An effectiveness-implementation hybrid trial study protocol targeting posttraumatic stress disorder and comorbidity

Engaging and following physical injury survivors at risk for developing posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms: A 25 site US national study

INTRODUCTION

Early intervention for patients at risk for Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) relies upon the ability to engage and follow trauma-exposed patients. Recent requirements by the American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma (College) have mandated screening and referral for patients with high levels of risk for the development of PTSD or depression. Investigations that assess factors associated with engaging and following physically injured patients may be essential in assessing outcomes related to screening, intervention, and referral.

METHODS

This investigation was a secondary analysis of data collected as part of a United States level I trauma center site randomized clinical trial. All 635 patients were ages ≥18 and had high PTSD symptom levels (i.e., DSM-IV PTSD Checklist score ≥35) at the time of the baseline trauma center admission. Baseline technology use, demographic, and injury characteristics were collected for patients who were followed up with over the course of the year after physical injury. Regression analyses were used to assess the associations between technology use, demographic and injury characteristics, and the attainment of follow-up outcome assessments.

RESULTS

Thirty-one percent of participants were missing one or more 3-, 6- or 12-month follow-up outcome assessments. Increased risk of missing one or more outcome assessments was associated with younger age (18-30 versus ≥55 Relative Risks [RR] = 1.78, 95 % Confidence Interval [CI] = 1.09, 2.91), lack of cell phone (RR = 1.32, 95 % CI = 1.01, 1.72), no internet access (RR = 1.47, 95 % CI = 1.01, 2.16), public versus private insurance (RR = 1.47, 95 % CI = 1.12, 1.92), having no chronic medical comorbidities (≥4 versus none, RR = 0.28, 95 % CI = 0.20, 0.39), and worse pre-injury mental health function (RR = 0.99, 95 % CI = 0.98, 0.99).

CONCLUSIONS

This multisite investigation suggests that younger and publicly insured and/or uninsured patients with barriers to cell phone and internet access may be particularly vulnerable to lapses in trauma center follow-up. Clinical research informing trauma center-based screening, intervention, and referral procedures could productively explore strategies for patients at risk for not engaging and adhering to follow-up care and outcome assessments.

Can Baseline Patient Clinical and Demographic Characteristics Predict Response to Early Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Interventions After Physical Injury?

OBJECTIVE

A growing evidence base supports stepped care interventions for the early treatment of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) after physical injury. Few investigations have examined the characteristics of patients who do and do not respond to these interventions.

METHOD

This investigation was a secondary analysis that used previously collected data from three randomized clinical trials of stepped care interventions (patient N = 498). The study hypothesized that a subgroup of patients would manifest persistent PTSD symptoms regardless of randomization to intervention or control conditions, and that characteristics present at the time of baseline injury hospitalization could distinguish patients who would develop persistent symptoms from potential treatment responders. Regression analyses identified baseline patient clinical and demographic characteristics that were associated with persistent PTSD symptoms over the 6-months post-injury. Additional analyses identified treatment attributes of intervention patients who were and were not likely to demonstrate persistent symptoms.

RESULTS

A substantial subgroup of patients (n = 222, 44.6%) demonstrated persistent PTSD symptoms over time. Greater numbers of pre-injury trauma, pre-injury PTSD symptoms, elevated early post-injury PTSD symptoms, unemployment, and non-White race identified patients with persistent symptoms. Patients with ≥3 of these baseline risk characteristics demonstrated diminished treatment responses when compared to patients with <3 characteristics. Intervention patients with ≥3 risk characteristics were less likely to engage in treatment and required greater amounts of interventionist time.

CONCLUSIONS

Injured trauma survivors have readily identifiable characteristics at the time of hospitalization that can distinguish responders to PTSD stepped care interventions versus patients who may be treatment refractory.

Can stepped collaborative care interventions improve post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms for racial and ethnic minority injury survivors?

Objectives

No large-scale randomized clinical trial investigations have evaluated the potential differential effectiveness of early interventions for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) among injured patients from racial and ethnic minority backgrounds. The current investigation assessed whether a stepped collaborative care intervention trial conducted at 25 level I trauma centers differentially improved PTSD symptoms for racial and ethnic minority injury survivors.

Methods

The investigation was a secondary analysis of a stepped wedge cluster randomized clinical trial. Patients endorsing high levels of distress on the PTSD Checklist (PCL-C) were randomized to enhanced usual care control or intervention conditions. Three hundred and fifty patients of the 635 randomized (55%) were from non-white and/or Hispanic backgrounds. The intervention included care management, cognitive behavioral therapy elements and, psychopharmacology addressing PTSD symptoms. The primary study outcome was PTSD symptoms assessed with the PCL-C at 3, 6, and 12 months postinjury. Mixed model regression analyses compared treatment effects for intervention and control group patients from non-white/Hispanic versus white/non-Hispanic backgrounds.

Results

The investigation attained between 75% and 80% 3-month to 12-month follow-up. The intervention, on average, required 122 min (SD=132 min). Mixed model regression analyses revealed significant changes in PCL-C scores for non-white/Hispanic intervention patients at 6 months (adjusted difference -3.72 (95% CI -7.33 to -0.10) Effect Size =0.25, p<0.05) after the injury event. No significant differences were observed for white/non-Hispanic patients at the 6-month time point (adjusted difference -1.29 (95% CI -4.89 to 2.31) ES=0.10, p=ns).

Conclusion

In this secondary analysis, a brief stepped collaborative care intervention was associated with greater 6-month reductions in PTSD symptoms for non-white/Hispanic patients when compared with white/non-Hispanic patients. If replicated, these findings could serve to inform future American College of Surgeon Committee on Trauma requirements for screening, intervention, and referral for PTSD and comorbidities.

Level of evidence

Level II, secondary analysis of randomized clinical trial data reporting a significant difference.

Trial registration number

NCT02655354.

Implementation of a Stepped Care Program to Address Emotional Recovery among Traumatic Injury Patients

BACKGROUND

Annually, over 600,000 adults served in US trauma centers (≥20%) develop posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and/or depression in the first year after injury. American College of Surgeons guidelines include screening and addressing mental health recovery in trauma centers. Yet, many trauma centers do not monitor and address mental health recovery, and it is a priority to learn how to implement evidence-informed mental health programs in trauma centers.

STUDY DESIGN

This report describes our application of the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, Sustainment model to implement the Trauma Resilience and Recovery Program (TRRP) in 3 Level I and II trauma centers to address patients' mental health needs. TRRP is a scalable and sustainable stepped model of care-one of the few in the US-that provides early intervention and direct services after traumatic injury.

RESULTS

Trauma centers are well positioned to accelerate patients' mental health recovery via early identification, education, screening, and referrals to mental health agencies that provide best-practice care. We found that TRRP was acceptable to the 3 partnering trauma centers we studied. Early engagement of patient, provider, and hospital administration stakeholders enhanced buy-in during the early stages of the implementation process and promoted sustainability. Active processes to support monitoring, evaluation, and adaptation were critical.

CONCLUSIONS

Our work demonstrates the feasibility of implementing and adapting TRRP, a cost-efficient and sustainable stepped care intervention, in Level I and II trauma centers. Several factors should be carefully considered by trauma centers seeking to integrate behavioral health interventions into their trauma program.

