The effectiveness of computer reminders for improving quality assessment for point-of-care testing in general practice--a randomized controlled trial

Obesity prevention practices in early care and education settings: an adaptive implementation trial

Background

Despite the potential for Early Care and Education (ECE) settings to promote healthy habits, a gap exists between current practices and evidence-based practices (EBPs) for obesity prevention in childhood.

Methods

We will use an enhanced non-responder trial design to determine the effectiveness and incremental cost-effectiveness of an adaptive implementation strategy for Together, We Inspire Smart Eating (WISE), while examining moderators and mediators of the strategy effect. WISE is a curriculum that aims to increase children’s intake of carotenoid-rich fruits and vegetables through four evidence-based practices in the early care and education setting. In this trial, we will randomize sites that do not respond to low-intensity strategies to either (a) continue receiving low-intensity strategies or (b) receive high-intensity strategies. This design will determine the effect of an adaptive implementation strategy that adds high-intensity versus one that continues with low-intensity among non-responder sites. We will also apply explanatory, sequential mixed methods to provide a nuanced understanding of implementation mechanisms, contextual factors, and characteristics of sites that respond to differing intensities of implementation strategies. Finally, we will conduct a cost effectiveness analysis to estimate the incremental effect of augmenting implementation with high-intensity strategies compared to continuing low-intensity strategies on costs, fidelity, and child health outcomes.

Discussion

We expect our study to contribute to an evidence base for structuring implementation support in real-world ECE contexts, ultimately providing a guide for applying the adaptive implementation strategy in ECE for WISE scale-up. Our work will also provide data to guide implementation decisions of other interventions in ECE. Finally, we will provide the first estimate of relative value for different implementation strategies in this setting.

Trial registration

NCT05050539; 9/20/21.

Improving Isotonic Maintenance Intravenous Fluid Use in the Emergency Department

BACKGROUND

Maintenance intravenous fluids (IVFs) are commonly used in the hospital setting. Hypotonic IVFs are commonly used in pediatrics despite concerns about high incidence of hyponatremia. We aimed to increase isotonic maintenance IVF use in children admitted from the emergency department (ED) from a baseline of 20% in 2018 to >80% by December 2019.

METHODS

We included patients aged 28 days to 18 years receiving maintenance IVFs (rate >10 mL/hour) at the time of admission. Patients with active chronic medical problems were excluded. Interventions included institutional discussions on isotonic IVF based on literature review, education on isotonic IVF use per the American Academy of Pediatrics guideline (isotonic IVF use with appropriate potassium chloride and dextrose), electronic medical record changes to encourage isotonic IVF use, and group practice review with individual physician audit and feedback. Balancing measures were the frequency of serum electrolyte checks within 24 hours of ED admission and occurrence of hypernatremia. Data were analyzed by using statistical process control charts.

RESULTS

Isotonic maintenance IVF use improved, with special cause observed twice; the 80% goal was met and sustained. No difference was noted in serum electrolyte checks within 24 hours of admission (P > .05). There was no increase in occurrence of hypernatremia among patients who received isotonic IVF compared with those who received hypotonic IVF (P > .05).

CONCLUSIONS

The application of improvement methods resulted in improved isotonic IVF use in ED patients admitted to the inpatient setting. Institutional readiness for change at the time of the American Academy of Pediatrics guideline release and hardwiring of preferred fluids via electronic medical record changes were critical to success.

Stakeholder selected strategies for obesity prevention in childcare: results from a small-scale cluster randomized hybrid type III trial

BACKGROUND

Together, We Inspire Smart Eating (WISE) is an intervention for the early care and education setting to support children's exposure to and intake of fruits and vegetables. WISE emphasizes 4 evidence-based practices (EBPs): (1) use of a mascot; (2) educators' role modeling; (3) positive feeding practices; and (4) hands-on exposures. The current study reports on a small-scale implementation trial aimed at improving the use of WISE EBPs by teachers.

METHODS

A Hybrid Type III Cluster Randomized Design compared a Basic and Enhanced implementation strategy. The Basic Strategy included training and reminders only; the Enhanced strategy was a multi-faceted package of stakeholder-selected strategies including a leadership commitment, an implementation blueprint, a local champion, an environmental reminder of the EBPs, facilitation, and tailored educational resources and incentives. All study sites were Head Starts. Sites were randomized using a balancing technique that considered site characteristics; 4 sites (20 classrooms, 39 educators, 305 children) received Enhanced support; 5 sites (18 classrooms, 36 educators, 316 children) received Basic support. RE-AIM guided the evaluation, and implementation fidelity was the primary outcome. Strategies were assessed using examination of data distributions and unadjusted comparisons (t tests) as well as general linear and mixed effects models controlling for covariates.

RESULTS

For the primary outcome of fidelity, the Enhanced group had significantly higher means for 3 of 4 EBPs. Multivariate models explained a significant portion of variance for both mascot use and hands-on exposure with a significant positive effect observed for treatment condition. The Enhanced group also had higher rates of Appropriateness and Organizational Readiness for Implementing Change (as indicators of implementation and adoption, respectively). There was no significant difference between groups for indicators of Reach, Effectiveness or Maintenance. Formative interviews indicated key targets for iteration and potential mechanisms. Key events were catalogued to provide context for interpretation (e.g., 61% of classrooms with turnover).

