The Asthma Toolkit Bootcamp to Improve Rural Primary Care for Pediatric Asthma

Applying the dissemination and implementation sciences to allergy and immunology: A Work Group Report from the AAAAI Quality, Adherence, and Outcomes Committee

Translating evidence-based practice (EBP) into real-world clinical settings often takes a considerable amount of time and resources. In allergy and immunology, the dissemination and implementation (D&I) sciences facilitate the study of how variations in knowledge, resources, patient populations, and staffing models lead to differences in the clinical care of asthma, allergic disease, and primary immunodeficiency. Despite the need for validated approaches to study how to best apply EBP in the real world, the D&I sciences are underutilized. To address this gap, an American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology (AAAAI) work group was convened to provide an overview for the role of the D&I sciences in clinical care and future research within the field. For the D&I sciences to be leveraged effectively, teams should be multidisciplinary and inclusive of community and clinical partners, and multimethods approaches to data collection and analyses should be used. Used appropriately, the D&I sciences provide important tools to promote EBP and health equity as well as optimization of clinical practice in allergy and immunology.

Implementing evidence-based practices in rural settings: a scoping review of theories, models, and frameworks

Background

Rural healthcare has unique characteristics that affect the dissemination and implementation of evidence-based interventions. Numerous theories, models, and frameworks have been developed to guide implementation of healthcare interventions, though not specific to rural healthcare. The present scoping review sought to identify the theories, models, and frameworks most frequently applied to rural health and propose an approach to rural health research that harnesses selected constructs from these theories, models, and frameworks. This resulting synthesis can serve as a guide to researchers, policy makers, and clinicians seeking to employ commonly used theories, models, and frameworks to rural health.

Methods

We used the Scopus abstract indexing service to identify peer-reviewed literature citing one or more of theories, models, or frameworks used in dissemination and implementation research and including the word "rural" in the Title, Abstract, or Keywords. We screened the remaining titles and abstracts to ensure articles met additional inclusion criteria. We conducted a full review of the resulting 172 articles to ensure they identified one or more discrete theory, model, or framework applied to research or quality improvement projects. We extracted the theories, models, and frameworks and categorized these as process models, determinant frameworks, classic theories, or evaluation frameworks.

Results

We retained 61 articles of which 28 used RE-AIM, 11 used Community-Based Participatory Research (CBPR) framework, eight used the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), and six used the integrated-Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (iPARIHS). Additional theories, models, and frameworks were cited in three or fewer reports in the literature. The 14 theories, models, and frameworks cited in the literature were categorized as seven process models, four determinant frameworks, one evaluation framework, and one classic theory.

Conclusions

The RE-AIM framework was the most frequently cited framework in the rural health literature, followed by CBPR, CFIR, and iPARIHS. A notable advantage of RE-AIM in rural healthcare settings is the focus on reach as a specified outcome, given the challenges of engaging a geographically diffuse and often isolated population. We present a rationale for combining the strengths of these theories, models, and frameworks to guide a research agenda specific to rural healthcare research.

Systematic Review Registration

https://osf.io/fn2cd/.

A scoping review of theories, models and frameworks used or proposed to evaluate knowledge mobilization strategies

BACKGROUND

Evaluating knowledge mobilization strategies (KMb) presents challenges for organizations seeking to understand their impact to improve KMb effectiveness. Moreover, the large number of theories, models, and frameworks (TMFs) available can be confusing for users. Therefore, the purpose of this scoping review was to identify and describe the characteristics of TMFs that have been used or proposed in the literature to evaluate KMb strategies.

METHODS

A scoping review methodology was used. Articles were identified through searches in electronic databases, previous reviews and reference lists of included articles. Titles, abstracts and full texts were screened in duplicate. Data were charted using a piloted data charting form. Data extracted included study characteristics, KMb characteristics, and TMFs used or proposed for KMb evaluation. An adapted version of Nilsen (Implement Sci 10:53, 2015) taxonomy and the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) taxonomy (Powell et al. in Implement Sci 10:21, 2015) guided data synthesis.

RESULTS

Of the 4763 search results, 505 were retrieved, and 88 articles were eligible for review. These consisted of 40 theoretical articles (45.5%), 44 empirical studies (50.0%) and four protocols (4.5%). The majority were published after 2010 (n = 70, 79.5%) and were health related (n = 71, 80.7%). Half of the studied KMb strategies were implemented in only four countries: Canada, Australia, the United States and the United Kingdom (n = 42, 47.7%). One-third used existing TMFs (n = 28, 31.8%). According to the adapted Nilsen taxonomy, process models (n = 34, 38.6%) and evaluation frameworks (n = 28, 31.8%) were the two most frequent types of TMFs used or proposed to evaluate KMb. According to the ERIC taxonomy, activities to "train and educate stakeholders" (n = 46, 52.3%) were the most common, followed by activities to "develop stakeholder interrelationships" (n = 23, 26.1%). Analysis of the TMFs identified revealed relevant factors of interest for the evaluation of KMb strategies, classified into four dimensions: context, process, effects and impacts.