Stepped collaborative care for pain and posttraumatic stress disorder after major trauma: a randomized controlled feasibility trial

PURPOSE

To examine feasibility and acceptability of providing stepped collaborative care case management targeting posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and pain symptoms after major traumatic injury.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Participants were major trauma survivors in Victoria, Australia, at risk of persistent pain or PTSD with high baseline symptoms. Participants were block-randomized, stratified by compensation-status, to the usual care (n = 15) or intervention (n = 17) group (46% of eligible patients). The intervention was adapted from existing stepped collaborative care interventions with input from interdisciplinary experts and people with lived experience in trauma and disability. The proactive case management intervention targeted PTSD and pain management for 6-months using motivational interviewing, cognitive behavioral therapy strategies, and collaborative care. Qualitative interviews explored intervention acceptability.

RESULTS

Intervention participants received a median of 7 h case manager contact and reported that they valued the supportive and non-judgmental listening, and timely access to effective strategies, resources, and treatments post-injury from the case manager. Participants reported few disadvantages from participation, and positive impacts on symptoms and recovery outcomes consistent with the reduction in PTSD and pain symptoms measured at 1-, 3- and 6-months.

CONCLUSIONS

Stepped collaborative care was low-cost, feasible, and acceptable to people at risk of PTSD or pain after major trauma.IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONAfter hospitalization for injury, people can experience difficulty accessing timely support to manage posttraumatic stress, pain and other concerns.Stepped case management-based interventions that provide individualized support and collaborative care have reduced posttraumatic stress symptom severity for patients admitted to American trauma centers.We showed that this model of care could be adapted to target pain and mental health in the trauma system in Victoria, Australia.The intervention was low cost, acceptable and highly valued by most participants who perceived that it helped them use strategies to better manage post-traumatic symptoms, and to access clinicians and treatments relevant to their needs.

Integrating pragmatic and implementation science randomized clinical trial approaches: a PRagmatic Explanatory Continuum Indicator Summary-2 (PRECIS-2) analysis

BACKGROUND

Over the past two decades, pragmatic and implementation science clinical trial research methods have advanced substantially. Pragmatic and implementation studies have natural areas of overlap, particularly relating to the goal of using clinical trial data to leverage health care system policy changes. Few investigations have addressed pragmatic and implementation science randomized trial methods development while also considering policy impact.

METHODS

The investigation used the PRagmatic Explanatory Continuum Indicator Summary-2 (PRECIS-2) and PRECIS-2-Provider Strategies (PRECIS-2-PS) tools to evaluate the design of two multisite randomized clinical trials that targeted patient-level effectiveness outcomes, provider-level practice changes and health care system policy. Seven raters received PRECIS-2 training and applied the tools in the coding of the two trials. Descriptive statistics were produced for both trials, and PRECIS-2 wheel diagrams were constructed. Interrater agreement was assessed with the Intraclass Correlation (ICC) and Kappa statistics. The Rapid Assessment Procedure Informed Clinical Ethnography (RAPICE) qualitative approach was applied to understanding integrative themes derived from the PRECIS-2 ratings and an end-of-study policy summit.

RESULTS

The ICCs for the composite ratings across the patient and provider-focused PRECIS-2 domains ranged from 0.77 to 0.87, and the Kappa values ranged from 0.25 to 0.37, reflecting overall fair-to-good interrater agreement for both trials. All four PRECIS-2 wheels were rated more pragmatic than explanatory, with composite mean and median scores ≥ 4. Across trials, the primary intent-to-treat analysis domain was consistently rated most pragmatic (mean = 5.0, SD = 0), while the follow-up/data collection domain was rated most explanatory (mean range = 3.14-3.43, SD range = 0.49-0.69). RAPICE field notes identified themes related to potential PRECIS-2 training improvements, as well as policy themes related to using trial data to inform US trauma care system practice change; the policy themes were not captured by the PRECIS-2 ratings.

CONCLUSIONS

The investigation documents that the PRECIS-2 and PRECIS-2-PS can be simultaneously used to feasibly and reliably characterize clinical trials with patient and provider-level targets. The integration of pragmatic and implementation science clinical trial research methods can be furthered by using common metrics such as the PRECIS-2 and PRECIS-2-PS. Future study could focus on clinical trial policy research methods development.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

DO-SBIS ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00607620. registered on January 29, 2008. TSOS ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02655354, registered on July 27, 2015.

Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms and alcohol and drug use comorbidity at 25 US level I trauma centers

Background

Questions regarding the extent to which post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is comorbid with alcohol and drug use are particularly germane in an era when the American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma (ACS-COT) is considering policy requiring screening, intervention and/or referral services for patients presenting with psychological sequalae of traumatic injury. Literature review revealed few multisite trauma-center-based investigations that have assessed the association between PTSD symptoms and alcohol and drug use comorbidities in injured patients.

Methods

This investigation was a secondary analysis of baseline data collected prior to randomization in a 25-site trauma center pragmatic clinical trial. All 635 patients included in the investigation had elevated PTSD symptom levels at the time of trauma center admission. Self-report questionnaire screening, laboratory toxicology results, and electronic health record data were combined to assess the frequencies of alcohol, stimulant (i.e., amphetamine and cocaine), opioid and marijuana use comorbidities for injured patients. Logistic regression was used to assess the associations between demographic and injury characteristics and alcohol and drug use comorbidity.

Results

The frequency of patients with one or more alcohol or substance use comorbidity was between 62% and 79%. Over 50% of patients were positive for one or more alcohol or cannabis comorbidity. Approximately 26% of patients were positive for stimulants and 10% for opioid comorbidity.

Discussion

This multisite investigation suggests that between 62% and 79% of hospitalized injury survivors with elevated PTSD symptoms have one or more alcohol or drug use comorbidity. Orchestrated ACS-COT policy and trauma center service delivery development should incorporate the key finding that a substantial majority of patients with high levels of psychological distress (eg, elevated PTSD symptoms) may have alcohol and drug use comorbidities.

Level of evidence

Level II (epidemiological investigation of untreated controls from a multisite randomized clinical trial)

Trial registration number

NCT02655354.

Alternative Designs for Testing Speech, Language, and Hearing Interventions: Cluster-Randomized Trials and Stepped-Wedge Designs

PURPOSE

Individual-randomized trials are the gold standard for testing the efficacy and effectiveness of drugs, devices, and behavioral interventions. Health care delivery, educational, and programmatic interventions are often complex, involving multiple levels of change and measurement precluding individual randomization for testing. Cluster-randomized trials and cluster-randomized stepped-wedge trials are alternatives where the intervention is allocated at the group level, such as a clinic or a school, and the outcomes are measured at the person level. These designs are introduced along with the statistical implications of similarities among individuals within the same cluster. We also illustrate the parameters that have the most impact on the likelihood of detecting intervention effects, which must be considered when planning these trials.

CONCLUSION

Cluster-randomized and stepped-wedge designs should be considered by researchers as experimental alternatives to individual-randomized trials when testing speech, language, and hearing care interventions in real-world settings.

