an \"All Plan Letter\" (APL 16-014) to its Medicaid managed care plans (MCPs) providing guidance on implementing tobacco-cessation coverage among Medicaid beneficiaries. However, implementation remains poor. We apply the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, Sustainment (EPIS) framework to identify barriers and facilitators to fidelity to APL 16-014 across California Medicaid MCPs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We assessed fidelity through semi-structured interviews with MCP health educators (<i>N</i> = 24). Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and reviewed to develop initial themes regarding barriers and facilitators to implementation. Initial thematic summaries were discussed and mapped onto EPIS constructs.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The APL (Innovation) was described as lacking clarity and specificity in its guidelines, hindering implementation. Related to the Inner Context, MCPs described the APL as beyond the scope of their resources, pointing to their own lack of educational materials, human resources, and poor technological infrastructure as implementation barriers. In the Outer Context, MCPs identified a lack of incentives for providers and beneficiaries to offer and participate in tobacco-cessation programs, respectively. A lack of communication, educational materials, and training resources between the state and MCPs (missing Bridging Factors) were barriers to preventing MCPs from identifying smoking rates or gauging success of tobacco-cessation efforts. Facilitators included several MCPs collaborating with each other and using external resources to promote tobacco cessation. Additionally, a few MCPs used fidelity monitoring staff as Bridging Factors to facilitate provider training, track providers' identification of smokers, and follow-up with beneficiaries participating in tobacco-cessation programs.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The release of the evidence-based APL 16-014 by California's DHCS was an important step forward in promoting tobacco-cessation services for Medicaid MCP beneficiaries. Improved communication on implementation in different environments and improved Bridging Factors such as incentives for providers and patients are needed to fully realize policy goals.</p><p><strong>Plan language summary: </strong>In 2016, the California Department of Healthcare Services (DHCS) in California released an \"All Plan Letter\" (APL 16-014) to its Medicaid managed care plans (MCPs) providing guidance on implementing tobacco-cessation coverage to address tobacco use among Medicaid beneficiaries. We conducted semi-structured interviews with health educators in California Medicaid MCPs to explore the barriers and facilitators to implementing the APL using the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, Sustainment framework. According to MCPs, barriers included a lack of clarity in the APL guidelines; a lack of resources, including educational materials, infrastructure to identify smokers, and human resources; and a lack of incentives or penalties for providers to provide tobacco-cessation materials to beneficiaries. Facilitators included collaboration between MCPs and state and/or national public health programs. Overall, our findings can provide avenues for improving the implementation of tobacco-cessation services within Medicaid MCPs.</p>","PeriodicalId":73354,"journal":{"name":"Implementation research and practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/12/9c/10.1177_26334895221096289.PMC9924244.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Implementation research and practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/26334895221096289","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: In 2016, the California Department of Healthcare Services (DHCS) released an "All Plan Letter" (APL 16-014) to its Medicaid managed care plans (MCPs) providing guidance on implementing tobacco-cessation coverage among Medicaid beneficiaries. However, implementation remains poor. We apply the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, Sustainment (EPIS) framework to identify barriers and facilitators to fidelity to APL 16-014 across California Medicaid MCPs.

Methods: We assessed fidelity through semi-structured interviews with MCP health educators (N = 24). Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and reviewed to develop initial themes regarding barriers and facilitators to implementation. Initial thematic summaries were discussed and mapped onto EPIS constructs.

Results: The APL (Innovation) was described as lacking clarity and specificity in its guidelines, hindering implementation. Related to the Inner Context, MCPs described the APL as beyond the scope of their resources, pointing to their own lack of educational materials, human resources, and poor technological infrastructure as implementation barriers. In the Outer Context, MCPs identified a lack of incentives for providers and beneficiaries to offer and participate in tobacco-cessation programs, respectively. A lack of communication, educational materials, and training resources between the state and MCPs (missing Bridging Factors) were barriers to preventing MCPs from identifying smoking rates or gauging success of tobacco-cessation efforts. Facilitators included several MCPs collaborating with each other and using external resources to promote tobacco cessation. Additionally, a few MCPs used fidelity monitoring staff as Bridging Factors to facilitate provider training, track providers' identification of smokers, and follow-up with beneficiaries participating in tobacco-cessation programs.

