Symposia
Dissemination & Implementation Science
Gwendolyn Lawson, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor
The Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Gwendolyn Lawson, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor
The Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Samantha Tavlin, MA
Clinical Research Coordinator
Children's Hospital of Philadelphia
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Julie S. Owens, Ph.D.
Professor
Ohio University
Athens, OH
David Mandell, Other
Professor and Director
Center for Mental Health
Philadelphia, PA
Aaron Lyon, PhD
Professor
University of Washington
Seattle, Washington
Aubrey Depa, BA
PBIS Coach, Specialist for Classroom Implementation Projects
School District of Philadelphia
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Steven Rufe, M.Ed.
Director, Positive Behavior Interventions & Supports (PBIS)
School District of Philadelphia
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Thomas J. Power, ABPP, Ph.D.
Professor
Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Perelman School of Medicine at University of Pennsylvania
Turnersville, NJ
Classroom behavioral interventions comprise a well-established treatment for attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD; Evans et al., 2018). However, they can be difficult to use in schools. Schools need effective and appropriate implementation strategies to support teachers in using them, especially in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, which has created additional stressors. Developing implementation strategies in partnership with stakeholders makes them more likely to be usable, acceptable, and sustainable. This presentation will share data from an iterative, stakeholder-partnered process of developing a toolkit to support evidence-based behavioral intervention for ADHD in classrooms.
We conducted a series of tryouts in which teachers of diverse backgrounds used a version of the Toolkit. After each tryout, teachers provided quantitative feedback using the Acceptability of Intervention Measure (AIM), Intervention Appropriateness Measure (IAM), and Feasibility of Intervention Measure (FIM; Weiner et al., 2017). Teachers also provided qualitative feedback through semi-structured interviews that probed for usability, acceptability, appropriateness, perceived impact, and recommendations for Toolkit components.
After each round of feedback, we coded the interview transcripts and analyzed for major themes. The themes were discussed with a Program Development Team of school district stakeholders and informed revisions to the Toolkit. After the first round of tryouts, the mean scores on the quantitative measures (all measured on a 5-point scale, where 1 is the lowest and 5 is the highest) were: 4.41 (SD = .52) on the AIM, 4.25 (SD = .66) on the IAM and 4.41 (SD = .52) on the FIM. Major qualitative themes included: 1) The Toolkit meets an important need; 2) The Toolkit is feasible and easy to engage with; 3) Adaptations for age, culture, and exposure to traumatic stress would make the Toolkit more appropriate for the context; 4) The student-teacher relationship is foundational for implementation. Data collection and analysis for additional tryouts is ongoing and will be complete by June 2022.
The presentation will share examples of how qualitative and quantitative data from users informed iterative revisions to the Toolkit in partnership with the Program Development Team, thus providing a model for a process of stakeholder-partnered intervention and implementation strategy development that is applicable across settings and populations.