Leveraging Community Engagement and Human-Centered Design to Develop Multilevel Implementation Strategies to Enhance Adoption of a Health Equity Intervention

Background Health equity intervention implementation (which promotes positive health outcomes for populations experiencing disproportionately worse health) is often impeded by health-equity-specific barriers like provider bias; few studies demonstrate how to overcome these barriers through implementation strategies. An urgent health equity problem in the U.S. is the mental health of transgender youth. To address this, we developed Gender-Affirming Psychotherapy (GAP), a health equity intervention comprising best-practice mental health care for transgender youth. This paper details the identification of implementation determinants and the development of targeted strategies to promote provider adoption of GAP. Methods This study represents part of a larger study of mental health provider adoption of GAP. Here we describe the first 2 stages of the 3-stage community-engaged and human-centered design process – Discover, Design/Build, and Test – to identify implementation determinants of adoption and develop implementation strategies with transgender youth, their parents, and mental health providers. This process involved collecting data via focus groups, design meetings, usability testing, and champion meetings. Data were analyzed using rapid and conventional content analysis. Qualitative coding of implementation determinants was guided by the Health Equity Implementation Framework, and implementation strategy coding was facilitated by the ERIC Implementation Strategy Compilation. Results We identified 15 determinants of GAP adoption, and all were specific to the transgender population (e.g., inclusive record system, anti-transgender attitudes). Seventeen implementation strategies were recommended and 12 were developed, collectively addressing all identified determinants. Most strategies were packaged into an online self-paced mental health provider training (implementation intervention) with 6 training tools. Additional inner setting strategies were designed to support training uptake (e.g., mandate training) and GAP adoption (e.g., change record system). Conclusions Community-engaged and human-centered design methods can identify health equity intervention implementation determinants and develop targeted strategies. We highlight five generalizable takeaways for health equity implementation scientists: (1) implementer bias may be a key barrier, (2) experience with the health equity population may be an important facilitator, (3) stakeholder stories may be an effective training tool, (4) inner setting-level implementation strategies may be necessary, and (5) teaching implementers how to build implementation strategies can overcome resource-constraints. Trial registration: NCT05626231