The Participant-Reported Implementation Update and Score (PRIUS): A Novel Method for Capturing Implementation-Related Data Over Time
February 19th, 2021
This protocol describes a novel method for collecting and analyzing data related to ongoing implementation called the Participant-Reported Implementation Update and Score (PRIUS). The PRIUS method allows for the efficient and systematic capture of data over time and from multiple viewpoints in healthcare settings.
The PRIUS method explicitly addresses the need for a brief and systematic method for collecting ongoing data about the status and progress of implementation from the perspectives of participants themselves. As a lead investigator on a project using this method, I can attest that it really gives the perspective of many different kinds of people over time about how the implementation process is unfolded. This technique addresses an outstanding need in healthcare research for an efficient, structured, and longitudinal method for capturing data on the status and progress of implementation.
To obtain a PRIUS score, at a mutually agreed upon time, meet the participant and pose the prompts asking for updates on the implementation of this project. Score each development with a seven-point scale ranging from plus three to minus three with zero as the middle value. Begin the session.
Well, great, we're here for our check-in, so I'm hoping to hear about some updates from the last time we spoke. So, if you just start with the first update. Well, so, the most exciting thing that's happened is that the database that we're using to identify eligible patients is finally up and running.
Okay, great. And would you say that's a positive, neutral, or a negative update? That's definitely a positive-Okay.event.
And in terms of its influence, would you say it's strong, medium, moderate, or weak? Strong.Okay.Strong, so it sounds like a plus three.Yes. And why would you say a plus three?
Well, I think it's really gonna help us to identify all of the potentially eligible patients and help us to recruit them in a really efficient way. Excellent, okay, great. Okay, do you have another update that you share?
I do. Unfortunately, many of the patients who we have scheduled for enrollment are too sick. They end up in the hospital and we're not able to enroll them in the program.
Okay, and again, would you say that's positive, neutral, or negative? That's a negative. That's a negative, okay.
And how strong of an influence, is it strong, moderate, or weak? I think it's a weak. Okay, a weak, so a negative one?
Yes.Negative one. And what would be the rationale for that? Well, I think it shows that we are enrolling the right patients.
We want to take care of the sickest patients. And I think that sometimes these things kind of come in waves, and so, it's just a recent new development and I'm hoping it won't last for too long. Okay, great.
Any other page you can think of? Well, we do have a new staff member who's just joined. Okay, and same thing, would you say that's positive, neutral, or negative?
I think that's neutral for today. Okay, neutral, great. And do you have any other further rationale for that?
Well, she's only just started and she's in training right now, so hopefully the next time we have an update, then it'll be a positive. But for right now, she's just in training. Okay, great, super.
Well, that's great, well, thank you for checking in with me. Thank you so much.Yeah. Later, use a spreadsheet template to capture each implementation related development that the participant reports under the column labeled, Update.
Each development gets its own row. For each development, enter the score that the participant reports in the spreadsheet for the column labeled, Score. Next, enter the rationale that the participant reports in the spreadsheet for each score.
A short text summary is sufficient. Then add any additional information to the optional comments column of the spreadsheet is appropriate including observed non-verbal cues such as facial expressions, body language, tone of voice, and or additional relevant details. Check in with each participant on a recurring basis.
Recording the participant provided information as demonstrated at each subsequent session. In this representative analysis, 12 staff members at a single Veterans Affairs Medical Center in the Midwestern United States participated in Prius sessions related to a quality improvement project over a six month period in 2016. This project resulted in a total of over 190 different Prius items.
The most frequent score applied by participants to Prius entries in this project was plus three. The highest possible score on the seven point minus three to plus three scale. Entry scored with a plus three included initial professional development and training events, interactions with the outside vendor, and implementation of new electronic tools.
The next most frequent score was minus two, the second lowest possible score. Entry scored with a minus two included interactions between individuals from different clinical areas. Slow initial patient enrollment and the need for follow-up training.
As intended, the Prius made the leader of the clinical intervention aware of an implementation issue that otherwise would've remained undetected, helped inform the development of a course correction and provided a way to evaluate the effect of that change on ongoing implementation. When asking participants to report and score implementation updates, it is extremely important to collect all three elements, the update, the score, and the rationale.
