The impact of Put Prevention into Practice on selected clinical preventive services in five Texas sites

Patient reminder and recall interventions to improve immunization rates

BACKGROUND

Immunization rates for children and adults are rising, but coverage levels have not reached optimal goals. As a result, vaccine-preventable diseases still occur. In an era of increasing complexity of immunization schedules, rising expectations about the performance of primary care, and large demands on primary care providers, it is important to understand and promote interventions that work in primary care settings to increase immunization coverage. One common theme across immunization programs in many nations involves the challenge of implementing a population-based approach and identifying all eligible recipients, for example the children who should receive the measles vaccine. However, this issue is gradually being addressed through the availability of immunization registries and electronic health records. A second common theme is identifying the best strategies to promote high vaccination rates. Three types of strategies have been studied: (1) patient-oriented interventions, such as patient reminder or recall, (2) provider interventions, and (3) system interventions, such as school laws. One of the most prominent intervention strategies, and perhaps best studied, involves patient reminder or recall systems. This is an update of a previously published review.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate and compare the effectiveness of various types of patient reminder and recall interventions to improve receipt of immunizations.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and CINAHL to January 2017. We also searched grey literature and trial registers to January 2017.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized trials, controlled before and after studies, and interrupted time series evaluating immunization-focused patient reminder or recall interventions in children, adolescents, and adults who receive immunizations in any setting. We included no-intervention control groups, standard practice activities that did not include immunization patient reminder or recall, media-based activities aimed at promoting immunizations, or simple practice-based awareness campaigns. We included receipt of any immunizations as eligible outcome measures, excluding special travel immunizations. We excluded patients who were hospitalized for the duration of the study period.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane and the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) Group. We present results for individual studies as relative rates using risk ratios, and risk differences for randomized trials, and as absolute changes in percentage points for controlled before-after studies. We present pooled results for randomized trials using the random-effects model.

MAIN RESULTS

The 75 included studies involved child, adolescent, and adult participants in outpatient, community-based, primary care, and other settings in 10 countries.Patient reminder or recall interventions, including telephone and autodialer calls, letters, postcards, text messages, combination of mail or telephone, or a combination of patient reminder or recall with outreach, probably improve the proportion of participants who receive immunization (risk ratio (RR) of 1.28, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.23 to 1.35; risk difference of 8%) based on moderate certainty evidence from 55 studies with 138,625 participants.Three types of single-method reminders improve receipt of immunizations based on high certainty evidence: the use of postcards (RR 1.18, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.30; eight studies; 27,734 participants), text messages (RR 1.29, 95% CI 1.15 to 1.44; six studies; 7772 participants), and autodialer (RR 1.17, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.32; five studies; 11,947 participants). Two types of single-method reminders probably improve receipt of immunizations based on moderate certainty evidence: the use of telephone calls (RR 1.75, 95% CI 1.20 to 2.54; seven studies; 9120 participants) and letters to patients (RR 1.29, 95% CI 1.21 to 1.38; 27 studies; 81,100 participants).Based on high certainty evidence, reminders improve receipt of immunizations for childhood (RR 1.22, 95% CI 1.15 to 1.29; risk difference of 8%; 23 studies; 31,099 participants) and adolescent vaccinations (RR 1.29, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.42; risk difference of 7%; 10 studies; 30,868 participants). Reminders probably improve receipt of vaccinations for childhood influenza (RR 1.51, 95% CI 1.14 to 1.99; risk difference of 22%; five studies; 9265 participants) and adult influenza (RR 1.29, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.43; risk difference of 9%; 15 studies; 59,328 participants) based on moderate certainty evidence. They may improve receipt of vaccinations for adult pneumococcus, tetanus, hepatitis B, and other non-influenza vaccinations based on low certainty evidence although the confidence interval includes no effect of these interventions (RR 2.08, 95% CI 0.91 to 4.78; four studies; 8065 participants).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Patient reminder and recall systems, in primary care settings, are likely to be effective at improving the proportion of the target population who receive immunizations.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of practice facilitation within primary care settings

PURPOSE

This study was a systematic review with a quantitative synthesis of the literature examining the overall effect size of practice facilitation and possible moderating factors. The primary outcome was the change in evidence-based practice behavior calculated as a standardized mean difference.

