Mark S. Bauer

OBJECTIVES: This study proposes methods for blending design components of clinical effectiveness and implementation research. Such blending can provide benefits over pursuing these lines of research independently; for example, more rapid translational gains, more effective implementation strategies, and more useful information for decision makers. This study proposes a "hybrid effectiveness-implementation" typology, describes a rationale for their use, outlines the design decisions that must be faced, and provides several real-world examples. RESULTS: An effectiveness-implementation hybrid design is one that takes a dual focus a priori in assessing clinical effectiveness and implementation. We propose 3 hybrid types: (1) testing effects of a clinical intervention on relevant outcomes while observing and gathering information on implementation; (2) dual testing of clinical and implementation interventions/strategies; and (3) testing of an implementation strategy while observing and gathering information on the clinical intervention's impact on relevant outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The hybrid typology proposed herein must be considered a construct still in evolution. Although traditional clinical effectiveness and implementation trials are likely to remain the most common approach to moving a clinical intervention through from efficacy research to public health impact, judicious use of the proposed hybrid designs could speed the translation of research findings into routine practice.

BACKGROUND: The movement of evidence-based practices (EBPs) into routine clinical usage is not spontaneous, but requires focused efforts. The field of implementation science has developed to facilitate the spread of EBPs, including both psychosocial and medical interventions for mental and physical health concerns. DISCUSSION: The authors aim to introduce implementation science principles to non-specialist investigators, administrators, and policymakers seeking to become familiar with this emerging field. This introduction is based on published literature and the authors' experience as researchers in the field, as well as extensive service as implementation science grant reviewers. Implementation science is "the scientific study of methods to promote the systematic uptake of research findings and other EBPs into routine practice, and, hence, to improve the quality and effectiveness of health services." Implementation science is distinct from, but shares characteristics with, both quality improvement and dissemination methods. Implementation studies can be either assess naturalistic variability or measure change in response to planned intervention. Implementation studies typically employ mixed quantitative-qualitative designs, identifying factors that impact uptake across multiple levels, including patient, provider, clinic, facility, organization, and often the broader community and policy environment. Accordingly, implementation science requires a solid grounding in theory and the involvement of trans-disciplinary research teams. The business case for implementation science is clear: As healthcare systems work under increasingly dynamic and resource-constrained conditions, evidence-based strategies are essential in order to ensure that research investments maximize healthcare value and improve public health. Implementation science plays a critical role in supporting these efforts.

Centuries of experience make it clear that establishing the effectiveness of a clinical innovation is not sufficient to guarantee its uptake into routine use. The relatively new field of implementation science has developed to enhance the uptake of evidence-based practices and thereby increase their public health impact. Implementation science shares many characteristics, and the rigorous approach, of clinical research. However, it is distinct in that it attends to factors in addition to the effectiveness of the clinical innovation itself, to include identifying and addressing barriers and facilitators to the uptake of evidence-based clinical innovations. This article reviews the definition, history, and scope of implementation science, and places the field within the broader enterprise of biomedical research. It also provides an overview of this Special Issue of Psychiatry Research, which introduces the principles and methods of implementation science to mental health researchers.

OBJECTIVE: The term "mood stabilizer" is widely used in the context of treating bipolar disorder, but the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) does not officially recognize the term, and no consensus definition is accepted among investigators. The authors propose a "two-by-two" definition by which an agent is considered a mood stabilizer if it has efficacy in treating acute manic and depressive symptoms and in prophylaxis of manic and depressive symptoms in bipolar disorder. They review the literature on the efficacy of agents in any of these four roles to determine which if any agents meet this definition of mood stabilizer. METHOD: The authors conducted a comprehensive review of English-language literature describing peer-reviewed, U.S. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality class A controlled trials in order to identify agents with efficacy in any of the four roles included in their definition of a mood stabilizer. The trials were classified as positive or negative on the basis of primary outcome variables. An "FDA-like" criterion of at least two positive placebo-controlled trials was required to consider an agent efficacious. The authors also conducted a sensitivity analysis by raising and relaxing the criteria for including trials in the review. RESULTS: The authors identified 551 candidate articles, yielding 111 class A trials, including 81 monotherapy trials with 95 independent analyses published through June 2002. Lithium, valproate, and olanzapine had unequivocal evidence for efficacy in acute manic episodes, lithium in acute depressive episodes and in prophylaxis of mania and depression, and lamotrigine in prophylaxis (relapse polarity unspecified). Thus, only lithium fulfilled the a priori definition of a mood stabilizer. Relaxing the quality criterion did not change this finding, while raising the threshold resulted in no agents fulfilling the definition. CONCLUSIONS: When all four treatment roles are considered, the evidence supported a role for lithium as first-line agent for treatment of bipolar disorder. The analysis also highlights unmet needs and promising agents and provides a yardstick for evaluating new treatment strategies.

BACKGROUND: We describe the use of a conceptual framework and implementation protocol to prepare effective health services interventions for implementation in community-based (i.e., non-academic-affiliated) settings. METHODS: The framework is based on the experiences of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Replicating Effective Programs (REP) project, which has been at the forefront of developing systematic and effective strategies to prepare HIV interventions for dissemination. This article describes the REP framework, and how it can be applied to implement clinical and health services interventions in community-based organizations. RESULTS: REP consists of four phases: pre-conditions (e.g., identifying need, target population, and suitable intervention), pre-implementation (e.g., intervention packaging and community input), implementation (e.g., package dissemination, training, technical assistance, and evaluation), and maintenance and evolution (e.g., preparing the intervention for sustainability). Key components of REP, including intervention packaging, training, technical assistance, and fidelity assessment are crucial to the implementation of effective interventions in health care. CONCLUSION: REP is a well-suited framework for implementing health care interventions, as it specifies steps needed to maximize fidelity while allowing opportunities for flexibility (i.e., local customizing) to maximize transferability. Strategies that foster the sustainability of REP as a tool to implement effective health care interventions need to be developed and tested.