Computable Guidelines and Clinical Decision Support for Cervical Cancer Screening and Management to Improve Outcomes and Health Equity

HL7 Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources (HL7 FHIR) in digital healthcare ecosystems for chronic disease management: Scoping review

BACKGROUND

The prevalence of chronic diseases has shifted the burden of disease from incidental acute inpatient admissions to long-term coordinated care across healthcare institutions and the patient's home. Digital healthcare ecosystems emerge to target increasing healthcare costs and invest in standard Application Programming Interfaces (API), such as HL7 Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources (HL7 FHIR) for trusted data flows.

OBJECTIVES

This scoping review assessed the role and impact of HL7 FHIR and associated Implementation Guides (IGs) in digital healthcare ecosystems focusing on chronic disease management.

METHODS

To study trends and developments relevant to HL7 FHIR, a scoping review of the scientific and gray English literature from 2017 to 2023 was used.

RESULTS

The selection of 93 of 524 scientific papers reviewed in English indicates that the popularity of HL7 FHIR as a robust technical interface standard for the health sector has been steadily rising since its inception in 2010, reaching a peak in 2021. Digital Health applications use HL7 FHIR in cancer (45 %), cardiovascular disease (CVD) (more than 15 %), and diabetes (almost 15 %). The scoping review revealed that references to HL7 FHIR IGs are limited to ∼ 20 % of articles reviewed. HL7 FHIR R4 was most frequently referenced when the HL7 FHIR version was mentioned. In HL7 FHIR IGs registries and the internet, we found 35 HL7 FHIR IGs addressing chronic disease management, i.e., cancer (40 %), chronic disease management (25 %), and diabetes (20 %). HL7 FHIR IGs frequently complement the information in the article.

CONCLUSIONS

HL7 FHIR matures with each revision of the standard as HL7 FHIR IGs are developed with validated data sets, common shared HL7 FHIR resources, and supporting tools. Referencing HL7 FHIR IGs cataloged in official registries and in scientific publications is recommended to advance data quality and facilitate mutual learning in growing digital healthcare ecosystems that nurture interoperability in digital health innovation.

Clinical Decision Support System for Guidelines-Based Treatment of Gonococcal Infections, Screening for HIV, and Prescription of Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis: Design and Implementation Study

BACKGROUND

The syndemic nature of gonococcal infections and HIV provides an opportunity to develop a synergistic intervention tool that could address the need for adequate treatment for gonorrhea, screen for HIV infections, and offer pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) for persons who meet the criteria. By leveraging information available on electronic health records, a clinical decision support (CDS) system tool could fulfill this need and improve adherence to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) treatment and screening guidelines for gonorrhea, HIV, and PrEP.

OBJECTIVE

The goal of this study was to translate portions of CDC treatment guidelines for gonorrhea and relevant portions of HIV screening and prescribing PrEP that stem from a diagnosis of gonorrhea as an electronic health record-based CDS intervention. We also assessed whether this CDS solution worked in real-world clinic.

METHODS

We developed 4 tools for this CDS intervention: a form for capturing sexual history information (SmartForm), rule-based alerts (best practice advisory), an enhanced sexually transmitted infection (STI) order set (SmartSet), and a documentation template (SmartText). A mixed methods pre-post design was used to measure the feasibility, use, and usability of the CDS solution. The study period was 12 weeks with a baseline patient sample of 12 weeks immediately prior to the intervention period for comparison. While the entire clinic had access to the CDS solution, we focused on a subset of clinicians who frequently engage in the screening and treatment of STIs within the clinical site under the name "X-Clinic." We measured the use of the CDS solution within the population of patients who had either a confirmed gonococcal infection or an STI-related chief complaint. We conducted 4 midpoint surveys and 3 key informant interviews to quantify perception and impact of the CDS solution and solicit suggestions for potential future enhancements. The findings from qualitative data were determined using a combination of explorative and comparative analysis. Statistical analysis was conducted to compare the differences between patient populations in the baseline and intervention periods.