METHODS

In this systematic review, we searched 4 electronic databases and the reference lists of published literature reviews to find practice facilitation studies that identified evidence-based guideline implementation within primary care practices as the outcome. We included randomized and nonrandomized controlled trials and prospective cohort studies published from 1966 to December 2010 in English language only peer-reviewed journals. Reviews of each study were conducted and assessed for quality; data were abstracted, and standardized mean difference estimates and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using a random-effects model. Publication bias, influence, subgroup, and meta-regression analyses were also conducted.

RESULTS

Twenty-three studies contributed to the analysis for a total of 1,398 participating practices: 697 practice facilitation intervention and 701 control group practices. The degree of variability between studies was consistent with what would be expected to occur by chance alone (I2 = 20%). An overall effect size of 0.56 (95% CI, 0.43-0.68) favored practice facilitation (z = 8.76; P <.001), and publication bias was evident. Primary care practices are 2.76 (95% CI, 2.18-3.43) times more likely to adopt evidence-based guidelines through practice facilitation. Meta-regression analysis indicated that tailoring (P = .05), the intensity of the intervention (P = .03), and the number of intervention practices per facilitator (P = .004) modified evidence-based guideline adoption.

CONCLUSION

Practice facilitation has a moderately robust effect on evidence-based guideline adoption within primary care. Implementation fidelity factors, such as tailoring, the number of practices per facilitator, and the intensity of the intervention, have important resource implications.

Practicing preventive health: the underlying culture among low-income rural populations

CONTEXT

Health disparities on the basis of geographic location, social economic factors and education levels are well documented. However, even when health care services are available, there is no guarantee that all persons will take preventive health measures. Understanding the cultural beliefs, practices, and lifestyle choices that determine utilization of health services is an important factor in combating chronic diseases.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to investigate personal, cultural, and external barriers that interfered with participating in a community-based preventive outreach program that included health screening for obesity, diabetes, heart diseases, and hypertension when cost and transportation factors were addressed.

METHODS

Six focus groups were conducted in a rural community of Louisiana. Focus groups were divided into 2 categories: participants and nonparticipants. Three focus groups were completed with Dubach Health Outreach Project (DUHOP) participants and 3 were completed with nonparticipants. The focus group interviews were moderated by a researcher experienced in focus group interviews; a graduate student assisted with recording and note-taking during the sessions.

FINDINGS

Four main themes associated with barriers to participation in preventive services emerged from the discussions: (1) time, (2) low priority, (3) fear of the unknown, and (4) lack of companionship or support. Health concerns, free services, enjoyment, and free food were identified as motivators for participation.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this study indicated that the resulting synergy between low-income status and a lack of motivation regarding health care prevention created a complicated practice of health care procrastination, which resulted in unnecessary emergency care and disease progression. To change this practice to proactive disease prevention and self care, a concerted effort will need to be implemented by policy makers, funding agents, health care providers, and community leaders and members.

Improving delivery of clinical preventive services: a multi-year journey

BACKGROUND

Adults in the United States typically do not receive all recommended clinical preventive services (CPS) for which they are eligible, missing opportunities for prevention and/or early detection. A multi-year quality improvement initiative targeting CPS delivery in a fee-for-service ambulatory care network is described.

METHODS

Since 1999, HealthTexas Provider Network (HTPN) has implemented multiple initiatives to increase CPS delivery, including a flowsheet, a physician champion model, physician- and practice-level audit and feedback, and rapid-cycle quality improvement training.

RESULTS

From 2000 to 2006, "recommended or done" CPS delivery increased from 68% to 92%, and "done" from 70% to 86% (2001 to 2006). "Perfect care" composite performance increased from 0.19 to 0.51 (2001 to 2006).

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term, multistrategy approaches can achieve substantial sustained improvement in CPS delivery throughout a large ambulatory care provider network.

