Refocusing knowledge generation, application, and education: raising our gaze to promote health across boundaries

The Role of Primary Care in Improving Population Health

Policy Points Systems based on primary care have better population health, health equity, and health care quality, and lower health care expenditure. Primary care can be a boundary-spanning force to integrate and personalize the many factors from which population health emerges. Equitably advancing population health requires understanding and supporting the complexly interacting mechanisms by which primary care influences health, equity, and health costs.

An Extension of RE-AIM to Enhance Sustainability: Addressing Dynamic Context and Promoting Health Equity Over Time

RE-AIM is a widely adopted, robust implementation science (IS) framework used to inform intervention and implementation design, planning, and evaluation, as well as to address short-term maintenance. In recent years, there has been growing focus on the longer-term sustainability of evidence-based programs, policies and practices (EBIs). In particular, investigators have conceptualized sustainability as the continued health impact and delivery of EBIs over a longer period of time (e.g., years after initial implementation) and incorporated the complex and evolving nature of context. We propose a reconsideration of RE-AIM to integrate recent conceptualizations of sustainability with a focus on addressing dynamic context and promoting health equity. In this Perspective, we present an extension of the RE-AIM framework to guide planning, measurement/evaluation, and adaptations focused on enhancing sustainability. We recommend consideration of: (1) extension of "maintenance" within RE-AIM to include recent conceptualizations of dynamic, longer-term intervention sustainability and "evolvability" across the life cycle of EBIs, including adaptation and potential de-implementation in light of changing and evolving evidence, contexts, and population needs; (2) iterative application of RE-AIM assessments to guide adaptations and enhance long-term sustainability; (3) explicit consideration of equity and cost as fundamental, driving forces that need to be addressed across RE-AIM dimensions to enhance sustainability; and (4) use or integration of RE-AIM with other existing frameworks that address key contextual factors and examine multi-level determinants of sustainability. Finally, we provide testable hypotheses and detailed research questions to inform future research in these areas.

Engaging Learners in Health System Quality Improvement Efforts

In 1999, an Institute of Medicine report spurred health care organizations to implement systems-based quality improve ment efforts and tackle patient safety. Simultaneously, the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education asked residency programs to address Practice-Based Learning and Systems-Based Practice competencies. Medical educators now advocate incorporation of these competencies in undergraduate medical education.The authors examine the success of these efforts both from the health care delivery and systems perspective as well as from the perspective of educators as they aspire to engage medical students and residents in these domains. The authors argue that the missing element that prevents health care systems from the full realization of the promise of quality improvement is bidirectional alignment. Included are examples from the literature to demonstrate how medical educators are moving toward alignment of learners with health system quality improvement and safety needs. Finally, the authors explore business and information technology governance literature in support of the hypothesis that bidirectional alignment should be the next step in moving from reactive to proactive systems of care.

Integrative Medicine in Preventive Medicine Education: Competency and Curriculum Development for Preventive Medicine and Other Specialty Residency Programs

During 2012, the USDHHS's Health Resources and Services Administration funded 12 accredited preventive medicine residencies to incorporate an evidence-based integrative medicine curriculum into their training programs. It also funded a national coordinating center at the American College of Preventive Medicine, known as the Integrative Medicine in Preventive Medicine Education (IMPriME) Center, to provide technical assistance to the 12 grantees. To help with this task, the IMPriME Center established a multidisciplinary steering committee, versed in integrative medicine, whose primary aim was to develop integrative medicine core competencies for incorporation into preventive medicine graduate medical education training. The competency development process was informed by central integrative medicine definitions and principles, preventive medicine's dual role in clinical and population-based prevention, and the burgeoning evidence base of integrative medicine. The steering committee considered an interdisciplinary integrative medicine contextual framework guided by several themes related to workforce development and population health. A list of nine competencies, mapped to the six general domains of competence approved by the Accreditation Council of Graduate Medical Education, was operationalized through an iterative exercise with the 12 grantees in a process that included mapping each site's competency and curriculum products to the core competencies. The competencies, along with central curricular components informed by grantees' work presented elsewhere in this supplement, are outlined as a roadmap for residency programs aiming to incorporate integrative medicine content into their curricula. This set of competencies adds to the larger efforts of the IMPriME initiative to facilitate and enhance further curriculum development and implementation by not only the current grantees but other stakeholders in graduate medical education around integrative medicine training.