Ethical and epistemic issues in the design and conduct of pragmatic stepped-wedge cluster randomized clinical trials

Stepped-wedge cluster randomized trial (SW-CRT) designs are increasingly employed in pragmatic research; they differ from traditional parallel cluster randomized trials in which an intervention is delivered to a subset of clusters, but not to all. In a SW-CRT, all clusters receive the intervention under investigation by the end of the study. This approach is thought to avoid ethical concerns about the denial of a desired intervention to participants in control groups. Such concerns have been cited in the literature as a primary motivation for choosing SW-CRT design, however SW-CRTs raise additional ethical concerns related to the delayed implementation of an intervention and consent. Yet, PCT investigators may choose SW-CRT designs simply because they are concerned that other study designs are infeasible. In this paper, we examine justifications for the use of SW-CRT study design, over other designs, by drawing on the experience of the National Institutes of Health's Health Care Systems Research Collaboratory (NIH Collaboratory) with five pragmatic SW-CRTs. We found that decisions to use SW-CRT design were justified by practical and epistemic reasons rather than ethical ones. These include concerns about feasibility, the heterogeneity of cluster characteristics, and the desire for simultaneous clinical evaluation and implementation. In this paper we compare the potential benefits of SW-CRTs against the ethical and epistemic challenges brought forth by the design and suggest that the choice of SW-CRT design must balance epistemic, feasibility and ethical justifications. Moreover, given their complexity, such studies need rigorous and informed ethical oversight.

Digital and Mobile Health Technology in Collaborative Behavioral Health Care: Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

The collaborative care model (CoCM) is a well-established system of behavioral health care in primary care settings. There is potential for digital and mobile technology to augment the CoCM to improve access, scalability, efficiency, and clinical outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to conduct a scoping review to synthesize the evidence available on digital and mobile health technology in collaborative care settings.

METHODS

This review included cohort and experimental studies of digital and mobile technologies used to augment the CoCM. Studies examining primary care without collaborative care were excluded. A literature search was conducted using 4 electronic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and Google Scholar). The search results were screened in 2 stages (title and abstract screening, followed by full-text review) by 2 reviewers.

RESULTS

A total of 3982 nonduplicate reports were identified, of which 20 (0.5%) were included in the analysis. Most studies used a combination of novel technologies. The range of digital and mobile health technologies used included mobile apps, websites, web-based platforms, telephone-based interactive voice recordings, and mobile sensor data. None of the identified studies used social media or wearable devices. Studies that measured patient and provider satisfaction reported positive results, although some types of interventions increased provider workload, and engagement was variable. In studies where clinical outcomes were measured (7/20, 35%), there were no differences between groups, or the differences were modest.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of digital and mobile health technologies in CoCM is still limited. This study found that technology was most successful when it was integrated into the existing workflow without relying on patient or provider initiative. However, the effect of digital and mobile health on clinical outcomes in CoCM remains unclear and requires additional clinical trials.

A Pragmatic Clinical Trial Approach to Assessing and Monitoring Suicidal Ideation: Results from A National US Trauma Care System Study

OBJECTIVE

Few investigations have comprehensively described methods for assessing and monitoring suicidal ideation in pragmatic clinical trials of mental health services interventions. This investigation's goal was to assess a collaborative care intervention's effectiveness in reducing suicidal ideation and describe suicide monitoring implementation in a nationwide protocol.

METHOD

The investigation was a secondary analysis of a stepped wedge cluster randomized trial at 25-Level I trauma centers. Injury survivors (N = 635) were randomized to control (n = 370) and intervention (n = 265) conditions and assessed at baseline hospitalization and follow-up at 3-, 6- and 12-months post-injury. The Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) item-9 was used to evaluate patients for suicidal ideation. Mixed model regression was used to assess intervention versus control group changes in PHQ-9 item-9 scores over time and associations between baseline characteristics and development of suicidal ideation longitudinally. As part of the study implementation process assessment, suicide outreach call logs were also reviewed.

RESULTS

Over 50% of patients endorsed suicidal ideation at ≥1 assessment. Intervention patients relative to control patients demonstrated reductions in endorsements of suicidal ideation that did not achieve statistical significance (F[3,1461] = 0.74, P = .53). The study team completed outreach phone calls, texts or voice messages to 268 patients with PHQ-9 item-9 scores ≥1 (n = 161 control, n = 107 intervention).

CONCLUSIONS

Suicide assessment and monitoring can be feasibly implemented in large-scale pragmatic clinical trials. Intervention patients demonstrated less suicidal ideation over time; however, these comparisons did not achieve statistical significance. Intensive pragmatic trial monitoring may mask treatment effects by providing control patients a supportive intervention.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02655354.

An evaluation of the association between fault attribution and healthcare costs and trajectories in the first three years after transport injury

BACKGROUND

People with complex medical and psychosocial issues have high healthcare needs. This registry-based cohort study sought to quantify the association between external fault attribution, recorded during compensation claim lodgement, and the cost and patterns of healthcare utilisation.

METHODS

6,144 survivors of transport-related major trauma between 1 July 2010 and 30 June 2016 were extracted from the Victorian State Trauma Registry (VSTR) and linked to treatment payments from the Transport Accident Commission (TAC). Associations between fault and healthcare costs were examined with Generalised Linear Regression. Healthcare trajectories were identified using Group-Based Multi-Trajectory Modelling and included medical treatments from a physician, or pain, mental health and physical therapy treatments for the first three years post-injury. Trajectories were validated against the EQ-5D-3L health status summary score using mixed linear regression.

RESULTS

While injury severity had the strongest association with healthcare use, people who attributed fault to another had 9% higher healthcare costs. Six multi-trajectory groups were identified: 36% had low treatments over time; 25% had a rapid decline from high medical and physical therapy by 12-months; 12% had moderate to high medical and physical therapy that declined by 2-3 years; 11% had a gradual decline in medical treatment, an early increase in physical therapy but low pain and mental health treatment; 8% had high or increasing medical and physical therapy, moderate mental health therapy and low pain treatment; and 7% had moderate-high treatment across all domains. All groups had poorer health status compared with the group with low treatment levels, and people who attributed fault to another had higher risk of following trajectories with higher levels of treatment versus the low treatment group (beta=0.34, SE=0.12, p=0.01).

CONCLUSION

These findings highlight the need to provide pro-active multidisciplinary care coordination for people with complex needs after injury to better optimise recovery.

Enhancing the use of EHR systems for pragmatic embedded research: lessons from the NIH Health Care Systems Research Collaboratory

OBJECTIVE

We identified challenges and solutions to using electronic health record (EHR) systems for the design and conduct of pragmatic research.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Since 2012, the Health Care Systems Research Collaboratory has served as the resource coordinating center for 21 pragmatic clinical trial demonstration projects. The EHR Core working group invited these demonstration projects to complete a written semistructured survey and used an inductive approach to review responses and identify EHR-related challenges and suggested EHR enhancements.

RESULTS

We received survey responses from 20 projects and identified 21 challenges that fell into 6 broad themes: (1) inadequate collection of patient-reported outcome data, (2) lack of structured data collection, (3) data standardization, (4) resources to support customization of EHRs, (5) difficulties aggregating data across sites, and (6) accessing EHR data.

DISCUSSION

Based on these findings, we formulated 6 prerequisites for PCTs that would enable the conduct of pragmatic research: (1) integrate the collection of patient-centered data into EHR systems, (2) facilitate structured research data collection by leveraging standard EHR functions, usable interfaces, and standard workflows, (3) support the creation of high-quality research data by using standards, (4) ensure adequate IT staff to support embedded research, (5) create aggregate, multidata type resources for multisite trials, and (6) create re-usable and automated queries.