CONCLUSIONS

Findings were mixed but suggested promise for the Enhanced strategy, especially considering key events of the study. Implementation fidelity improvements occurred mainly in the last 3 months of the school year; additional time may be needed to translate to improvements in child outcomes.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT03075085 Registered 20 February 2017.

Variation in Point-of-Care Testing of HbA1c in Diabetes Care in General Practice

Background: Point-of-care testing (POCT) of HbA1c may result in improved diabetic control, better patient outcomes, and enhanced clinical efficiency with fewer patient visits and subsequent reductions in costs. In 2008, the Danish regulators created a framework agreement regarding a new fee-for-service fee for the remuneration of POCT of HbA1c in general practice. According to secondary research, only the Capital Region of Denmark has allowed GPs to use this new incentive for POCT. The aim of this study is to use patient data to characterize patients with diabetes who have received POCT of HbA1c and analyze the variation in the use of POCT of HbA1c among patients with diabetes in Danish general practice. Methods: We use register data from the Danish Drug Register, the Danish Health Service Register and the National Patient Register from the year 2011 to define a population of 44,981 patients with diabetes (type 1 and type 2 but not patients with gestational diabetes) from the Capital Region. The POCT fee is used to measure the amount of POCT of HbA1c among patients with diabetes. Next, we apply descriptive statistics and multilevel logistic regression to analyze variation in the prevalence of POCT at the patient and clinic level. We include patient characteristics such as gender, age, socioeconomic markers, health care utilization, case mix markers, and municipality classifications. Results: The proportion of patients who received POCT was 14.1% and the proportion of clinics which were “POCT clinics” was 26.9%. There were variations in the use of POCT across clinics and patients. A part of the described variation can be explained by patient characteristics. Male gender, age differences (older age), short education, and other ethnicity imply significantly higher odds for POCT. High patient costs in general practice and other parts of primary care also imply higher odds for POCT. In contrast, high patient costs for drugs and/or morbidity in terms of the Charlson Comorbidity index mean lower odds for POCT. The frequency of patients with diabetes per 1000 patients was larger in POCT clinics than Non-POCT clinics. A total of 22.5% of the unexplained variability was related to GP clinics. Conclusions: This study demonstrates variation in the use of POCT which can be explained by patient characteristics such as demographic, socioeconomic, and case mix markers. However, it appears relevant to reassess the system for POCT. Further studies are warranted in order to assess the impacts of POCT of HbA1c on health care outcomes.

Computer-generated reminders delivered on paper to healthcare professionals: effects on professional practice and healthcare outcomes

BACKGROUND

Clinical practice does not always reflect best practice and evidence, partly because of unconscious acts of omission, information overload, or inaccessible information. Reminders may help clinicians overcome these problems by prompting them to recall information that they already know or would be expected to know and by providing information or guidance in a more accessible and relevant format, at a particularly appropriate time. This is an update of a previously published review.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effects of reminders automatically generated through a computerized system (computer-generated) and delivered on paper to healthcare professionals on quality of care (outcomes related to healthcare professionals' practice) and patient outcomes (outcomes related to patients' health condition).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, six other databases and two trials registers up to 21 September 2016 together with reference checking, citation searching and contact with study authors to identify additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included individual- or cluster-randomized and non-randomized trials that evaluated the impact of computer-generated reminders delivered on paper to healthcare professionals, alone (single-component intervention) or in addition to one or more co-interventions (multi-component intervention), compared with usual care or the co-intervention(s) without the reminder component.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Review authors working in pairs independently screened studies for eligibility and abstracted data. For each study, we extracted the primary outcome when it was defined or calculated the median effect size across all reported outcomes. We then calculated the median improvement and interquartile range (IQR) across included studies using the primary outcome or median outcome as representative outcome. We assessed the certainty of the evidence according to the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 35 studies (30 randomized trials and five non-randomized trials) and analyzed 34 studies (40 comparisons). Twenty-nine studies took place in the USA and six studies took place in Canada, France, Israel, and Kenya. All studies except two took place in outpatient care. Reminders were aimed at enhancing compliance with preventive guidelines (e.g. cancer screening tests, vaccination) in half the studies and at enhancing compliance with disease management guidelines for acute or chronic conditions (e.g. annual follow-ups, laboratory tests, medication adjustment, counseling) in the other half.Computer-generated reminders delivered on paper to healthcare professionals, alone or in addition to co-intervention(s), probably improves quality of care slightly compared with usual care or the co-intervention(s) without the reminder component (median improvement 6.8% (IQR: 3.8% to 17.5%); 34 studies (40 comparisons); moderate-certainty evidence).Computer-generated reminders delivered on paper to healthcare professionals alone (single-component intervention) probably improves quality of care compared with usual care (median improvement 11.0% (IQR 5.4% to 20.0%); 27 studies (27 comparisons); moderate-certainty evidence). Adding computer-generated reminders delivered on paper to healthcare professionals to one or more co-interventions (multi-component intervention) probably improves quality of care slightly compared with the co-intervention(s) without the reminder component (median improvement 4.0% (IQR 3.0% to 6.0%); 11 studies (13 comparisons); moderate-certainty evidence).We are uncertain whether reminders, alone or in addition to co-intervention(s), improve patient outcomes as the certainty of the evidence is very low (n = 6 studies (seven comparisons)). None of the included studies reported outcomes related to harms or adverse effects of the intervention.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is moderate-certainty evidence that computer-generated reminders delivered on paper to healthcare professionals probably slightly improves quality of care, in terms of compliance with preventive guidelines and compliance with disease management guidelines. It is uncertain whether reminders improve patient outcomes because the certainty of the evidence is very low. The heterogeneity of the reminder interventions included in this review also suggests that reminders can probably improve quality of care in various settings under various conditions.

