Enhancing Success of Medicare's Shared Decision Making Mandates Using Implementation Science: Examples Applying the Pragmatic Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model (PRISM)

Enhancing the implementation of provider-to-provider telehealth in rural and remote areas: A mixed methods study protocol

Background

Virtual healthcare solutions are proposed as a way to combat the inequity of access to healthcare in rural and remote areas, and to better support the front-line providers who work in these areas. Rural provider-to-provider telehealth (RPPT) connects rural and remote clinicians to a 'hub' of healthcare specialists who can increase access to emergency and specialised healthcare via an integrated model. Reported benefits for the place-based provider include enhanced knowledge, expanded professional development opportunities, improved scope of practice, and increased confidence in treating more complex cases. These reported benefits could have implications for supporting and futureproofing our health workforce in terms of productivity, burnout, recruitment, and retention.

Methods

The research uses an explanatory sequential mixed methods approach across multiple phases to evaluate the current implementation of Western Australia Country Health Service's (WACHS) Command Centre (CC) services and explore factors associated with their differential use. The primary population of interest and participants in this study are the place-based providers in country Western Australia (WA). Patient data constitutes the secondary population, informing the access and reach of CC services into country WA. Data collection will include service data, an online survey, and semi-structured interviews with the primary population. The data will be interpreted to inform evidence-based strategies and recommendations to improve the implementation and sustainment of RPPT.

Discussion

Innovative and sustained workforce models and solutions are needed globally. Virtual healthcare, including provider-to-provider models, demonstrate potential, especially in rural and remote areas, designed to increase access to specialised expertise for patients and to support the local workforce. This research will generate new data around behaviour, perceptions, and value from the WACHS rural and remote workforce about provider-to-provider telehealth, to explore the implementation and investigate strategies for the long-term sustainment of RPPT services.

Shared Decision-Making and Cardiovascular Health: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association

Shared decision-making is increasingly embraced in health care and recommended in cardiovascular guidelines. Patient involvement in health care decisions, patient-clinician communication, and models of patient-centered care are critical to improve health outcomes and to promote equity, but formal models and evaluation in cardiovascular care are nascent. Shared decision-making promotes equity by involving clinicians and patients, sharing the best available evidence, and recognizing the needs, values, and experiences of individuals and their families when faced with the task of making decisions. Broad endorsement of shared decision-making as a critical component of high-quality, value-based care has raised our awareness, although uptake in clinical practice remains suboptimal for a range of patient, clinician, and system issues. Strategies effective in promoting shared decision-making include educating clinicians on communication techniques, engaging multidisciplinary medical teams, incorporating trained decision coaches, and using tools (ie, patient decision aids) at appropriate literacy and numeracy levels to support patients in their cardiovascular decisions. This scientific statement shines a light on the limited but growing body of evidence of the impact of shared decision-making on cardiovascular outcomes and the potential of shared decision-making as a driver of health equity so that everyone has just opportunities. Multilevel solutions must align to address challenges in policies and reimbursement, system-level leadership and infrastructure, clinician training, access to decision aids, and patient engagement to fully support patients and clinicians to engage in the shared decision-making process and to drive equity and improvement in cardiovascular outcomes.

Lung cancer screening in rural primary care practices in Colorado: time for a more team-based approach?

BACKGROUND

Despite lung cancer being a leading cause of death in the United States and lung cancer screening (LCS) being a recommended service, many patients eligible for screening do not receive it. Research is needed to understand the challenges with implementing LCS in different settings. This study investigated multiple practice members and patient perspectives impacting rural primary care practices related to LCS uptake by eligible patients.

METHODS

This qualitative study involved primary care practice members in multiple roles (clinicians n = 9, clinical staff n = 12 and administrators n = 5) and their patients (n = 19) from 9 practices including federally qualified and rural health centers (n = 3), health system owned (n = 4) and private practices (n = 2). Interviews were conducted regarding the importance of and ability to complete the steps that may result in a patient receiving LCS. Data were analyzed using a thematic analysis with immersion crystallization then organized using the RE-AIM implementation science framework to illuminate and organize implementation issues.