RESULTS

Within the X-Clinic, the CDS alerted clinicians (as a best practice advisory) in one-tenth (348/3451, 10.08%) of clinical encounters. These 348 encounters represented 300 patients; SmartForms were opened for half of these patients (157/300, 52.33%) and was completed for most for them (147/300, 89.81%). STI test orders (SmartSet) were initiated by clinical providers in half of those patients (162/300, 54%). HIV screening was performed during about half of those patient encounters (191/348, 54.89%).

CONCLUSIONS

We successfully built and implemented multiple CDC treatment and screening guidelines into a single cohesive CDS solution. The CDS solution was integrated into the clinical workflow and had a high rate of use.

Enduring Consensus Guidelines for Cervical Cancer Screening and Management: Introduction to the Scope and Process

OBJECTIVES

The Enduring Consensus Cervical Cancer Screening and Management Guidelines (Enduring Guidelines) effort is a standing committee to continuously evaluate new technologies and approaches to cervical cancer screening, management, and surveillance.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The Enduring Guidelines process will selectively incorporate new technologies and approaches with adequate supportive data to more effectively improve cancer prevention for high-risk individuals and decrease unnecessary procedures in low-risk individuals. This manuscript describes the structure, process, and methods of the Enduring Guidelines effort. Using systematic literature reviews and primary data sources, risk of precancer will be estimated and recommendations will be made based on risk estimates in the context of established risk-based clinical action thresholds. The Enduring Guidelines process will consider health equity and health disparities by assuring inclusion of diverse populations in the evidence review and risk assessment and by developing recommendations that provide a choice of well-validated strategies that can be adapted to different settings.

CONCLUSIONS

The Enduring Guidelines process will allow updating existing cervical cancer screening and management guidelines rapidly when new technologies are approved or new scientific evidence becomes available.

A qualitative study of primary care clinician's approach to ending cervical cancer screening in older women in the United States

The United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommends that cervical cancer screening end in average-risk patients with a cervix at 65 years of age if adequate screening measures have been met, defined as having 1) at least three normal consecutive cytology (Pap) tests, or 2) two normal cytology tests and/or two negative high-risk human papillomavirus tests between ages 55-65; the last test should be performed within the prior 5 years. Up to 60 % of all women aged 65 years and older who are ending screening do not meet the criteria for adequate screening. The objective of this study was to understand the process and approach that healthcare clinicians use to determine eligibility to end cervical cancer screening. In 2021 we conducted semi-structured interviews in San Francisco, CA with twelve healthcare clinicians: two family medicine physicians, three general internal medicine physicians, two obstetrician/gynecologists and five nurse practitioners. Thematic analysis, using inductive and deductive coding, was utilized. Three major themes emerged: following guidelines, relying on self-reported data regarding prior screening, and considering sexual activity as a factor in the decision to end screening. All interviewees endorsed following the USPSTF guidelines and they utilized self-report to determine eligibility to end screening. Clinicians' approach was dependent in part on their judgement about the reliability of the patient to convey their screening history. Sexual activity of the patient was considered when making clinical recommendations. Shared decision-making was often utilized. Clinicians voiced a strong reliance on self-reported screening history to end cervical cancer screening.

A Multilevel Primary Care Intervention to Improve Follow-Up of Overdue Abnormal Cancer Screening Test Results: A Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Realizing the benefits of cancer screening requires testing of eligible individuals and processes to ensure follow-up of abnormal results.

Objective

To test interventions to improve timely follow-up of overdue abnormal breast, cervical, colorectal, and lung cancer screening results.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Pragmatic, cluster randomized clinical trial conducted at 44 primary care practices within 3 health networks in the US enrolling patients with at least 1 abnormal cancer screening test result not yet followed up between August 24, 2020, and December 13, 2021.