CONCLUSION

We are hopeful our collection of specific EHR challenges and research needs will drive health system leaders, policymakers, and EHR designers to support these suggestions to improve our national capacity for generating real-world evidence.

A Prospective US National Trauma Center Study of Firearm Injury Survivors Weapon Carriage and Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Symptoms

OBJECTIVE

To describe the demographic, injury-related, and mental health characteristics of firearm injury patients and trace firearm weapon carriage and PTSD symptoms over the year after injury.

SUMMARY AND BACKGROUND DATA

Based on the increasing incidence of firearm injury and need for novel injury prevention strategies, hospital-based violence intervention programs are being implemented in US trauma centers. There is limited data on the long-term outcomes and risk behaviors of firearm injury survivors to guide this work.

METHODS

We conducted a secondary analysis of a pragmatic 25-trauma center randomized trial (N = 635). Baseline characteristics of firearm-injured patients (N = 128) were compared with other trauma patients. Mixed model regression was used to identify risk factors for postinjury firearm weapon carriage and PTSD symptoms.

RESULTS

Firearm injury patients were younger and more likely to be black, male and of lower socioeconomic status, and more likely to carry a firearm in the year before injury. Relative to preinjury, there was a significant drop in firearm weapon carriage at 3- and 6-months postinjury, followed by a return to preinjury levels at 12-months. Firearm injury was significantly and independently associated with an increased risk of postinjury firearm weapon carriage [relative risk = 2.08, 95% confidence interval (1.34, 3.22), P < 0.01] and higher PTSD symptom levels [Beta = 3.82, 95% confidence interval (1.29, 6.35), P < 0.01].

CONCLUSIONS

Firearm injury survivors are at risk for firearm carriage and high PTSD symptom levels postinjury. The significant decrease in the high-risk behavior of firearm weapon carriage at 3-6 months postinjury suggests that there is an important postinjury "teachable moment" that should be targeted with preventive interventions.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02655354.

Catalyzing the Translation of Patient-Centered Research Into United States Trauma Care Systems: A Case Example

BACKGROUND

The expedient translation of research findings into sustainable intervention procedures is a longstanding health care system priority. The Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) has facilitated the development of "research done differently," with a central tenet that key stakeholders can be productively engaged throughout the research process. Literature review revealed few examples of whether, as originally posited, PCORI's innovative stakeholder-driven approach could catalyze the expedient translation of research results into practice.

OBJECTIVES

This narrative review traces the historical development of an American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma (ACS/COT) policy guidance, facilitated by evidence supplied by the PCORI-funded studies evaluating the delivery of patient-centered care transitions. Key elements catalyzing the guidance are reviewed, including the sustained engagement of ACS/COT policy stakeholders who have the capacity to invoke system-level implementation strategies, such as regulatory mandates linked to verification site visits. Other key elements, including the encouragement of patient stakeholder voice in policy decisions and the incorporation of end-of-study policy summits in pragmatic comparative effectiveness trial design, are discussed.

CONCLUSIONS

Informed by comparative effectiveness trials, ACS/COT policy has expedited introduction of the patient-centered care construct into US trauma care systems. A comparative health care systems conceptual framework for transitional care which incorporates Research Lifecycle, pragmatic clinical trial and implementation science models is articulated. When combined with Rapid Assessment Procedure Informed Clinical Ethnography (RAPICE), employed as a targeted implementation strategy, this approach may accelerate the sustainable delivery of high-quality patient-centered care transitions for US trauma care systems.

Stepped Collaborative Care Targeting Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Symptoms and Comorbidity for US Trauma Care Systems: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

To date, few multisite investigations have evaluated early interventions for injured patients with posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms.

Objective

To simultaneously assess the effectiveness and implementation of a brief stepped collaborative care intervention targeting PTSD and comorbidity.

Design, Setting, and Participants

A stepped-wedge cluster randomized clinical trial was conducted at 25 US level I trauma centers. Participants included hospitalized survivors of physical injury who underwent a 2-step evaluation for PTSD symptoms. Patients reporting high levels of distress on the PTSD Checklist (PCL-C) were randomized (N = 635) per the stepped-wedge protocol to enhanced usual care control (n = 370) or intervention (n = 265) conditions. The study was conducted from January 4, 2016, through November 2018. Data analysis was performed from November 4, 2019, to December 8, 2020.

Interventions

The Trauma Survivors Outcomes and Support collaborative care intervention included proactive injury case management that assisted patients transitioning from hospital inpatient to outpatient and community settings. The intervention also integrated evidence-based pharmacotherapy and psychotherapeutic elements targeting PTSD symptoms and comorbidity.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary study outcome was PTSD symptoms assessed with the PCL-C at baseline in the surgical ward and at 3, 6, and 12 months postinjury. Secondary outcomes included depressive symptoms, alcohol use, and physical function. Subgroup analyses examined the effect of baseline risk factors for enduring PTSD and quality of protocol implementation on study outcomes. Primary statistical analyses were conducted using the intent-to-treat sample.

Results

A total of 327 men (51.5%) were included in analysis; mean (SD) age was 39.0 (14.2) years. The investigation attained follow-up of 75% to 80% of the participants at 3 to 12 months. The intervention lasted a mean (SD) of 122 (132) minutes. Mixed model regression analyses revealed statistically significant changes in PCL-C scores for intervention patients compared with control patients at 6 months (difference, -2.57; 95% CI, -5.12 to -0.03; effect size, 0.18; P < .05) but not 12 months (difference, -1.27; 95% CI, -4.26 to 1.73; effect size, 0.08; P = .35). Subgroup analyses revealed larger PTSD treatment effects for patients with 3 or more baseline risk factors for enduring PTSD and for patients, including firearm injury survivors, treated at trauma centers with good or excellent protocol implementation. Intervention effects for secondary outcomes did not attain statistical significance.

Conclusions and Relevance

A brief stepped collaborative care intervention was associated with significant 6-month but not 12-month PTSD symptom reductions. Greater baseline PTSD risk and good or excellent trauma center protocol implementation were associated with larger PTSD treatment effects. Orchestrated efforts targeting policy and funding should systematically incorporate the study findings into national trauma center requirements and verification criteria.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02655354.

Implementing eScreening for suicide prevention in VA post-9/11 transition programs using a stepped-wedge, mixed-method, hybrid type-II implementation trial: a study protocol

BACKGROUND

Post-9/11 veterans who enroll in VA health care frequently present with suicidal ideation and/or recent suicidal behavior. Most of these veterans are not screened on their day of enrollment and their risk goes undetected. Screening for suicide risk, and associated mental health factors, can lead to early detection and referral to effective treatment, thereby decreasing suicide risk. eScreening is an innovative Gold Standard Practice with evidence to support its effectiveness and implementation potential in transition and care management (TCM) programs. We will evaluate the impact of eScreening to improve the rate and speed of suicide risk screening and referral to mental health care compared to current screening methods used by transition care managers. We will also evaluate the impact of an innovative, multicomponent implementation strategy (MCIS) on the reach, adoption, implementation, and sustained use of eScreening.

