Applying Process Improvement Methods to Clinical and Translational Research: Conceptual Framework and Case Examples

Areas of strength and opportunities for growth in translational science education and training: Results of a scoping review from the NCATS Education Branch

Translational science education and training (E&T) aims to prepare the translational workforce to accelerate progress along the translational pipeline toward solutions that improve human health. In 2020-2021, the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS) Education Branch conducted a scoping review of the E&T literature with this focus. The review used the methodological framework proposed by Arksey and O'Malley. PubMed, Education Resources Information Center (ERIC), and Embase were searched, and forward citations conducted. Screening of titles, abstracts, and full text identified 44 included articles. Data extraction facilitated analysis of E&T content, audiences, modalities, evaluations, and recommendations. The NCATS Translational Science Principles were used to identity described or recommended E&T content. Twenty-nine articles described a translational science E&T opportunity or its evaluation, and another 15 articles offered recommendations for translational science E&T. The most prevalent NCATS Translational Science Principles were boundary-crossing partnerships (77%) and cross-disciplinary team science (75%). Among publications describing E&T opportunities, the most reported modalities were experiential learning (64%) and courses (61%) and the most reported participants were graduate students (68%) and postdoctoral fellows (54%). About half of these articles (n = 15) reported an evaluation, covering a range of proximal to distal outcomes. Recommendations emphasized the value of translational science E&T across training and career stages and the use of varied modalities to reach diverse audiences. This review highlights strengths and opportunities for growth in translational science E&T. Enhancements to content, expansion of participants and modalities, and rigorous evaluations will contribute to building a highly qualified, diverse translational science workforce.

Characterising the impact of BRAINSPaN: a multidisciplinary community of practice for clinicians and researchers in the brain impairment field

Background:

Communities of practice can facilitate the sharing and translation of knowledge. BRAINSPaN is a multidisciplinary community of practice of clinicians, researchers and students in the brain impairment field that was launched in Australia in June 2017. We aimed to investigate the impact of BRAINSPaN on multidisciplinary collaboration and on knowledge, skills and confidence in domains of practice of interest to members.

Methods:

We surveyed BRAINSPaN members over three time points at 1-month (n = 117), 7-months (n = 69) and 14-months (n = 46) post-launch. Content analysis of posts to the BRAINSPaN listserv was also conducted to identify their purpose and content.

Results:

Increasing access to new research findings and increasing interaction with others in the brain impairment field were the two main goals for survey respondents’ participation in BRAINSPaN. At 7- and 14-months post-launch, these were also the most commonly achieved goals and most frequently cited benefits of BRAINSPaN participation. Cognitive rehabilitation and behaviour management were the most frequently reported practice domains of interest, as well as being two of the five most common topics of BRAINSPaN posts over the survey period. There was a significant increase in self-reported knowledge for participants’ top two domains of interest, but no change in skills or confidence.

Conclusions:

BRAINSPaN has the potential to serve as a vehicle for the sharing and translation of knowledge in the brain impairment field. Combining other forms of dissemination with communities of practice, such as workshops and clinical mentoring, may be needed to also influence the development of skills and confidence in practice areas.

Pilot test of an accrual Common Metric for the NIH Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSA) Consortium: Metric usefulness

The Common Metrics Initiative aims to develop and field metrics to improve research processes within the national Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) Consortium. A Median Accrual Ratio (MAR) common metric was developed to assess the results of efforts to increase subject accrual into a set of clinical trials within the expected time period. A pilot test of the MAR was undertaken at Tufts Clinical and Translational Science Institute (CTSI) with eight CTSA Consortium hubs. Post-pilot interviews were conducted with 9 CTSA Principal Investigators (PIs) and 23 pilot team members. Over three-quarters (78%) of respondents reported that the MAR could be useful for performance improvement, but also described limitations or concerns. The most commonly cited barrier to MAR use for performance improvement was difficulty in interpreting the single value that is produced. Most respondents were interested in using the MAR to assess recruitment at an individual trial level. Majority of respondents (63%) had mixed opinions about aggregating metric results across the CTSA Consortium for comparison or benchmarking. Collecting data about additional contextual factors, and comparing accrual between subgroups, were cited as potentially helping address concerns about aggregation. Significant challenges remain in ensuring that the MAR can be sufficiently useful for collaborative process improvement. We offer recommendations to potentially improve metric usefulness.

TRANSLATOR Database-A Vision for a Multi-Institutional Research Network

The formation of the CTSI One Health Alliance (COHA) network has generated the infrastructure necessary to support "Big Data" collaborative comparative and translational research in veterinary medicine. We describe the first step in the design, implementation, and dissemination of a collaborative information technology infrastructure that will serve the public and clinicians (COHA public/member based web site at https://ctsaonehealthalliance.org/) and its research focused COHA Research Workbench application. The core research infrastructure, TRANSLATOR (TRanslational ANimal Shared ColLAboraTive Observational Research), represents the foundation of a federated research-capable network to enable pooling large datasets from both electronic health records and publications. The public facing COHA website is a mechanism for both the dissemination of knowledge to the public and to foster collaborations amongst veterinary clinician scientists and the greater medical research community.

The Effect of a Continuous Quality Improvement Intervention on Retention-In-Care at 6 Months Postpartum in a PMTCT Program in Northern Nigeria: Results of a Cluster Randomized Controlled Study

BACKGROUND

Retention in care is critical for improving HIV-infected maternal outcomes and reducing vertical transmission. Health systems' interventions such as continuous quality improvement (CQI) may support health services to address factors that affect the delivery of HIV-related care and thereby influence rates of retention-in-care.

METHODOLOGY

We evaluated the effect of a CQI intervention on retention-in-care at 6 months postpartum of pregnant women and mothers living with HIV who had been started on lifelong antiretroviral treatment. Thirty-two health care facilities were randomized to either implement the intervention or not. We considered women fully retained in care when they attended the 6-month postpartum visit and did not miss any previous scheduled visit by more than 30 days.

RESULTS

Five hundred eleven women living with HIV attending antenatal clinics at 26 facilities were included in the analysis. Median age at enrolment was 27 years and gestational age was 20 weeks. Seventy-one percent of women were seen at 6-month postpartum irrespective of missing any scheduled visit. However, 43% of women were fully retained at 6-month postpartum and did not miss any scheduled visit based on our stringent study definition of retention. There was no significant difference in retention at 6 months between the intervention and control arms [44% vs. 41%, relative risk: 1.08; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.78 to 1.49]. Initiation of ARV prophylaxis among infants within 72 hours was not different by study arm (66.0% vs. 74.7%, relative risk = 0.95; 95% CI: 0.84 to 1.07) but rates of early infant testing at 4-6 weeks were higher in intervention sites (48.8% vs. 25.3%, adjusted relative risk: 1.76; 95% CI: 1.27 to 2.42).

CONCLUSIONS

CQI as implemented in this study did not differ across study arms in the rates of retention. Several intervention design or implementation issues or other contextual constraints may explain the absence of effect.