Intervention

Automated algorithms developed using data from electronic health records (EHRs) recommended follow-up actions and times for abnormal screening results. Primary care practices were randomized in a 1:1:1:1 ratio to (1) usual care, (2) EHR reminders, (3) EHR reminders and outreach (a patient letter was sent at week 2 and a phone call at week 4), or (4) EHR reminders, outreach, and navigation (a patient letter was sent at week 2 and a navigator outreach phone call at week 4). Patients, physicians, and practices were unblinded to treatment assignment.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was completion of recommended follow-up within 120 days of study enrollment. The secondary outcomes included completion of recommended follow-up within 240 days of enrollment and completion of recommended follow-up within 120 days and 240 days for specific cancer types and levels of risk.

Results

Among 11 980 patients (median age, 60 years [IQR, 52-69 years]; 64.8% were women; 83.3% were White; and 15.4% were insured through Medicaid) with an abnormal cancer screening test result for colorectal cancer (8245 patients [69%]), cervical cancer (2596 patients [22%]), breast cancer (1005 patients [8%]), or lung cancer (134 patients [1%]) and abnormal test results categorized as low risk (6082 patients [51%]), medium risk (3712 patients [31%]), or high risk (2186 patients [18%]), the adjusted proportion who completed recommended follow-up within 120 days was 31.4% in the EHR reminders, outreach, and navigation group (n = 3455), 31.0% in the EHR reminders and outreach group (n = 2569), 22.7% in the EHR reminders group (n = 3254), and 22.9% in the usual care group (n = 2702) (adjusted absolute difference for comparison of EHR reminders, outreach, and navigation group vs usual care, 8.5% [95% CI, 4.8%-12.0%], P < .001). The secondary outcomes showed similar results for completion of recommended follow-up within 240 days and by subgroups for cancer type and level of risk for the abnormal screening result.

Conclusions and Relevance

A multilevel primary care intervention that included EHR reminders and patient outreach with or without patient navigation improved timely follow-up of overdue abnormal cancer screening test results for breast, cervical, colorectal, and lung cancer.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03979495.

An Intervention-Based Approach to Achieve Racial Equity in Gynecologic Oncology

Racial inequities within gynecologic oncology exist at every step of the cancer continuum. Although the disparities have been well described, there is a significant gap in the literature focused on eliminating inequities in gynecologic cancer outcomes. The goal of this narrative review is to highlight successful, evidence-based interventions from within and outside of gynecologic oncology that alleviate disparity, providing a call to action for further research and implementation efforts within the field. These solutions are organized in the socioecologic framework, where multiple levels of influence-societal, community, organizational, interpersonal, and individual-affect health outcomes.

A cross-sectional survey examining clinician characteristics, practices, and attitudes associated with adoption of the 2019 American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology risk-based management consensus guidelines

BACKGROUND

The 2019 American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology (ASCCP) risk-based management consensus guidelines are the most recent national guidelines for the management of abnormal cervical cancer screening tests. These guidelines benefit patients by concentrating testing and treatment in those at highest cervical cancer risk. Adoption of guidelines often occurs slowly, with few studies examining the factors associated with guideline-adherent management of abnormal results.

METHODS

To elucidate the factors associated with the use of the 2019 ASCCP guidelines among clinicians who perform cervical cancer screening, physicians and advanced practice professionals who perform cervical cancer screening were cross-sectionally surveyed. Clinicians responded to screening vignettes with differing recommendations for management between the 2019 and prior management guidelines. Screening vignette 1 involved reduction of invasive testing on a low-risk patient; screening vignette 2 involved increased surveillance testing on a high-risk patient. Binomial logistic regression models determined the factors associated with the use of the 2019 guidelines.

RESULTS

A total of 1251 clinicians participated from across the United States. For screening vignettes 1 and 2, guideline-adherent responses were given by 28% and 36% of participants, respectively. Management recommendations differed by specialty and were incorrect in different situations: there was inappropriate invasive testing by obstetrics and gynecology physicians (vignette 1) and inappropriate discontinuation of screening by family and internal medicine physicians (vignette 2). Regardless of their chosen response, over half erroneously believed they were guideline adherent.