METHODS

This is an eight-site 4-year, stepped-wedge, mixed-method, hybrid type-II implementation trial comparing eScreening to screening as usual while also evaluating the potential impact of the MCIS focusing on external facilitation and Lean/SixSigma rapid process improvement workshops in TCM. The aims will address: 1) whether using eScreening compared to oral and/or paper-based methods in TCM programs is associated with improved rates and speed of PTSD, depression, alcohol, and suicide screening & evaluation, and increased referral to mental health treatment; 2) whether and to what degree our MCIS is feasible, acceptable, and has the potential to impact adoption, implementation, and maintenance of eScreening; and 3) how contextual factors influence the implementation of eScreening between high- and low-eScreening adopting sites. We will use a mixed methods approach guided by the RE-AIM outcomes of the Practical Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model (PRISM). Data to address Aim 1 will be collected via medical record query while data for Aims 2 and 3 will be collected from TCM staff questionnaires and qualitative interviews.

DISCUSSION

The results of this study will help identify best practices for screening in suicide prevention for Post-9/11 veterans enrolling in VA health care and will provide information on how best to implement technology-based screening into real-world clinical care programs.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov : NCT04506164; date registered: August 20, 2020; retrospectively registered.

Mixed-effects models for the design and analysis of stepped wedge cluster randomized trials: An overview

The stepped wedge cluster randomized design has received increasing attention in pragmatic clinical trials and implementation science research. The key feature of the design is the unidirectional crossover of clusters from the control to intervention conditions on a staggered schedule, which induces confounding of the intervention effect by time. The stepped wedge design first appeared in the Gambia hepatitis study in the 1980s. However, the statistical model used for the design and analysis was not formally introduced until 2007 in an article by Hussey and Hughes. Since then, a variety of mixed-effects model extensions have been proposed for the design and analysis of these trials. In this article, we explore these extensions under a unified perspective. We provide a general model representation and regard various model extensions as alternative ways to characterize the secular trend, intervention effect, as well as sources of heterogeneity. We review the key model ingredients and clarify their implications for the design and analysis. The article serves as an entry point to the evolving statistical literatures on stepped wedge designs.

Leveraging a health information exchange to examine the accuracy of self-report emergency department utilization data among hospitalized injury survivors

Background

Accurate acute care medical utilization history is an important outcome for clinicians and investigators concerned with improving trauma center care. The objective of this study was to examine the accuracy of self-report emergency department (ED) utilization compared with utilization obtained from the Emergency Department Information Exchange (EDIE) in admitted trauma surgery patients with comorbid mental health and substance use problems.

Methods

This is a retrospective cohort study of 169 injured patients admitted to the University of Washington’s Harborview Level I Trauma Center. Patients had high levels of post-traumatic stress disorder and depressive symptoms, suicidal ideation and alcohol comorbidity. The investigation used EDIE, a novel health technology tool that collects information at the time a patient checks into any ED in Washington and other US states. Patterns of EDIE-documented visits were described, and the accuracy of injured patients’ self-report visits was compared with EDIE-recorded visits during the course of the 12 months prior to the index trauma center admission.

Results

Overall, 45% of the sample (n=76) inaccurately recalled their ED visits during the past year, with 36 participants (21%) reporting less ED visits than EDIE indicated and 40 (24%) reporting more ED visits than EDIE indicated. Patients with histories of alcohol use problems and major psychiatric illness were more likely to either under-report or over-report ED health service use.

Discussion

Nearly half of all patients were unable to accurately recall ED visits in the previous 12 months compared with EDIE, with almost one-quarter of patients demonstrating high levels of disagreement. The improved accuracy and ease of use when compared with self-report make EDIE an important tool for both clinical and pragmatic trial longitudinal outcome assessments. Orchestrated investigative and policy efforts could further examine the benefits of introducing EDIE and other information exchanges into routine acute care clinical workflows.

Level of evidence

II/III.

Trial registration number

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02274688.

Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder in Adult and Pediatric Trauma Populations: A Literature Review

Each year, traumatic injuries affect 2.6 million adults in the United States leading to significant health problems. Although many sequelae stem directly from physical manifestations of one's sustained injuries, mental health may also be affected in the form of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). PTSD can lead to decreased physical recovery, social functioning, and quality of life. Several screening tools such as the Injured Trauma Survivor Screen, PTSD CheckList, Primary Care PTSD, and Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale for DSM-5 have been used for initial PTSD screening of the trauma patient. Early screening is important as it serves as the first step in delivering the appropriate mental health care to those in need. Factors that increase the likelihood of developing PTSD include younger age, nonwhite ethnicity, and lower socioeconomic status. Current data on male or female predominance of PTSD in trauma populations is inconsistent. Cognitive behavioral therapy, hypnosis, and psychoeducation have been used to treat symptoms of PTSD. This review discusses the impact PTSD has on the trauma patient and the need for universal screening in this susceptible population. Ultimately, trauma centers should implement such universal screening protocols as to avoid absence, or undertreatment of PTSD, both of which having longstanding consequences.

Ethical and Regulatory Concerns in Pragmatic Clinical Trial Monitoring and Oversight

The implementation of pragmatic clinical trials (PCTs) can be accompanied by unique regulatory challenges. In this paper, we describe the experience and management of regulatory noncompliance during a 25-site acute care PCT. During the trial, the study team conducted a comprehensive audit of all enrollment forms (informed consent and Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act authorization forms) and related study documentation. A review of 997 participants' enrollment forms identified 138 (13.8%) that required reporting to the institutional review board due to noncompliance. To prevent subsequent noncompliance, the study team developed and introduced a revised participant tracking system, reviewed all enrollment documentation, and retrained sites regarding study procedures. Based on these experiences, we developed a set of recommendations for future PCTs to ensure both operational success and regulatory compliance.

A comparative effectiveness trial of an information technology enhanced peer-integrated collaborative care intervention versus enhanced usual care for US trauma care systems: Clinical study protocol

Annually approximately 2-3 million Americans are so severely injured that they require inpatient hospitalization. The study team, which includes patients, clinical researchers, front-line provider and policy maker stakeholders, has been working together for over a decade to develop interventions that target improvements for US trauma care systems nationally. This pragmatic randomized trial compares a multidisciplinary team collaborative care intervention that integrates front-line trauma center staff with peer interventionists, versus trauma team notification of patient emotional distress with mental health consultation as enhanced usual care. The peer-integrated collaborative care intervention will be supported by a novel emergency department exchange health information technology platform. A total of 424 patients will be randomized to peer-integrated collaborative care (n = 212) and surgical team notification (n = 212) conditions. The study hypothesizes that patient's randomized to peer integrated collaborative care intervention will demonstrate significant reductions in emergency department health service utilization, severity of patient concerns, post traumatic stress disorder symptoms, and physical limitations when compared to surgical team notification. These four primary outcomes will be followed-up at 1- 3-, 6-, 9- and 12-months after injury for all patients. The Rapid Assessment Procedure Informed Clinical Ethnography (RAPICE) method will be used to assess implementation processes. Data from the primary outcome analysis and implementation process assessment will be used to inform an end-of-study policy summit with the American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma. The policy summit will facilitate acute care practice changes related to patient-centered care transitions over the course of a single 5-year funding cycle. Trial registration: (Clinicaltrials.govNCT03569878).

