A feasibility study of external implementation support provided across two states in the U.S.

Abstract

Background: External implementation support (EIS) can aid implementation and scale-up efforts, but less has been reported about the experience of those receiving EIS, such as the feasibility and usability of participating in the support process. Method: From November 2016 to April 2022, data were collected from the support participants across 13 regions in North Carolina and South Carolina implementing the Triple P system of interventions and the regional support team members who provided EIS to these partners. The experience of participating in EIS was assessed using measures of acceptability, appropriateness, accessibility, quality of delivery, feasibility, likelihood and actual use of support materials received, degree of collaboration, and frequency of contact. Mann–Whitney U tests or Kruskal–Wallis tests were conducted to explore differences in these measures across a variety of regional characteristics and contexts. Results: Support participants generally found EIS to be accessible, acceptable, appropriate, feasible, and delivered with high quality across different states, regions, and over the course of the support relationship. Support was generally provided 1–2 times per month and collaboration between regional support teams and regional Triple P partners was rated highly significant differences between support participant experiences were generally limited to ratings of support accessibility, engagement with data collection processes, and number of monthly contacts. Conclusions: This pattern of findings suggests that EIS as provided by regional support teams is feasible for support participants across a diversity of contexts. Additional research on EIS would help refine the field and illuminate promising practices and mechanisms of change to accelerate successful and sustainable implementation.