Evaluating the Development, Implementation and Dissemination of a Multisite Card Study in the WWAMI Region Practice and Research Network

Patient concerns about accessing sexual and reproductive health services outside of primary care: A survey in rural and urban settings in the Pacific Northwest

OBJECTIVES

While primary care providers are a major source of sexual and reproductive health (SRH) services in the United States, particularly in rural areas, not all primary care settings offer a full range of SRH services. We aimed to understand primary care patient concerns regarding accessing SRH services, including abortion care, outside of their primary care clinic and if those concerns differed by urban or rural setting.

STUDY DESIGN

An anonymous survey was distributed over a 2-week period between December 2019 to March 2020 to all adult patients in four primary care clinics in Idaho, Washington, and Wyoming. The survey assessed patient concerns regarding accessing SRH services outside of their primary care clinic and their willingness to travel to access SRH services.

RESULTS

The overall response rate was 69% (745/1086). Over 85% of respondents identified at least one concern to seeking SRH services outside of a primary care setting, with cost, insurance coverage, length of wait time, and lack of an established relationship being the most frequently reported concerns. A majority of respondents were willing to travel a maximum of 1 hour for most SRH services. Respondents from rural-serving clinics were significantly more likely to be willing to travel longer amounts of time for medication abortion, aspiration abortion, and intrauterine device placement.

CONCLUSION

Our findings highlight that a majority of both urban and rural primary care patients have concerns regarding accessing SRH services outside of their primary care clinic and are unwilling to travel more than 1 hour to access most SRH services.

IMPLICATIONS

A majority of primary care patients have concerns regarding accessing SRH services outside of primary care settings. Health care policy changes should aim to strengthen the SRH services available in primary care settings to alleviate the burdens primary care patients face in accessing SRH services outside of their primary care clinic, particularly for rural populations.

Designing and Implementing an Electronic Health Record-Embedded Card Study in Primary Care: Methods and Considerations

Card studies-short surveys about the circumstances within which patients receive care-are traditionally completed on physical cards. We report on the development of an electronic health record (EHR)-embedded card study intended to decrease logistical challenges inherent to paper-based approaches, including distributing, tracking, and transferring the physical cards, as well as data entry and respondent prompts, while simultaneously decreasing the complexity for participants and facilitating rich analyses by linking to clinical and demographic data found in the EHR. Developing the EHR-based programming and data extraction was time consuming, required specialized expertise, and necessitated iteration to rectify issues encountered during implementation. Nonetheless, future EHR-embedded card studies will be able to replicate many of the same processes as informed by these results. Once built, the EHR-embedded card study simplified survey implementation for both the research team and clinic staff, resulting in research-quality data, the ability to link survey responses to relevant EHR data, and a 79% response rate. This detailed accounting of the development and implementation process, including issues encountered and addressed, might guide others in conducting EHR-embedded card studies.

Promoting learning health system feedback loops: Experience with a VA practice-based research network card study

Background:

We tested the capacity of the 60-site VA Women’s Health Practice-Based Research Network (WH-PBRN), embedded within VA, to employ a multisite card study to collect women Veterans’ perspectives about Complementary and Integrative Health (CIH) and to rapidly return findings to participating sites and partnered national policy-makers in support of a Learning Health System (LHS) wherein evidence generation informs ongoing improvement.

Methods:

VA primary care clinic clerks and nurses distributed anonymous surveys (patient feedback forms) at clinics for up to two weeks in fiscal year 2017, asking about CIH behavior and preferred delivery methods. We examined the project’s feasibility, representativeness, acceptability, and impact via a tracking system, national administrative data, debriefing notes, and three surveys of WH-PBRN Site Leads.

Results:

Twenty geographically diverse and largely representative VA Medical Centers and 11 Community-Based Outpatient Clinics volunteered to participate. Over six months, N = 1191 women Veterans responded (median 57; range 8–151 per site). In under three months, we returned local findings benchmarked against multisite findings to all participating sites and summary findings to national VA partners. Sites and partners disseminated results to clinical and leadership stakeholders, who then applied results as warranted.

Conclusions:

VA effectively mobilized an embedded PBRN to implement a timely, representative, acceptable and impactful operations project.

Implications:

Card studies by PBRNs within large, national healthcare systems can provide rapid feedback to participating sites and national leaders to guide policies, programs, and practices.

Level of Evidence:

Self-selected respondents could have biased results.

Family Medicine-Specific Practice-Based Research Network Productivity and Clinical and Translational Sciences Award Program Affiliation

OBJECTIVE

Practice-based research networks (PBRNs) are groups of practices that work together to conduct research. Little is known about the degree to which PBRNs may be achieving success. This is the first general survey of family medicine-based PBRN directors in the United States and Canada to examine research productivity outcomes of PBRNs and explore the association between Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSA) program affiliation and PBRN outcomes.

METHODS

The Council of Academic Family Medicine Educational Research Alliance conducted the survey and e-mailed it to 102 PBRN directors from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality's registration.

RESULTS

A total of 54 (56%) PBRN directors responded to the survey. PBRNs with an affiliation with a CTSA program were more likely to report completion of quality improvement research and participation in multiple PBRN collaboration research projects. PBRNs affiliated with CTSA programs were less likely to report maintaining funding as a significant barrier.

CONCLUSIONS

CTSA involvement with PBRNs results in family physician scientists' completing research and disseminating this research through publication. Also, PBRNs with CTSA partnerships have more funding availability. PBRN partnership with a CTSA is beneficial in furthering research in family medicine.