Rapid Assessment Procedure Informed Clinical Ethnography (RAPICE) in Pragmatic Clinical Trials of Mental Health Services Implementation: Methods and Applied Case Study

Pragmatic clinical trials of mental health services are increasingly being developed to establish comparative effectiveness, influence sustainable implementation, and address real world policy decisions. However, use of time and resource intensive qualitative methods in pragmatic trials may be inconsistent with the aims of efficiency and cost minimization. This paper introduces a qualitative method known as Rapid Assessment Procedure-Informed Clinical Ethnography (RAPICE) that combines the techniques of Rapid Assessment Procedures with clinical ethnography. A case study is presented to illustrate how RAPICE can be used to efficiently understand pragmatic trial implementation processes and associated real world policy implications.

Safety Planning on Crisis Lines: Feasibility, Acceptability, and Perceived Helpfulness of a Brief Intervention to Mitigate Future Suicide Risk

BACKGROUND

The role of crisis hotlines traditionally was limited to de-escalation and service linkage. However, hotlines are increasingly recruited to provide outreach and follow-up to suicidal individuals. Hotlines have the opportunity to not just defuse current crises but also provide brief interventions to mitigate future risk. The Safety Planning Intervention (SPI) is a brief intervention designed to help manage suicidal crises, but its feasibility and effectiveness on hotlines are not established.

AIMS

This study examined feasibility and perceived effectiveness of SPI, as reported by 271 crisis counselors at five centers in the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline network.

METHOD

Counselors were trained to use SPI. Self-report surveys were completed immediately after training (time 1) and at the end of the study, approximately 9 months later (time 2).

RESULTS

Counselors reported that SPI was feasible and helpful, and was used on both incoming and follow-up calls. Utilization and perceived effectiveness at time 2 were predicted by self-efficacy, feasibility, and helpfulness at time 1.

LIMITATIONS

Results are preliminary and limited to counselors' perceptions. Future RCTs should establish efficacy of SPI for crisis callers.

CONCLUSION

The Safety Planning Intervention is a promising approach to reduce crisis callers' future suicide risk that hotline counselors report is both feasible and helpful.

A Pragmatic Approach to Psychometric Comparisons between the DSM-IV and DSM-5 Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) Checklists in Acutely Injured Trauma Patients

Objective: Prior investigations suggest the relative equivalence of the DSM-IV and DSM-5 versions of the Posttraumatic Stress Disorders (PTSD) Checklist, yet no investigations have assessed the psychometric properties of the scales in pragmatic trials of acutely injured trauma survivors. Method: DSM-IV and DSM-5 versions of the PTSD Checklist were included in follow-up interviews of physically injured patients enrolled longitudinally in a pragmatic clinical trial; pragmatic trials aim to efficiently implement research procedures to inform healthcare system policy changes. Psychometric comparisons of the DSM-IV, DSM-5, and a 20-item blended version of the scale included evaluations of internal consistency, correlational assessments, evaluation of item level agreements, and estimation of DSM-5 cutoffs that optimize electronic health record screening protocols. Results: 128 patients were included in the pragmatic psychometric study. Cronbach's alphas for the 3 versions of the PTSD Checklist ranged from 0.93 to 0.95. Correlations between the 3 scales ranged from 0.79 to 0.99. All 3 measures demonstrated excellent convergent and discriminant properties. Item level agreement ranged from 70-80%. For the DSM-5 and blended versions of the scale, a score of 30 and 24, respectively, best approximated the DSM-IV cutoff of ≥35 that had previously optimized PTSD detection in conjunction with EHR screening. Conclusions: Among injured trauma survivors, the psychometric performance of the DSM-IV PTSD Checklist with the addition of the 4 new DSM-5 PTSD Checklist items is nearly equivalent to the DSM-5 PTSD Checklist. The investigation also suggests that pragmatic psychometric methods can catalyze the rapid translation of research findings into real-world practice settings.

Evaluation of a Level I trauma center provider training in patient-centered alcohol brief interventions using the Behavior Change Counseling Index rated by standardized patients

Background

Traumatic injury requiring hospitalization is common in the USA and frequently related to alcohol consumption. The American College of Surgeons requires that Level I and II verified trauma centers implement universal alcohol screening and brief intervention for injured patients. We examined whether Level I trauma center provider skill in patient-centered alcohol brief interventions improved after training and whether professional role (eg, nursing, social work) and education were associated with these skills.

Methods

We present evaluation data collected as part of training in alcohol brief interventions embedded within a larger clinical trial of a collaborative care intervention targeting posttraumatic stress disorder and related comorbidities. Sixty-five providers from 25 US Level I trauma centers engaged in a 1-day workshop, with 2 hours dedicated to training in patient-centered alcohol brief interventions followed by 6 months of weekly coaching in a collaborative care model. Providers completed standardized patient role-plays prior to and 6 months after the workshop training. The standardized patient actors rated provider quality of alcohol brief interventions immediately after each role-play using the Behavior Change Counseling Index (BECCI), a pragmatic measure designed to assess the quality of behavior change counseling, an adaptation of motivational interviewing suitable for brief healthcare consultations about behavior change.

Results

Seventy-two percent of providers completed both standardized patient role-play assessments. A statistically significant improvement in overall BECCI scores (t(41)=−2.53, p=0.02, Cohen’s d=−0.39) was observed among those providers with available pre–post data. Provider professional role was associated with BECCI scores at pre-training (F(3, 58)=11.25, p<0.01) and post-training (F(3, 41)=8.10, p<0.01).

Discussion

Findings underscore the need for training in patient-centered alcohol brief interventions and suggest that even a modest training helps providers engage in a more patient-centered way during a role-play assessment.

Level of evidence

Level V, therapeutic/care management.

Collaborative care model for treatment of persistent symptoms after concussion among youth (CARE4PCS-II): Study protocol for a randomized, controlled trial

Background

Currently, there is limited evidence to guide intervention and service delivery coordination for youth who suffer a concussion and subsequently experience persistent post-concussive symptoms (PCS) (Lumba-Brown et al. JAMA Pediatr 172(11):e182853, 2018; Lumba-Brown A et al. JAMA Pediatr 172(11):e182847, 2018). We have developed a collaborative care intervention with embedded cognitive-behavioral therapy, care management, and stepped-up psychotropic medication consultation to address persistent PCS and related psychological comorbidities. The CARE4PCS-II study was designed to assess whether adolescents with persistent symptoms after sports-related concussion will demonstrate better outcomes when receiving this collaborative care intervention compared to a usual care (control) condition.

Methods/design

This investigation is a randomized comparative effectiveness trial to receive intervention (collaborative care) or control (usual care). Two hundred sports-injured male and female adolescents aged 11–18 years with three or more post-concussive symptoms that persist for at least 1 month but less than 9 months after injury will be recruited and randomized into the study. The trial focuses on the effects of the intervention on post-concussive, depressive, and anxiety symptoms measured 3, 6, and 12 months after baseline.