RESULTS

Although all groups endorsed the importance of LCS, all also struggled with implementation challenges. Since assessing smoking history is part of the process to identify eligibility for LCS, we asked about these processes. We found that smoking assessment and assistance (including referral to services) were routine in the practices, but other steps in the LCS portion of determining eligibility and offering LCS were not. Lack of knowledge about screening and coverage, patient stigma, and resistance and practical considerations such as distance to LCS testing facilities complicated completion of LCS compared to screening for other types of cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

Limited uptake of LCS results from a range of multiple interacting factors that cumulatively affect consistency and quality of implementation at the practice level. Future research should consider team-based approaches to conduct of LCS eligibility and shared decision making.

Crohn's disease shared decision making intervention leads to more patients choosing combination therapy: a cluster randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Crohn's disease requires effective patient-clinician communication for successful illness and medication management. Shared decision making (SDM) has been suggested to improve communication around early intensive therapy. However, effective evidence-based SDM interventions for Crohn's disease are lacking, and the impact of SDM on Crohn's disease decision making and choice of therapy is unclear.

AIM

To test the impact of SDM on choice of therapy, quality of the decision and provider trust compared to standard Crohn's disease care.

METHODS

We conducted a multi-site cluster randomised controlled trial in 14 diverse gastroenterology practices in the US.

RESULTS

A total of 158 adult patients with Crohn's disease within 15 years of their diagnosis, with no prior Crohn's disease complications, and who were candidates to receive immunomodulators or biologics, participated in the study. Among these, 99 received the intervention and 59 received standard care. Demographics were similar between groups, although there were more women assigned to standard care, and a slightly shorter disease duration among those in the intervention group. Participants in the intervention group more frequently chose combination therapy (25% versus 5% control, p < 0.001), had a significantly lower decisional conflict (p < 0.05) and had greater trust in their provider (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

With rapidly expanding medication choices for Crohn's disease and slow uptake of early intensive therapy, SDM can personalise treatment strategies and has the potential to move the field of Crohn's disease management forward with an ultimate goal of consistently treating this disease early and intensively in appropriate patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Evaluating a Shared Decision Making Program for Crohn's Disease, ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT02084290 https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02084290.

Experiences Implementing a Suite of Decision Aids for Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators: Qualitative Insights From the DECIDE-ICD Trial

BACKGROUND

Shared decision making (SDM) is gaining importance in cardiology, including Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) reimbursement policies requiring documented SDM for patients considering primary prevention implantable cardioverter defibrillators. The DECIDE-ICD Trial (Decision Support Intervention for Patients offered implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators) assessed the implementation and effectiveness of patient decision aids (DAs) using a stepped-wedge design at 7 sites. The purpose of this subanalysis was to qualitatively describe electrophysiology clinicians' experience implementing and using the DAs.

METHODS

This included semi-structured individual interviews with electrophysiology clinicians at participating sites across the US, at least 6 months following conversion into the implementation phase of the trial (from June 2020 through February 2022). The interview guide was structured according to the RE-AIM (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation and Maintenance [implementation evaluation model]) framework, assessing clinician experiences, which can impact implementation domains, and was qualitatively assessed using a mixed inductive/deductive method.

RESULTS

We completed 22 interviews post-implementation across all 7 sites. Participants included both physicians (n=16) and other clinicians who counsel patients regarding treatment options (n=6). While perception of SDM and the DA were positive, participants highlighted reasons for uneven delivery of DAs to appropriate patients. The CMS mandate for SDM was not universally viewed as associating with patients receiving DA's, but rather (1) logistics of DA delivery, (2) perceived effectiveness in improving patient decision-making, and (3) match of DA content to current patient populations. Remaining tensions include the specific trial data used in DAs and reconciling timing of delivery with when patients are actively making decisions.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinicians charged with delivering DAs to patients considering primary prevention implantable cardioverter defibrillators were generally supportive of the tenets of SDM, and of the DA tools themselves, but noted several opportunities to improve the reach and continued use of them in routine care.

REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov; Unique Identifier: NCT03374891.

A citation analysis and scoping systematic review of the operationalization of the Practical, Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model (PRISM)

Background

The Practical, Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model (PRISM) was developed in 2008 as a contextually expanded version of the broadly used Reach, Adoption, Effectiveness, Implementation, and Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework. PRISM provides researchers a pragmatic and intuitive model to improve translation of research interventions into clinical and community practice. Since 2008, the use of PRISM increased across diverse topics, populations, and settings. This citation analysis and scoping systematic review aimed to assess the use of the PRISM framework and to make recommendations for future research.

Methods

A literature search was conducted using three databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus) for the period of 2008 and September 2020. After exclusion, reverse citation searches and invitations to experts in the field were used to identify and obtain recommendations for additional articles not identified in the original search. Studies that integrated PRISM into their study design were selected for full abstraction. Unique research studies were abstracted for information on study characteristics (e.g., setting/population, design), PRISM contextual domains, and RE-AIM outcomes.

Results

A total of 180 articles were identified to include PRISM to some degree. Thirty-two articles representing 23 unique studies integrated PRISM within their study design. Study characteristics varied widely and included studies conducted in diverse contexts, but predominately in high-income countries and in clinical out-patient settings. With regards to use, 19 used PRISM for evaluation, 10 for planning/development, 10 for implementation, four for sustainment, and one for dissemination. There was substantial variation across studies in how and to what degree PRISM contextual domains and RE-AIM outcomes were operationalized and connected. Only two studies directly connected individual PRISM context domains with RE-AIM outcomes, and another four included RE-AIM outcomes without direct connection to PRISM domains.

Conclusions

This is the first systematic review of the use of PRISM in various contexts. While there were low levels of ‘integrated’ use of PRISM and few reports on linkage to RE-AIM outcomes, most studies included important context domains of implementation and sustainability infrastructure and external environment. Recommendations are provided for more consistent and comprehensive use of and reporting on PRISM to inform both research and practice on contextual factors in implementation.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13012-022-01234-3.

Stakeholder Research Priorities to Promote Implementation of Shared Decision-Making for Lung Cancer Screening: An American Thoracic Society and Veterans Affairs Health Services Research and Development Statement

Rationale: Shared decision-making (SDM) for lung cancer screening (LCS) is recommended in guidelines and required by Medicare, yet it is seldom achieved in practice. The best approach for implementing SDM for LCS remains unknown, and the 2021 U.S. Preventive Services Task Force calls for implementation research to increase uptake of SDM for LCS. Objectives: To develop a stakeholder-prioritized research agenda and recommended outcomes to advance implementation of SDM for LCS. Methods: The American Thoracic Society and VA Health Services Research and Development Service convened a multistakeholder committee with expertise in SDM, LCS, patient-centered care, and implementation science. During a virtual State of the Art conference, we reviewed evidence and identified research questions to address barriers to implementing SDM for LCS, as well as outcome constructs, which were refined by writing group members. Our committee (n = 34) then ranked research questions and SDM effectiveness outcomes by perceived importance in an online survey. Results: We present our committee's consensus on three topics important to implementing SDM for LCS: 1) foundational principles for the best practice of SDM for LCS; 2) stakeholder rankings of 22 implementation research questions; and 3) recommended outcomes, including Proctor's implementation outcomes and stakeholder rankings of SDM effectiveness outcomes for hybrid implementation-effectiveness studies. Our committee ranked questions that apply innovative implementation approaches to relieve primary care providers of the sole responsibility of SDM for LCS as highest priority. We rated effectiveness constructs that capture the patient experience of SDM as most important. Conclusions: This statement offers a stakeholder-prioritized research agenda and outcomes to advance implementation of SDM for LCS.