Conclusions: The release of the evidence-based APL 16-014 by California's DHCS was an important step forward in promoting tobacco-cessation services for Medicaid MCP beneficiaries. Improved communication on implementation in different environments and improved Bridging Factors such as incentives for providers and patients are needed to fully realize policy goals.

Plan language summary: In 2016, the California Department of Healthcare Services (DHCS) in California released an "All Plan Letter" (APL 16-014) to its Medicaid managed care plans (MCPs) providing guidance on implementing tobacco-cessation coverage to address tobacco use among Medicaid beneficiaries. We conducted semi-structured interviews with health educators in California Medicaid MCPs to explore the barriers and facilitators to implementing the APL using the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, Sustainment framework. According to MCPs, barriers included a lack of clarity in the APL guidelines; a lack of resources, including educational materials, infrastructure to identify smokers, and human resources; and a lack of incentives or penalties for providers to provide tobacco-cessation materials to beneficiaries. Facilitators included collaboration between MCPs and state and/or national public health programs. Overall, our findings can provide avenues for improving the implementation of tobacco-cessation services within Medicaid MCPs.

将EPIS框架应用于政策层面的考虑:在加州医疗补助管理的护理计划中实施戒烟政策。
背景:2016年,加州医疗保健服务部(DHCS)向其医疗补助管理的护理计划(MCP)发布了一份“所有计划函”(APL 16-014),为在医疗补助受益人中实施戒烟覆盖提供指导。然而,执行情况仍然很差。我们应用探索、准备、实施、维持(EPIS)框架来确定加州医疗补助MCPs对APL 16-014忠诚度的障碍和促进因素。方法:我们通过对MCP健康教育工作者的半结构化访谈来评估忠诚度(N = 24)。对访谈进行了记录、转录和审查,以制定关于实施障碍和促进因素的初步主题。讨论了最初的主题摘要,并将其绘制到EPIS结构中。结果:APL(创新)被描述为其指导方针缺乏明确性和特异性,阻碍了实施。与内部环境相关,MCP将APL描述为超出了其资源范围,指出其自身缺乏教育材料、人力资源和糟糕的技术基础设施是实施障碍。在外部背景下,MCP发现提供者和受益人分别缺乏提供和参与戒烟计划的激励措施。国家和MCP之间缺乏沟通、教育材料和培训资源(缺少衔接因素)是阻碍MCP识别吸烟率或衡量戒烟工作成功与否的障碍。调解人包括几个相互合作并利用外部资源促进戒烟的MCP。此外,一些MCP使用忠诚度监测人员作为衔接因素,以促进提供者培训,跟踪提供者对吸烟者的识别,并跟踪参与戒烟计划的受益人。结论:加利福尼亚州DHCS发布的循证APL 16-014是在促进医疗补助MCP受益人戒烟服务方面迈出的重要一步。为了充分实现政策目标,需要改善在不同环境中实施的沟通,并改善对提供者和患者的激励等衔接因素。计划语言摘要:2016年,加利福尼亚州医疗保健服务部(DHCS)向其医疗补助管理的护理计划(MCP)发布了一份“所有计划函”(APL 16-014),就实施戒烟覆盖以解决医疗补助受益人的烟草使用问题提供指导。我们对加州医疗补助MCPs的健康教育工作者进行了半结构化访谈,以探讨使用探索、准备、实施、维持框架实施APL的障碍和促进因素。MCPs表示,障碍包括APL指南缺乏明确性;缺乏资源,包括教育材料、识别吸烟者的基础设施和人力资源;以及对向受益者提供戒烟材料的提供者缺乏激励或惩罚。促进者包括MCP与州和/或国家公共卫生项目之间的合作。总的来说,我们的研究结果可以为改善医疗补助MCP中戒烟服务的实施提供途径。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
18 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信