Recruiting Practices for Change Initiatives Is Hard: Findings From EvidenceNOW

Insights from Research Network Collaborators on How to Reach Rural Communities with Cancer Prevention and Control Programs

PURPOSE

This paper examines community leaders' and researchers' recommendations for reaching rural communities in a southeastern U.S. state with cancer prevention and control programming.

RESEARCH DESIGN

A qualitative inquiry of a grant network's research and community councils was conducted to explore members' opinions on how to engage rural communities and obtain input on how to recruit rural organizations for a mini-grants program.

STUDY SAMPLE AND DATA COLLECTION

Telephone/virtual interviews were conducted with all 13 council members. Responses were analyzed using thematic analysis and findings were examined within the context of system-centric and patient-centric dimensions.

RESULTS

Council members discussed limited education, lack of insurance, low socioeconomic status, health care avoidance, and transportation as barriers to cancer prevention and control. They recommended reaching rural populations by partnering with community and faith-based organizations, use of targeted multi-media, and tailored cancer education trainings.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings are used for guiding outreach with rural communities and recruitment of rural organizations for a cancer-focused mini-grants initiative.

Declining Participation in Primary Care Quality Improvement Research: A Qualitative Study

PURPOSE

There are numerous supportive quality improvement (QI) projects to facilitate the implementation of evidence-based practices in primary care, but recruiting physician practices to join these projects is challenging, costly, and time consuming. We aimed to identify factors leading primary care practices to decline participation in QI projects, and strategies to improve the feasibility and attractiveness of QI projects in the future.

METHODS

For this qualitative study, we contacted 109 representatives of practices that had declined participation in 1 of 4 Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality-funded EvidenceNOW projects. The representatives were invited to participate in a 15-minute interview or complete a 5-question questionnaire. Thematic analysis was used to organize and characterize findings.

RESULTS

Representatives from 31 practices (28.4% of those contacted) responded. Overwhelmingly, respondents indicated that staff turnover, staffing shortages, and general time constraints, exacerbated by the pandemic, prevented participation in the QI projects. Challenges with electronic health records, an expectation of greater financial compensation for participation, and confidence in the practices' current care practices were secondary reasons for declining participation. Tying participation to value-based programs and offering greater compensation were identified as strategies to facilitate recruitment. None of the respondents' recommendations, however, addressed the primary issues of staffing challenges and time constraints.

CONCLUSIONS

Staffing challenges and general time constraints, exacerbated by the pandemic, are compromising primary care practices' ability to engage in QI research projects. To encourage participation, policy makers should consider direct supports for primary care, which may also help to alleviate burnout.

Considerations Before Selecting a Stepped-Wedge Cluster Randomized Trial Design for a Practice Improvement Study

PURPOSE

Despite the growing popularity of stepped-wedge cluster randomized trials (SW-CRTs) for practice-based research, the design's advantages and challenges are not well documented. The objective of this study was to identify the advantages and challenges of the SW-CRT design for large-scale intervention implementations in primary care settings.

METHODS

The EvidenceNOW: Advancing Heart Health initiative, funded by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, included a large collection of SW-CRTs. We conducted qualitative interviews with 17 key informants from EvidenceNOW grantees to identify the advantages and challenges of using SW-CRT design.

RESULTS

All interviewees reported that SW-CRT can be an effective study design for large-scale intervention implementations. Advantages included (1) incentivized recruitment, (2) staggered resource allocation, and (3) statistical power. Challenges included (1) time-sensitive recruitment, (2) retention, (3) randomization requirements and practice preferences, (4) achieving treatment schedule fidelity, (5) intensive data collection, (6) the Hawthorne effect, and (7) temporal trends.

CONCLUSIONS

The challenges experienced by EvidenceNOW grantees suggest that certain favorable real-world conditions constitute a context that increases the odds of a successful SW-CRT. An existing infrastructure can support the recruitment of many practices. Strong retention plans are needed to continue to engage sites waiting to start the intervention. Finally, study outcomes should be ones already captured in routine practice; otherwise, funders and investigators should assess the feasibility and cost of data collection.VISUAL ABSTRACT.