Overview
This protocol describes the Participant-Reported Implementation Update and Score (PRIUS), a novel method for collecting and analyzing ongoing implementation data in healthcare settings. The PRIUS method captures data systematically over time from multiple participant perspectives.
Key Study Components
Area of Science
- Healthcare research
- Implementation science
- Data collection methodologies
Background
- The PRIUS method addresses the need for structured data collection in implementation research.
- It allows for longitudinal tracking of implementation progress.
- Participants provide updates and scores based on their experiences.
- This method enhances understanding of the implementation process from various viewpoints.
Purpose of Study
- To develop an efficient method for ongoing data collection in healthcare settings.
- To capture participant perspectives on implementation status and progress.
- To inform project leaders about implementation issues that may arise.
Methods Used
- Participants provide updates on implementation at agreed-upon times.
- Each update is scored on a seven-point scale from -3 to +3.
- Rationale for scores is collected alongside updates.
- Data is recorded in a structured format for analysis.
Main Results
- Over 190 different PRIUS items were recorded during the study.
- The most frequent score was +3, indicating positive developments.
- Negative scores highlighted challenges in the implementation process.
- The PRIUS method facilitated timely identification of issues and informed corrective actions.
Conclusions
- The PRIUS method is a valuable tool for capturing ongoing implementation data.
- It provides insights into participant perspectives and project progress.
- This structured approach can enhance the effectiveness of implementation in healthcare settings.
Frequently Asked Questions
Executive Industry Relevance
Capturing real-time, participant-driven implementation data is critical for de-risking operational rollouts and ensuring translational continuity in healthcare innovation. The PRIUS method enables systematic, longitudinal tracking of implementation progress, surfacing actionable insights for R&D and operational leaders. This approach supports adaptive decision-making and portfolio-level oversight of complex clinical interventions.
Strategic Applications in Biopharma R&D
Early Discovery & Target Validation
- Enables continuous feedback on the adoption and integration of new protocols or interventions.
- Supports identification of barriers and facilitators to implementation from diverse stakeholder perspectives.
- Provides a structured mechanism for capturing qualitative and quantitative data relevant to target validation.
Screening & Assay Development
- Facilitates standardized reporting of implementation progress across multiple teams or sites.
- Enables reproducible tracking of operational milestones and bottlenecks in assay deployment.
- Supports readiness assessments for downstream workflow integration.
Translational & Preclinical Research
- Aligns implementation tracking with translational milestones and quality improvement initiatives.
- Enables early detection of issues that may impact preclinical or clinical continuity.
- Supports risk-adjusted advancement decisions by providing real-time operational data.
Pipeline & Workflow Integration
The PRIUS method fits within the implementation science continuum, bridging early discovery, operational rollout, and translational research by providing structured, participant-reported data streams.
- Discovery Biology: Captures real-world feedback on intervention deployment and operational feasibility.
- Screening: Standardizes progress tracking and enables quantitative comparison of implementation status.
- Analytics: Provides a seven-point scoring system and rationale for each update, supporting robust data analysis.
- Translational Research: Informs ongoing evaluation and course correction for implementation strategies.
- Enterprise Reuse: Offers a scalable, reusable framework for monitoring diverse implementation projects.
Operational & Enterprise Impact
- Scientific Value: Enhances predictive confidence and reduces operational ambiguity in implementation.
- Operational Value: Drives standardization, reproducibility, and timely identification of issues.
- Strategic Value: Informs go/no-go decisions and supports adaptive management of implementation portfolios.
- Portfolio Impact: Enables risk-adjusted prioritization and resource allocation across multiple initiatives.
Implementation Considerations
- Requires expertise in structured qualitative and quantitative data collection.
- Needs spreadsheet or database infrastructure for systematic data capture and analysis.
- Demands cross-team alignment on scoring criteria and reporting cadence.
- Adaptable to various intervention types and organizational contexts.
- Dependent on participant engagement and consistent longitudinal follow-up.