Praxis-based research networks: An emerging paradigm for research that is rigorous, relevant, and inclusive

Practice-based research networks (PBRNs) have developed a grounded approach to conducting practice-relevant and translational research in community practice settings. Seismic shifts in the health care landscape are shaping PBRNs that work across organizational and institutional margins to address complex problems. Praxis-based research networks combine PBRN knowledge generation with multistakeholder learning, experimentation, and application of practical knowledge. The catalytic processes in praxis-based research networks are cycles of action and reflection based on experience, observation, conceptualization, and experimentation by network members and partners. To facilitate co-learning and solution-building, these networks have a flexible architecture that allows pragmatic inclusion of stakeholders based on the demands of the problem and the needs of the network. Praxis-based research networks represent an evolving trend that combines the core values of PBRNs with new opportunities for relevance, rigor, and broad participation.

The 5 R's: an emerging bold standard for conducting relevant research in a changing world

Research often fails to find its way into practice or policy in a timely way, if at all. Given the current pressure and pace of health care change, many authors have recommended different approaches to make health care research more relevant and rapid. An emerging standard for research, the "5 R's" is a synthesis of recommendations for care delivery research that (1) is relevant to stakeholders; (2) is rapid and recursive in application; (3) redefines rigor; (4) reports on resources required; and (5) is replicable. Relevance flows from substantive ongoing participation by stakeholders. Rapidity and recursiveness occur through accelerated design and peer reviews followed by short learning/implementation cycles through which questions and answers evolve over time. Rigor is the disciplined conduct of shared learning within the specific changing situations in diverse settings. Resource reporting includes costs of interventions. Replicability involves designing for the factors that may affect subsequent implementation of an intervention or program in different contexts. These R's of the research process are mutually reinforcing and can be supported by training that fosters collaborative and reciprocal relationships among researchers, implementers, and other stakeholders. In sum, a standard is emerging for research that is both rigorous and relevant. Consistent and bold application will increase the value, timeliness, and applicability of the research enterprise.

Metrics for assessing improvements in primary health care

Metrics focus attention on what is important. Balanced metrics of primary health care inform purpose and aspiration as well as performance. Purpose in primary health care is about improving the health of people and populations in their community contexts. It is informed by metrics that include long-term, meaning- and relationship-focused perspectives. Aspirational uses of metrics inspire evolving insights and iterative improvement, using a collaborative, developmental perspective. Performance metrics assess the complex interactions among primary care tenets of accessibility, a whole-person focus, integration and coordination of care, and ongoing relationships with individuals, families, and communities; primary health care principles of inclusion and equity, a focus on people's needs, multilevel integration of health, collaborative policy dialogue, and stakeholder participation; basic and goal-directed health care, prioritization, development, and multilevel health outcomes. Environments that support reflection, development, and collaborative action are necessary for metrics to advance health and minimize unintended consequences.

An evidence integration triangle for aligning science with policy and practice

Over-reliance on decontextualized, standardized implementation of efficacy evidence has contributed to slow integration of evidence-based interventions into health policy and practice. This article describes an "evidence integration triangle" (EIT) to guide translation, implementation, prevention efforts, comparative effectiveness research, funding, and policymaking. The EIT emphasizes interactions among three related components needed for effective evidence implementation: (1) practical evidence-based interventions; (2) pragmatic, longitudinal measures of progress; and (3) participatory implementation processes. At the center of the EIT is active engagement of key stakeholders and scientific evidence and attention to the context in which a program is implemented. The EIT model is a straightforward framework to guide practice, research, and policy toward greater effectiveness and is designed to be applicable across multiple levels-from individual-focused and patient-provider interventions, to health systems and policy-level change initiatives.