CONCLUSIONS

This scoping review provides an overview of the many KMb TMFs used or proposed. The results provide insight into potential dimensions and components to be considered when assessing KMb strategies.

A Primary Care-Based Quality Improvement Project to Reduce Asthma Emergency Department Visits

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Asthma exacerbation is a common and often preventable cause of Emergency Department (ED) utilization. Children eligible for Medicaid are at increased risk of poor asthma control and subsequent ED visits. In 2010, we implemented a multicomponent longitudinal quality improvement project to improve pediatric asthma care for our primary care population, which was 90% Medicaid-eligible. Our goal was to reduce asthma-related ED visits by patients ages 2 to 18 years by 3% annually.

METHODS

The setting was a multisite large urban high-risk primary care network affiliated with a children's hospital. We implemented 5 sequential interventions within our network of pediatric primary care centers to increase: use of asthma action plans by clinicians, primary care-based Asthma Specialty Clinic visits (extended asthma visits in the main primary care site), use of a standard asthma note at all visits, documentation of the Asthma Control Test, and step-up therapy for children with poorly controlled asthma.

RESULTS

At baseline in 2010, there were 21.7 asthma-related ED visits per 1000 patients per year. By 2019, asthma-related ED visits decreased to 14.5 per 1000 patients per year, a 33% decrease, with 2 center line shifts over time. We achieved and sustained our goal metrics for 4 of 5 key interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

We reduced ED utilization for asthma in a large, high-risk pediatric population. The interventions implemented and used over time in this project demonstrate that sustainable outcomes can be achieved in a large network of primary care clinics.

Implementation of standardized asthma management programs in outpatient settings

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This article reviews new approaches, facilitators, barriers, and opportunities to increasing adoption of standardized asthma management programs in the outpatient care setting.

RECENT FINDINGS

Primary care clinicians providing asthma care in the outpatient setting are challenged by the complexity of guidelines and want standardization of tools that are easy to use and that can be integrated within their practice's workflow. Programs that integrate clinical decision support tools within a practice's electronic health record and provide support from specialists may enhance uptake of asthma management programs in the outpatient setting and reduce asthma morbidity. Lack of an implementation science framework, consideration for organizational context, and clinician buy-in are recently recognized barriers to adoption of asthma programs and improved asthma outcomes. In addition, many of these interventions are labor intensive, costly, and may not be capable of wide dissemination because of the EHR interoperability problem.

CONCLUSION

Programs that simplify the guidelines, integrate clinical decision support within the EHR, and ground their approach with an implementation science framework may improve the quality of asthma care provided in the outpatient setting.

The Role of Access and Cost-Effectiveness in Managing Asthma: A Systematic Review

Background

Inconsistent and unequal access to medical care is an issue that predates the COVID19 pandemic, which only worsened the problem. Limited access to care from asthma specialists and other specialists treating comorbid diseases may adversely affect asthma.

Objective

The purpose of this review is to identify health disparities associated with access to care for asthma, and cost-effectiveness of therapies and interventions addressing this health disparity.

Methods

A narrative systematic review was undertaken using MeSH searches of English language articles published in CINAHL, Scopus, or PubMed.

Results

A total of 725 articles were identified. Barriers recognized from the literature included access to diagnostic spirometry, access to specialists, medication formulary restrictions, and issues leading to medical nonadherence. Telemedicine, school-based health care interventions, digital applications, and non–office-based digital spirometry could be used to address these gaps in access to asthma care while potentially being cost-effective.

Conclusion

With the widespread adoption of telemedicine because of the pandemic, and adoption of other mobile services, we now have potential tools that can increase access to asthma care, which can help address this health care inequity. Evidence is limited, but favorable, that some of these tools may be cost-effective.

An asthma collaboration to reduce childhood asthma disparities on the Navajo Nation: Trial protocol for the Community Asthma Program

Navajo children disproportionately experience poor asthma outcomes. Following a one-year community engagement period with key stakeholders from the Navajo Nation, the Community Asthma Program (CAP) was created using evidenced based programs with the goal of reducing asthma disparities among Navajo children. CAP is being evaluated with a six-year, multi-site step-wedge design in three Navajo communities: Tuba City, Chinle and Fort Defiance, Arizona. The primary outcome is asthma exacerbations defined as use of systemic oral corticosteroids, asthma hospitalizations, asthma related ED visits, and ICU admissions. Asthma exacerbations will be measured using data from the electronic medical records of the three community health care centers. Secondary outcomes include will changes in asthma-related events and asthma control. The RE-AIM ( R each and representativeness, 2) E ffectiveness, 3) A doption, 4) I mplementation, and 5) M aintenance) framework is being used to guide the implementation evaluation which includes iterative collection and analysis of process data to identify facilitators and barriers, describe relevant organizational contexts, and inform strategies for dissemination. The CAP intervention requires community engagement and participation, building community capacity, incorporating evidenced-based guidelines and practices while ensuring program strategies actively involve Navajo community members during all steps of the intervention. The outcome of this trial will allow us to determine the effectiveness of a multi-component, community-focused intervention to improve asthma in a tribal community.