Swedish Primary Care Physicians' Intentions to Use Telemedicine: A Survey Using a New Questionnaire - Physician Attitudes and Intentions to Use Telemedicine (PAIT)

Background

Research on intentions to use telemedicine in primary care is sparse. This survey study explored primary care physicians' intentions to use telemedicine by using a newly developed questionnaire: Physician Attitudes and Intentions to use Telemedicine.

Methods

An anonymous web-survey with questions focusing on theory-based predictors of behavioral intentions such as Attitudes, Subjective norms and Perceived behavioral control was designed, validated, and sent to all primary care physicians at 160 primary health care centers in southern Sweden from May to August 2019. The questionnaire had 29 subject items (including 49 multiple-choice sub-items). Main outcome measures were intentions to use three domains of telemedicine and correlation between theory-based predictors and behavioral intentions for using telemedicine.

Results

The survey was validated by an expert group, amended, and then tested and retested. A majority of the 198 physicians who returned the web-surveys reported that they did not use e-mails (68%), nor video consultations (78%), chat (81%), or text messages (86%) in their everyday patient work. Yet, most physicians described a positive intention to use telemedicine in patient care for all three studied domains with Attitudes and Perceived behavioral control being significant predictors (p<0.01) for Intentions to use digital contacts (R² = 0.54), chronic disease monitoring with digital tools (R² = 0.47) and artificial intelligence (R² = 0.54). A structural validation of a preliminary instrument - Physician Attitudes and Intention to use Telemedicine (PAIT) - containing 28 sub-items was done by exploratory factor analysis with acceptable explanatory, reliability and sampling adequacy measures. Five factors emerged with Eigenvalues between 1.6 and 11.1 explaining 72% of the variance. Total Cronbach's alpha was 0.91 and Kaiser-Meyer-Olkirk 0.79.

Conclusion

Before the covid-19 pandemic, Swedish primary care physicians reported a low use yet high behavioral intention to use telemedicine in a study where we developed the preliminary instrument Physician Attitudes and Intention to use Telemedicine. Perceived behavioral control had the largest predictive value of behavioral intention to use telemedicine. Thus, interventions aiming to increase the use of digital tools in primary care should possibly focus on empowering physicians' self-efficacy towards using them.

Stakeholder perspectives on the implementation of shared decision making to empower youth who have experienced commercial sexual exploitation

OBJECTIVE

Shared decision making (SDM) has been proposed as a method to improve treatment adherence, placement stability, and other youth-centric outcomes for children who have been victims of commercial sexual exploitation (CSEC). This project seeks to characterize service providers' perspectives on the adoption and implementation of SDM into treatment and placement planning decisions.

METHOD

Sixteen key stakeholders who provide services for youth who have experienced CSEC in a Southern city, as well as adults who survived exploitation as children, were individually interviewed. These interviews focused on stakeholders' perspective on the appropriateness and contextual considerations regarding implementing this model to engage youth in decision-making conversations. Interview transcripts were qualitatively analyzed using group-based inductive content analysis.

RESULT

While all participants acknowledged the philosophical importance of including youth in decision-making, perspectives varied on how this philosophy could be operationalized. Trauma-bonds to offenders, distrust in service systems, and policy and time constraints were discussed as potential barriers to implementation. Perceived benefits to applying this model included encouraging youth empowerment, helping youth develop decision-making skills, and strengthening relationships between youth and providers. Implementation considerations mirrored those seen in other medical and behavioral health settings, including extensive training, fidelity monitoring, enforcement through policy and legislation, and ultimately resetting the culture of services to be maximally youth inclusive.

CONCLUSION

Participants supported the use of SDM to standardize the inclusion of youth in treatment and placement planning decisions. However, there exist challenges in defining exactly how to adopt this approach, and how to implement broad-scale cultural change within the service-providing community.