CONCLUSIONS

Many clinicians who believe they are following appropriate guidelines may not realize their management strategy is inconsistent with the 2019 guidelines. Education initiatives tailored to clinician specialty could address the understanding of current guidelines, encourage the use of updated guidelines, maximize patient benefits, and minimize harms.

PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY

The 2019 American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology risk-based management consensus guidelines are the most recent national guidelines for abnormal cervical cancer screening test management. We surveyed over 1200 obstetrics and gynecology (OB/GYN), family medicine, and internal medicine physicians and advanced practice providers about their screening and abnormal results follow-up practices in relation to guidelines. Few clinicians are following the 2019 guidelines. Management recommendations differed by clinician specialty and were incorrect in different situations: there was inappropriate invasive testing by OB/GYN physicians and inappropriate screening discontinuation by family and internal medicine physicians. Education tailored by clinician specialty could address the understanding of current guidelines, encourage the use of updated guidelines, maximize patient benefits, and minimize harms.

Adapted Kaizen: Multi-Organizational Complex Process Redesign for Adapting Clinical Guidelines for the Digital Age

The need for a method to examine complex, multidisciplinary processes involving many diverse organizations initially led multiple US federal agencies to adopt the traditional Kaizen, a Lean process improvement method typically used within a single organization, to encompass multiple organizations each with its own leadership and priorities. First, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology adapted Kaizen to federal agency processes for the development of electronic clinical quality measures. Later, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) further modified this adapted Kaizen during its Adapting Clinical Guidelines for the Digital Age (ACG) initiative, which aimed to improve the broader scope of guideline development and implementation. This is a methods article to document the adapted Kaizen method for future use in similar complex processes, illustrating how to apply the adapted Kaizen through CDC's ACG initiative and showing the reach achieved by using the adapted Kaizen method. The adapted Kaizen includes pre-Kaizen planning, a Kaizen event, and post-Kaizen implementation that accommodate multidisciplinary and multi-organizational participation. ACG included 5 workgroups that each developed products to support their respective scope: Guideline Creation, Informatics Framework, Translation and Implementation, Communication and Dissemination, and Evaluation. Despite challenges gathering diverse perspectives and balancing the competing priorities of multiple organizations, the ACG participants produced interrelated standards, processes, and tools-further described in separate publications-that programs and partners have leveraged. Use of a siloed approach may not have supported the development and dissemination of these products.

Management of Abnormal Cervical Cancer Screening Test: A Risk-based Approach

Cervical cancer screening plays a major role in preventing cervical cancer. The field is based on understanding the natural history of human papillomavirus and its role in cervical cancer. Screening has evolved to assessing the risk for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3, a true cancer precursor, and performing diagnostic tests based on those risks. This article summarizes the present state of management of abnormal cervical cancer screening tests in the United States, based on the most recent 2019 American Society of Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology guidelines.

The impact of COVID-19 on antibiotic prescribing in primary care in England: Evaluation and risk prediction of appropriateness of type and repeat prescribing

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to predict risks of potentially inappropriate antibiotic type and repeat prescribing and assess changes during COVID-19.

METHODS

With the approval of NHS England, we used OpenSAFELY platform to access the TPP SystmOne electronic health record (EHR) system and selected patients prescribed antibiotics from 2019 to 2021. Multinomial logistic regression models predicted patient's probability of receiving inappropriate antibiotic type or repeat antibiotic course for each common infection.

RESULTS

The population included 9.1 million patients with 29.2 million antibiotic prescriptions. 29.1% of prescriptions were identified as repeat prescribing. Those with same day incident infection coded in the EHR had considerably lower rates of repeat prescribing (18.0%) and 8.6% had potentially inappropriate type. No major changes in the rates of repeat antibiotic prescribing during COVID-19 were found. In the 10 risk prediction models, good levels of calibration and moderate levels of discrimination were found.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study found no evidence of changes in level of inappropriate or repeat antibiotic prescribing after the start of COVID-19. Repeat antibiotic prescribing was frequent and varied according to regional and patient characteristics. There is a need for treatment guidelines to be developed around antibiotic failure and clinicians provided with individualised patient information.

