Implementation of Bright Light Therapy ID

acceptability

Acceptability (Proctor et al., 2011) is the perception among implementation stakeholders that a given treatment, service, practice, or innovation is agreeable, palatable, or satisfactory. This will be measured by interviews.

Time frame: three times during study, 3-4 months in between

appropriateness

Appropriateness (Proctor et al., 2011) is the perceived fit, relevance, or compatibility of the innovation or evidence based practice for a given practice setting, provider, or consumer; and/or perceived fit of the innovation to address a particular issue or problem. This will be measured by interviews.

Time frame: three times during study, 3-4 months in between

feasibility of the intervention

Feasibility (Proctor et al., 2011) is defined as the extent to which a new treatment, or an innovation, can be successfully used or carried out within a given agency or setting. This will be measured by interviews.

Time frame: three times during study, 3-4 months in between

fidelity

Fidelity (Proctor et al., 2011) is defined as the degree to which an intervention was implemented as it was prescribed in the original protocol or as it was intended by the program developers. This will be measured by interviews and by case report study.

Time frame: three times during study, 3-4 months in between

strategies

Implementation strategies are methods to enhance the adoption, implementation and sustainability of a policy or intervention. This will be studied with interview data and logs.

Time frame: three times during study, 3-4 months in between

Determinants

Barriers and facilitators to BLT, measured by interviews using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR, Damschroder et al., 2009)

Time frame: three times during study, 3-4 months in between