Implementing an Electronic Medical Record-Based Reminder for Cardiovascular Risk Screening in Rheumatoid Arthritis

OBJECTIVE

Although cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the leading cause of death among individuals with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), CVD risks are not being assessed frequently and systematically in RA. We implemented an electronic medical record (EMR)-based reminder in a tertiary care center and assessed the effects of this intervention on CVD risk screening by rheumatologists and primary care providers.

METHODS

The EMR reminder was implemented in December 2013 and included the most recent value and target ranges for body mass index, blood pressure (BP), and lipid profiles. It was displayed for every rheumatology and primary care visit for all patients with the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision code for RA (714.0). Lipid screening rates, as well as changes in BP and obesity rates were compared pre- and postimplementation. Factors associated with lipid screening postimplementation were assessed using multivariate logistic regression.

RESULTS

A total of 138 and 112 RA patients were seen in the outpatient clinics pre- and postimplementation, respectively. The demographic characteristics were similar in the pre- and postimplementation groups. Lipid screening rates were 50% preimplementation and 46% postimplementation (P = 0.58). There were no significant improvements in BP or obesity rates postimplementation. Factors associated with the higher odds of lipid screening included older age and history of diabetes mellitus.

CONCLUSION

Implementing an EMR reminder did not improve CVD risk screening among RA patients. Future research is needed to identify and address barriers to CVD screening, and to educate patients and providers about RA-related risks.

The effectiveness of computer reminders versus postal reminders for improving quality assessment for point-of-care testing in primary care: a randomized controlled trial

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to evaluate the relative effectiveness of electronic and postal reminders for increasing adherence to the quality assurance programme for the international normalized ratio (INR) point-of-care testing (POCT) device in primary care.

METHODS

All 213 family practices that use the Elective Laboratory of the Capital Region, Denmark, and regularly conduct INR POCT were randomly allocated into two similarly sized groups. During the 4-month intervention, these practices were sent either computer reminders (ComRem) or computer-generated postal reminders (Postal) if they did not perform a split test to check the quality of their INR POCT for each calendar month. The adherence of the practices was tracked during the subsequent 8 months subdivided into two 4-month periods both without intervention. Outcomes were measures of split test procedure adherence.

RESULTS

Both interventions were associated with an increase in adherence to the split test procedure - a factor 6.00 [95% confidence interval (CI) 4.46-7.72] and 8.22 [95% CI 5.87-11.52] for ComRem and Postal, respectively - but there is no evidence that one of the interventions was more effective than the other. In the ComRem group, the expected number of split tests (out of four) was 2.54 (95% CI 2.33-2.76) versus 2.44 (95% CI 2.24-2.65) in the Postal group, P = 0.14. There was a slight decrease in adherence over the two follow-ups, but neither intervention was better than the other in achieving a lasting improvement in adherence.

CONCLUSION

Computer reminders are as efficient as postal reminders in increasing adherence to a quality assurance programme for the INR POCT device in primary care.

Formative evaluation of clinician experience with integrating family history-based clinical decision support into clinical practice

Family health history is a leading predictor of disease risk. Nonetheless, it is underutilized to guide care and, therefore, is ripe for health information technology intervention. To fill the family health history practice gap, Cleveland Clinic has developed a family health history collection and clinical decision support tool, MyFamily. This report describes the impact and process of implementing MyFamily into primary care, cancer survivorship and cancer genetics clinics. Ten providers participated in semi-structured interviews that were analyzed to identify opportunities for process improvement. Participants universally noted positive effects on patient care, including increases in quality, personalization of care and patient engagement. The impact on clinical workflow varied by practice setting, with differences observed in the ease of integration and the use of specific report elements. Tension between the length of the report and desired detail was appreciated. Barriers and facilitators to the process of implementation were noted, dominated by the theme of increased integration with the electronic medical record. These results fed real-time improvement cycles to reinforce clinician use. This model will be applied in future institutional efforts to integrate clinical genomic applications into practice and may be useful for other institutions considering the implementation of tools for personalizing medical management.