Harrison M, Swiger J, A. Lomotan E, Dymek C, Dullabh P. Lessons Learned from a National Initiative Promoting Publicly Available Standards-Based Clinical Decision Support

BACKGROUND

Clinical decision support (CDS), which provides tools to assist clinical decision-making, can improve adherence to evidence-based practices, prevent medical errors, and support high-quality and patient-centered care delivery. Publicly available CDS that uses standards to express clinical logic (i.e., standards-based CDS) has the potential to reduce duplicative efforts of translating the same clinical evidence into CDS across multiple health care institutions. Yet development of such CDS is relatively new and its potential only partially explored.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to describe lessons learned from a national initiative promoting publicly available, standards-based CDS resources, discuss challenges, and report suggestions for improvement.

METHODS

Findings were drawn from an evaluation of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Patient-Centered Outcomes Research CDS Initiative, which aimed to advance evidence into practice through standards-based and publicly available CDS. Methods included literature and program material reviews, key informant interviews, and a web-based survey about a public repository of CDS artifacts and tools for authoring standards-based CDS.

RESULTS

The evaluation identified important lessons for developing and implementing standards-based CDS through publicly available repositories such as CDS Connect. Trust is a critical factor in uptake and can be bolstered through transparent information on underlying evidence, collaboration with experts, and feedback loops between users and developers to support continuous improvement. Additionally, while adoption of standards among electronic health record developers will make it easier to implement standards-based CDS, lower-resourced health systems will need extra support to ensure successful implementation and use. Finally, although we found the resources developed by the Initiative to offer valuable prototypes for the field, health systems desire more information about patient-centered, clinical, and cost-related outcomes to help them justify the investment required to implement standards-based, publicly available CDS.

CONCLUSION

While the standards and technology to publicly share standards-based CDS have increased, broad dissemination and implementation remain challenging.

Creating implementable clinical practice guidelines: the 2020 Focused Updates to the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute's Asthma Management Guidelines

BACKGROUND

The 2020 Focused Updates to the Asthma Management Guidelines: A Report from the National Asthma Education and Prevention Program Coordinating Committee Expert Panel Working Group provides the first new clinical practice recommendations from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) since the previous 2007 asthma management guidelines. Guideline implementability was a high priority for the expert panel, and many approaches were undertaken to enhance the implementability of this clinical guideline update. Within the report, specific implementation guidance sections provide expanded summaries for each recommendation to quickly assist users. The implementation guidance incorporates findings from NHLBI-sponsored focus groups conducted with people who have asthma, caregivers, and health care providers. The findings were used to identify the types of information and tools that individuals with asthma, their caregivers, and their health care providers would find most helpful; ensure that the new asthma guidelines reflect the voices of individuals with asthma and their caregivers; and identify potential barriers to uptake by individuals with asthma and their caregivers. The expert panel used a GRADE-based approach to develop evidence-to-decision tables that provided a framework for assessing the evidence and consideration of a range of contextual factors that influenced the recommendations such as desirable and undesirable effects, certainty of evidence, values, balance of effects, acceptability, feasibility, and equity. To facilitate uptake in clinical care workflow, selected recommendations were converted into structured, computer-based clinical decision support artifacts, and the new recommendations were integrated into existing treatment tables used in the 2007 asthma management guidelines, with which many users are familiar. A comprehensive approach to improve guidelines dissemination and implementation included scientific publications, patient materials, media activities, stakeholder engagement, and professional education.

CONCLUSION

We developed evidence-based clinical practice guideline updates for asthma management focused on six topic areas. The guideline development processes and implementation and dissemination activities undertaken sought to enhance implementability by focusing on intrinsic factors as described by Kastner, Gagliardi, and others to produce usable, adoptable, and adaptable guidelines. Enhanced collaboration during guideline development between authors, informaticists, and implementation scientists may facilitate the development of tools that support the application of recommendations to further improve implementability.