Discussion

The CARE4PCS II study is a large comparative effectiveness trial targeting symptomatic improvements in sports injured adolescents after concussion. The study is unique in its adaptation of the collaborative care model to a broad spectrum of primary care, sports medicine, and school settings. The investigation incorporates novel elements such as the delivery of CBT through HIPAA complaint video conferenceing technology and has excellent widespread dissemination potential should effectiveness be demonstrated.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03034720. Registered on January 27, 2017.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s13063-019-3662-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Prevalence and treatment of depression and posttraumatic stress disorder among trauma patients with non-neurological injuries

BACKGROUND

Psychological impairment among injury survivors is well documented. Little is known about the prevalence of treatment of psychological impairment, however. We aimed to determine the proportion of injury survivors treated for depression and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in the year after injury as well as to determine potential barriers to treatment.

METHODS

Adults (18 and older) admitted to a Level I trauma center with an injury severity score greater than 10 but without traumatic brain injury or spinal cord injury were eligible for study inclusion. The Center for Epidemiological Studies-Depression and PTSD CheckList-Civilian Versions surveys were administered during the initial hospitalization and repeated at 1, 2, 4, and 12 months after injury. Patients were asked if they received treatment specifically for depression or PTSD at each follow-up. Factors associated with treatment were determined using multivariable logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

Five hundred injury survivors were enrolled in this prospective observational study. Of those, 68.4% of patients screened positive for depression at some point in the year after their injury (53.3%, 1 month; 49.9%, 2 months; 49.0%, 4 months; and 50.2%, 12 months). Only 22.2% of depressed patients reported receiving treatment for depression; 44.4% of patients screened positive for PTSD (26.6%, 1 month; 27.8%, 2 months; 29.8%, 4 months; and 30.0%, 12 months), but only 9.8% received treatment for PTSD. After adjusting for other factors, compared to commercial insurance status, self-pay insurance status was negatively associated with treatment for PTSD or depression (odds ratio, 0.44; 95% confidence interval, 0.21-0.95).

CONCLUSION

Depression and PTSD are common in non-neurotrauma patients in the year following injury. Greater collaboration between those caring for injury survivors and behavioral health experts may help improve psychological outcomes after injury.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic/Care management, level IV.

Screening and treating hospitalized trauma survivors for posttraumatic stress disorder and depression

Traumatic injury affects over 2.6 million U.S. adults annually and elevates risk for a number of negative health consequences. This includes substantial psychological harm, the most prominent being posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), with approximately 21% of traumatic injury survivors developing the disorder within the first year after injury. Posttraumatic stress disorder is associated with deficits in physical recovery, social functioning, and quality of life. Depression is diagnosed in approximately 6% in the year after injury and is also a predictor of poor quality of life. The American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma suggests screening for and treatment of PTSD and depression, reflecting a growing awareness of the critical need to address patients' mental health needs after trauma. While some trauma centers have implemented screening and treatment or referral for treatment programs, the majority are evaluating how to best address this recommendation, and no standard approach for screening and treatment currently exists. Further, guidelines are not yet available with respect to resources that may be used to effectively screen and treat these disorders in trauma survivors, as well as who is going to bear the costs. The purpose of this review is: (1) to evaluate the current state of the literature regarding evidence-based screens for PTSD and depression in the hospitalized trauma patient and (2) summarize the literature to date regarding the treatments that have empirical support in treating PTSD and depression acutely after injury. This review also includes structural and funding information regarding existing postinjury mental health programs. Screening of injured patients and timely intervention to prevent or treat PTSD and depression could substantially improve health outcomes and improve quality of life for this high-risk population. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Review, level IV.

Ethical and Regulatory Considerations for Using Social Media Platforms to Locate and Track Research Participants

As social media becomes increasingly popular, human subjects researchers are able to use these platforms to locate, track, and communicate with study participants, thereby increasing participant retention and the generalizability and validity of research. The use of social media; however, raises novel ethical and regulatory issues that have received limited attention in the literature and federal regulations. We review research ethics and regulations and outline the implications for maintaining participant privacy, respecting participant autonomy, and promoting researcher transparency when using social media to locate and track participants. We offer a rubric that can be used in future studies to determine ethical and regulation-consistent use of social media platforms and illustrate the rubric using our study team's experience with Facebook. We also offer recommendations for both researchers and institutional review boards that emphasize the importance of well-described procedures for social media use as part of informed consent.

Impact of comorbidity on health outcome after a transport-related injury

INTRODUCTION

Understanding the impact of comorbidity on health outcomes is important given that comorbidities can affect survival, morbidity, service delivery costs and healthcare utilisation. However, little is known about the types of comorbidities affecting specific health outcomes after minor to moderate road trauma.

METHODS

This study involved 1574 participants who claimed injury compensation following transport-related injury. Cross sectional data were collected. Health outcomes were assessed using the EQ-5D-3L specific domains and summary score. Twelve self-reported pre-existing chronic conditions were assessed using a multivariate logistic regression, adjusting for demographic and injury characteristics.

RESULTS

Out of 1574 participants, only 17 (1%) participants reported no pre-existing comorbidities, 72% reported one, 13% reported two and 14% reported three or more comorbidities. Hypertension (15%), depression (14%) and anxiety (14%) were the most commonly reported comorbidities, followed by arthritis (13%), chronic pain (11%) and asthma (11%). Participants with a history of arthritis (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 1.90, 95% CI 1.24 to 2.91); chronic back pain (AOR 1.59, 95% CI, 1.04 to 2.43); other chronic pain (AOR 2.73, 95% CI 1.42 to 4.24); depression (AOR 2.55, 95% CI 1.60 to 4.05) and anxiety (AOR 2.08, 95% CI 1.32 to 3.26) were at increased risk of poorer health outcomes, after controlling for age, gender, type of injury and time since injury.

CONCLUSION

This study found that comorbidities such as arthritis, chronic back pain, other chronic pain, depression and anxiety significantly increase the odds of poorer health postinjury, regardless of the time since injury. Regular screening of comorbid conditions may help identify people likely to have poorer outcomes, thereby enabling the implementation of interventions to optimise health despite the presence of comorbidities.

Precision Medicine

Precision medicine seeks to maximize the quality of healthcare by individualizing the healthcare process to the uniquely evolving health status of each patient. This endeavor spans a broad range of scientific areas including drug discovery, genetics/genomics, health communication, and causal inference all in support of evidence-based, i.e., data-driven, decision making. Precision medicine is formalized as a treatment regime which comprises a sequence of decision rules, one per decision point, which map up-to-date patient information to a recommended action. The potential actions could be the selection of which drug to use, the selection of dose, timing of administration, specific diet or exercise recommendation, or other aspects of treatment or care. Statistics research in precision medicine is broadly focused on methodological development for estimation of and inference for treatment regimes which maximize some cumulative clinical outcome. In this review, we provide an overview of this vibrant area of research and present important and emerging challenges.

Pragmatic clinical trials offer unique opportunities for disseminating, implementing, and sustaining evidence-based practices into clinical care: Proceedings of a workshop

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) Health Care Systems (HCS) Research Collaboratory hosted a workshop to explore challenges and strategies for the dissemination, implementation, and sustainability of findings from pragmatic clinical trials (PCTs) embedded in HCS. PCTs are designed to assess the impact of interventions delivered in usual or real-world conditions and leverage existing infrastructure to answer important clinical questions. The goal of the workshop was to discuss strategies for conducting impactful future PCTs that bridge the gap between evidence, practice, and policy. This paper summarizes presentations about how to design and conduct PCTs embedded in HCS and use dissemination and implementation strategies during the planning and conduct of projects, emphasizing the ever-changing world of care delivery and the need for pragmatic trial operations to adapt at various levels of operation.