How Type of Practice Ownership Affects Participation with Quality Improvement External Facilitation: Findings from EvidenceNOW

BACKGROUND

Facilitation is an implementation strategy that can help primary care practices improve healthcare quality and build quality improvement (QI) capacity when delivered in a flexible manner by trained professionals. Practice ownership is associated with use of QI. However, little is known about how practices of different ownership participate in external facilitation, and this could inform future initiatives.

OBJECTIVE

Using data from EvidenceNOW, we examined how practice ownership influences participation in external facilitation.

STUDY DESIGN

We used an iterative mixed-methods design.

PARTICIPANTS, APPROACH, AND MEASURES

We collected data from practices on practice characteristics (e.g., location, size, payer mix) and ownership type via surveys and from facilitators on the number of hours, encounters, and months each practice had with a facilitator via facilitation logs. Using multivariable linear regression, we examined the association between facilitation and ownership (n = 1117 practices). We conducted semi-structured interviews with EvidenceNOW leadership (n = 12) and facilitators (n = 51) and observed facilitators in a subset of practices (n = 64); we analyzed this qualitative data for patterns of facilitation.

KEY RESULTS

In the fully adjusted model, differences by ownership were non-significant; FQHCs, however, had significantly less participation in facilitation than clinician-owned practices across two measures (unadjusted difference: - 2.83, p < 0.01 for number of encounters, and - 2.04, p < 0.01 for number of months with encounters). Qualitative data showed that Health System and FQHC ownership influenced types of practices enrolled in EvidenceNOW, and suggested that in these practices lower autonomy and greater complexity compared to clinician-owned ownership influenced facilitation participation patterns.

CONCLUSIONS

Practice ownership shaped how but not how much practices participated in external facilitation. This finding highlights the importance of tailoring facilitation approaches based on ownership-related characteristics in future QI initiatives.

Study protocol for evaluating Six Building Blocks for opioid management implementation in primary care practices

Background

The Six Building Blocks for improving opioid management (6BBs) is a program for improving the management of patients in primary care practices who are on long-term opioid therapy for chronic pain. The 6BBs include building leadership and consensus; aligning policies, patient agreements, and workflows; tracking and monitoring patient care; conducting planned, patient-centered visits; tailoring care for complex patients; and measuring success. The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality funded the development of a 6BBs implementation guide: a step-by-step approach for independently implementing the 6BBs in a practice. This mixed-method study seeks to assess practices’ use of the implementation guide to implement the 6BBs and the effectiveness of 6BBs implementation on opioid management processes of care among practices using the implementation guide.

Methods

Data collection is guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, Proctor’s taxonomy of implementation outcomes, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Guideline for Prescribing Opioids for Chronic Pain. A diverse group of health care organizations with primary care clinics across the USA will participate in the study over 15 months. Qualitative data collection will include semi-structured interviews with stakeholders at each organization at two time points, notes from routine check-in calls, and document review. These data will be used to understand practices’ motivation for participation, history with opioid management efforts, barriers and facilitators to implementation, and implementation progress. Quantitative data collection will consist of a provider and staff survey, an implementation milestones assessment, and quarterly opioid prescribing quality measures. These data will supplement our understanding of implementation progress and will allow us to assess changes over time in providers’ opioid prescribing practices, prescribing self-efficacy, challenges to providing guideline-driven care, and practices’ opioid prescribing quality measures. Qualitative data will be coded and analyzed for emergent themes. Quantitative data will be analyzed using descriptive statistics and clustered multivariate regression.

Discussion

This study contributes to the knowledge of the implementation and effectiveness of a team-based approach to opioid management in primary care practices. Information gleaned from this study can be used to inform efforts to curtail opioid prescribing and assist primary care practices considering implementing the 6BBs.

Barriers and Facilitators in the Recruitment and Retention of More Than 250 Small Independent Primary Care Practices for EvidenceNOW

Few studies have examined factors that facilitate recruitment of small independent practices (SIPs) (<5 full-time clinicians) to participate in research and methods for optimizing retention. The authors analyzed qualitative data (eg, recruiter's field notes and diary entries, provider interviews) to identify barriers and facilitators encountered in recruiting and retaining 257 practices in HealthyHearts New York City (NYC). This study was a stepped-wedge randomized controlled trial that took place 2015 through 2018 across 5 boroughs in NYC. Three main factors facilitated rapid recruitment: (1) a prior well-established relationship with the local health department, (2) alignment of project goals with practice priorities, and (3) providing appropriate monetary incentives. Retention was facilitated through similar mechanisms and an ongoing multifaceted communication strategy. This article identifies specific strategies that enhance recruitment of SIPs and fills gaps in knowledge about factors that influence retention in the context of a design that requires waiting to receive the intervention.