Utilization of prevention research: searching for evidence

OBJECTIVE

Understanding the process of translating prevention research into practice calls for systematic efforts to assess the state of the published literature on the utilization of prevention research in public health programs and policy. This review describes the search strategy, methods, results, and challenges in identifying and reviewing literature relevant to this objective.

METHODS

Systematic searches of topics related to prevention research in literature published in 1995-2002 revealed 86 empiric articles in 12 public health areas.

RESULTS

A lack of uniform terminology, variation in publication sources, and limited descriptions of the stages of research utilization (e.g., adoption and implementation) in the published literature posed major challenges to identifying articles that met study criteria. Most accepted articles assessed the adoption or implementation of prevention research; four examined long-term sustainability. There was approximately equal distribution of reported research set in either health services or public health settings. Few of the articles contained search terms reflecting all four concept areas (prevention, public health, research, and use) targeted by the literature search.

CONCLUSIONS

Refining terms used in prevention research and research utilization could address lack of shared and unique definitions. Expanded reporting of research utilization stages in reports of prevention research could lead to improved literature searches and contribute to more successful adoption, implementation, and further use of prevention research products.

Associations between obesity and receipt of screening mammography, Papanicolaou tests, and influenza vaccination: results from the Health and Retirement Study (HRS) and the Asset and Health Dynamics Among the Oldest Old (AHEAD) Study

OBJECTIVES

Obese Americans, who receive more care for chronic diseases, may receive fewer preventive services. We evaluated the association between body mass index (BMI) and receipt of screening mammography and Papanicolaou tests among middle-aged women and the association between BMI and receipt of influenza vaccination among the elderly.

METHODS

We analyzed 2 datasets: the Health and Retirement Study (4439 women aged 50-61 years) and the Asset and Health Dynamics Among the Oldest Old (AHEAD) Study (4045 women and 2154 men aged 70 years or more).

RESULTS

When BMI was greater than 18.5 kg/m2, we found an inverse dose-response relationship between BMI and receipt of screening mammography and Pap tests among White, but not Black, middle-aged women. We found a similar association between BMI and influenza vaccination among the elderly.

CONCLUSIONS

Higher BMI was associated with less frequent receipt of preventive services among middle-aged White women and elderly White women and men. The Healthy People 2010 clinical preventive service goals remain elusive, especially for overweight and obese White persons.

Utilizing "PPIP Texas style!" in a medically underserved population

Implementation models, such as the national Put Prevention Into Practice program, have produced small to moderate changes in the delivery of preventive services in primary care. More recently, researchers concluded that guides and tools, such as the PPIP toolkit, are helpful, but are not sufficient to facilitate substantive change in clinical preventive practice. Successful implementation of clinical preventive services, according to the Texas Department of Health-PPIP (TDH-PPIP) initiative, involves creating or altering systems to produce change in service delivery for a specific setting. This article describes the ways in which the guidelines and instruments that were developed and refined through the collaborative efforts among public and private health systems were used to implement systems change and improve clinical preventive services at one community primary health care clinic in Texas. The process and empirical results of using the TDH-PPIP Implementation Model in the field are also presented, as well as a discussion of one-year evaluation data.

Sustainability of a practice-individualized preventive service delivery intervention

BACKGROUND

The long-term effect of most interventions has not been studied. Changes due to interventions to improve patient care may revert to baseline after the intervention stimulus ends. This analysis reports the 24-month follow-up of a practice-tailored intervention to increase preventive service delivery rates.

DESIGN

Group randomized clinical trial with 24-month follow-up of intervention sites.

SETTING/PARTICIPANTS

Seventy-seven community family practices in northeast Ohio.

INTERVENTION

Practice-individualized facilitation of implementation of tools and approaches.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Summary scores of health habit counseling, screening, and immunization services recommended by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force that were up to date for consecutive patients during randomly selected chart review days.

RESULTS

Previously reported increases in global preventive service delivery rates, health habit counseling, and screening rates at 12 months were sustained after 24 months.

CONCLUSIONS

A practice-individualized approach can result in sustainable increases in rates of preventive service delivery, even 1 year after the outside intervention stimulus ends. Tailoring of approaches to the unique characteristics of each practice may result in institutionalization of changes.