Innovations in Mixed Methods Evaluations

Mixed methods research-i.e., research that draws on both qualitative and quantitative methods in varying configurations-is well suited to address the increasing complexity of public health problems and their solutions. This review focuses specifically on innovations in mixed methods evaluations of intervention, program or policy (i.e., practice) effectiveness, and implementation. The article begins with an overview of the structure, function, and process of different mixed methods designs and then provides illustrations of their use in effectiveness studies, implementation studies, and combined effectiveness-implementation hybrid studies. The article then examines four specific innovations: procedures for transforming (or "quantitizing") qualitative data, application of rapid assessment and analysis procedures in the context of mixed methods studies, development of measures to assess implementation outcomes, and strategies for conducting both random and purposive sampling, particularly in implementation-focused evaluation research. The article concludes with an assessment of challenges to integrating qualitative and quantitative data in evaluation research.

Task-shifting to improve the reach of mental health interventions for trauma patients: findings from a pilot study of trauma nurse training in patient-centered activity scheduling for PTSD and depression

Despite high rates of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and depression among traumatically injured patients, engagement in session-based psychotherapy early after trauma is limited due to various service utilization and readiness barriers. Task-shifting brief mental health interventions to routine trauma center providers is an understudied but potentially critical part of the continuum of care. This pilot study assessed the feasibility of training trauma nurses to engage patients in patient-centered activity scheduling based on a Behavioral Activation paradigm, which is designed to counteract dysfunctional avoidance/withdrawal behavior common among patients after injury. Nurses (N = 4) and patients (N = 40) were recruited from two level II trauma centers. A portion of a one day in-person workshop included didactics, demonstrations, and experiential activities to teach brief intervention delivery. Nurses completed pre- and posttraining standardized patient role-plays prior to and two months after training, which were coded for adherence to the intervention. Nurses also completed exit interviews to assess their perspectives on the training and addressing patient mental health concerns. Findings support the feasibility of training trauma nurses in a brief mental health intervention. Task-shifting brief interventions holds promise for reaching more of the population in need of posttrauma mental health care.

PTSD in civilian populations after hospitalization following traumatic injury: A comprehensive review

BACKGROUND

Injuries and their comorbidities affect victims far beyond their physical recovery period. Some study-measures show that more than half of patients hospitalized for a traumatic injury suffer from Acute Stress Disorder, alcohol dependence, and recurrent trauma. Overall, this literature review serves to review risk factors for PTSD, screening tools, follow-up strategies, and gaps in the literature for achieving feasible patient-centered interventions for the prevention of PTSD after a traumatic injury.

DATA SOURCES

A literature review was performed from August 1, 2017 to March 19, 2018, from 3 Databases: PubMed, CINAHL and Cochrane, with keywords: "PTSD", "Post-traumatic Stress Disorder", "Civilians", "Traumatic", "Injury", "Follow-up", "Treatment", "Referral", "surgery", "surgical", "Intervention", and "Insured", "underinsured".

CONCLUSIONS

Reported risk factors for PTSD were: prior psychiatric disorder, gunshots, and lack of social support. Most articles use the Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Checklist - Civilian version. Follow-up strategies mainly focus on multidisciplinary intervention protocols, including social workers, behavioral health specialists, and psychiatrists. Finally, gaps in the literature show the need for bilingual/bicultural patient-centered care for elderly, diverse ethnic backgrounds, and insured vs. uninsured patients.

Patient-Centered Care Transitions After Injury Hospitalization: A Comparative Effectiveness Trial

OBJECTIVE

The investigation aimed to compare two approaches to the delivery of care for hospitalized injury survivors, a patient-centered care transition intervention versus enhanced usual care.

METHOD

This pragmatic comparative effectiveness trial randomized 171 acutely injured trauma survivors with three or more early postinjury concerns and high levels of emotional distress to intervention (I; n = 85) and enhanced usual care control (C; n = 86) conditions. The care transition intervention components included care management that elicited and targeted improvement in patients' postinjury concerns, 24/7 study team cell phone accessibility, and stepped-up care. Posttraumatic concerns, symptomatic distress, functional status, and statewide emergency department (ED) service utilization were assessed at baseline and over the course of the 12 months after injury. Regression analyses assessed intervention and control group outcome differences over time.

RESULTS

Over 80% patient follow-up was attained at each time point. Intervention patients demonstrated clinically and statistically significant reductions in the percentage of any severe postinjury concerns expressed when compared to controls longitudinally (Wald chi-square = 11.29, p = 0.01) and at the six-month study time point (C = 74%, I = 53%; Fisher's exact test, p = 0.02). Comparisons of ED utilization data yielded clinically significant cross-sectional differences (one or more three- to six-month ED visits; C = 30.2%, I = 16.5%, [relative risk (95% confidence interval] C versus I = 2.00 (1.09, 3.70), p = 0.03) that did not achieve longitudinal statistical significance (F (3, 507) = 2.24, p = 0.08). The intervention did not significantly impact symptomatic or functional outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Orchestrated investigative and policy efforts should continue to evaluate patient-centered care transition interventions to inform American College of Surgeons' clinical guidelines for U.S. trauma care systems.

The 5th Annual One Mind Summit: Lessons Learned About "Science Informing Brain Health Policies and Practice"

Advances in science frequently precede changes in clinical care by several years or even decades. To better understand the path to translation, we invited experts to share their perspectives at the 5th Annual One Mind Summit: "Science Informing Brain Health Policies and Practice," which was held on May 24-25, 2016, in Crystal City, VA. While the translation of brain research throughout the pipeline-from basic science research to patient care-was discussed, the focus was on the implementation of "best evidence" into patient care. The Summit identified key steps, including the need for professional endorsement and clinical guidelines or policies, acceptance by regulators and payers, dissemination and training for clinicians, patient advocacy, and learning healthcare models. The path to implementation was discussed broadly, as well as in the context of a specific project to implement concussion screening in emergency and urgent care centers throughout the United States.

Case Studies from the Clinic: Initiating and Implementing Patient-Reported Outcome Measures

Introduction

Self-reporting by patients though the use of electronic patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures has been shown to use increase patient satisfaction with care, and improve patient-provider communication, symptom management, and health quality. Additionally, PROs are increasingly used in research to expand understanding regarding the relative risks, benefits, and burdens of interventions. While experience embedding patient-reported outcomes (PROs) into registries and clinical workflow is growing, there is little in the literature to guide those interested in incorporating PROs into routine clinical care and for use in research.

Case Descriptions

The NIH Health Care Systems Research Collaboratory PRO Core interviewed investigators from seven programs to get their first-hand experiences on the incorporation of PROs for both care and research, and the investigators have contributed to this manuscript as authors.

Findings

We use these case studies to present practical approaches to initiating and implementing PROS, including instrument selection, tips for integrating PRO collection systems into clinical workflow, considerations for user experience and data collection, and the methods to assess and monitor quality.

Conclusion

Because the decision to initiate and implement PRO collection impacts many different stakeholders, the solution requires collaboration among the involved parties, careful planning, and integration into clinical workflow.