Data-Driven Diffusion Of Innovations: Successes And Challenges In 3 Large-Scale Innovative Delivery Models

Failed diffusion of innovations may be linked to an inability to use and apply data, information, and knowledge to change perceptions of current practice and motivate change. Using qualitative and quantitative data from three large-scale health care delivery innovations-accountable care organizations, advanced primary care practice, and EvidenceNOW-we assessed where data-driven innovation is occurring and where challenges lie. We found that implementation of some technological components of innovation (for example, electronic health records) has occurred among health care organizations, but core functions needed to use data to drive innovation are lacking. Deficits include the inability to extract and aggregate data from the records; gaps in sharing data; and challenges in adopting advanced data functions, particularly those related to timely reporting of performance data. The unexpectedly high costs and burden incurred during implementation of the innovations have limited organizations' ability to address these and other deficits. Solutions that could help speed progress in data-driven innovation include facilitating peer-to-peer technical assistance, providing tailored feedback reports to providers from data aggregators, and using practice facilitators skilled in using data technology for quality improvement to help practices transform. Policy efforts that promote these solutions may enable more rapid uptake of and successful participation in innovative delivery system reforms.

Taking Innovation To Scale In Primary Care Practices: The Functions Of Health Care Extension

Health care extension is an approach to providing external support to primary care practices with the aim of diffusing innovation. EvidenceNOW was launched to rapidly disseminate and implement evidence-based guidelines for cardiovascular preventive care in the primary care setting. Seven regional grantee cooperatives provided the foundational elements of health care extension-technological and quality improvement support, practice capacity building, and linking with community resources-to more than two hundred primary care practices in each region. This article describes how the cooperatives varied in their approaches to extension and provides early empirical evidence that health care extension is a feasible and potentially useful approach for providing quality improvement support to primary care practices. With investment, health care extension may be an effective platform for federal and state quality improvement efforts to create economies of scale and provide practices with more robust and coordinated support services.

Design of healthy hearts in the heartland (H3): A practice-randomized, comparative effectiveness study

BACKGROUND

The Healthy Hearts in the Heartland (H3) study is part of a nationwide effort, EvidenceNOW, seeking to better understand the ability of small primary care practices to improve "ABCS" clinical quality measures: appropriate Aspirin therapy, Blood pressure control, Cholesterol management, and Smoking cessation. H3 aimed to assess feasibility of implementing Point-of-Care (POC) or POC plus Population Management (POC + PM) quality improvement (QI) strategies to improve ABCS at practices in Illinois, Indiana, and Wisconsin. We describe the design and randomization of the H3 study.

METHODS

We conducted a two-arm (1:1, POC:POC + PM), practice-randomized, comparative effectiveness study in 226 primary care practices across four "waves" of randomization with a 12-month intervention period, followed by a six-month sustainability period. Randomization controlled imbalance in nine baseline variables through a modified constrained algorithm. Among others, we used initial, unverified estimates of baseline ABCS values.

RESULTS

We randomized 112 and 114 practices to POC and POC + PM arms, respectively. Randomization ensured baseline comparability for all nine key variables, including the ABCS measures indicating proportion of patients at the practice level meeting each quality measure. Median(Inner Quartile Range) values were A: 0.78(0.66-0.86) in POC arm vs. 0.77(0.63-0.86) in POC + PM arm, B: 0.64(0.53-0.73) vs. 0.64(0.53-0.75), C: 0.78(0.63-0.86) vs. 0.75(0.64-0.81), S: 0.80(0.65-0.81) vs. 0.79(0.61-0.91).

DISCUSSION

Surrogate estimates for the true ABCS at baseline coupled with the unique randomization logic achieved adequate baseline balance on these outcomes. Similar practice- or cluster-randomized trials may consider adaptations of this design. Final analyses on 12- and 18-month ABCS outcomes for the H3 study are forthcoming.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (Initial post: 11/05/2015; identifier: NCT02598284; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02598284?term=NCT02598284&rank=1).