1
|
Ashcraft LE, Goodrich DE, Hero J, Phares A, Bachrach RL, Quinn DA, Qureshi N, Ernecoff NC, Lederer LG, Scheunemann LP, Rogal SS, Chinman MJ. A systematic review of experimentally tested implementation strategies across health and human service settings: evidence from 2010-2022. Implement Sci 2024; 19:43. [PMID: 38915102 PMCID: PMC11194895 DOI: 10.1186/s13012-024-01369-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/09/2023] [Accepted: 05/27/2024] [Indexed: 06/26/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Studies of implementation strategies range in rigor, design, and evaluated outcomes, presenting interpretation challenges for practitioners and researchers. This systematic review aimed to describe the body of research evidence testing implementation strategies across diverse settings and domains, using the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) taxonomy to classify strategies and the Reach Effectiveness Adoption Implementation and Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework to classify outcomes. METHODS We conducted a systematic review of studies examining implementation strategies from 2010-2022 and registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021235592). We searched databases using terms "implementation strategy", "intervention", "bundle", "support", and their variants. We also solicited study recommendations from implementation science experts and mined existing systematic reviews. We included studies that quantitatively assessed the impact of at least one implementation strategy to improve health or health care using an outcome that could be mapped to the five evaluation dimensions of RE-AIM. Only studies meeting prespecified methodologic standards were included. We described the characteristics of studies and frequency of implementation strategy use across study arms. We also examined common strategy pairings and cooccurrence with significant outcomes. FINDINGS Our search resulted in 16,605 studies; 129 met inclusion criteria. Studies tested an average of 6.73 strategies (0-20 range). The most assessed outcomes were Effectiveness (n=82; 64%) and Implementation (n=73; 56%). The implementation strategies most frequently occurring in the experimental arm were Distribute Educational Materials (n=99), Conduct Educational Meetings (n=96), Audit and Provide Feedback (n=76), and External Facilitation (n=59). These strategies were often used in combination. Nineteen implementation strategies were frequently tested and associated with significantly improved outcomes. However, many strategies were not tested sufficiently to draw conclusions. CONCLUSION This review of 129 methodologically rigorous studies built upon prior implementation science data syntheses to identify implementation strategies that had been experimentally tested and summarized their impact on outcomes across diverse outcomes and clinical settings. We present recommendations for improving future similar efforts.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Laura Ellen Ashcraft
- Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, Corporal Michael Crescenz VA Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
- Department of Biostatistics, Epidemiology, and Informatics, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
| | - David E Goodrich
- Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
- Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
- Clinical & Translational Science Institute, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
| | | | - Angela Phares
- Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
| | - Rachel L Bachrach
- Center for Clinical Management Research, VA Ann Arbor Healthcare System, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
- Department of Psychiatry, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - Deirdre A Quinn
- Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
- Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
| | | | | | - Lisa G Lederer
- Clinical & Translational Science Institute, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
| | - Leslie Page Scheunemann
- Division of Geriatric Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Department of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
- Division of Pulmonary, Allergy, Critical Care, and Sleep Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Department of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
| | - Shari S Rogal
- Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
- Departments of Medicine and Surgery, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Matthew J Chinman
- Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
- Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
- RAND Corporation, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Varley CD, Lowy E, Cartwright EJ, Morgan TR, Ross DB, Rozenberg-Ben-Dror K, Beste LA, Maier MM. Success of the US Veterans Health Administration's Hepatitis C Virus Care Continuum in the Direct-acting Antiviral Era. Clin Infect Dis 2024; 78:1571-1579. [PMID: 38279939 DOI: 10.1093/cid/ciae025] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/24/2023] [Revised: 11/17/2023] [Accepted: 01/23/2024] [Indexed: 01/29/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Estimated hepatitis C prevalence within the Veterans Health Administration is higher than the general population and is a risk factor for advanced liver disease and subsequent complications. We describe the hepatitis C care continuum within the Veterans Health Administration 1 January 2014 to 31 December 2022. METHODS We included individuals in Veterans Health Administration care 2021-2022 who were eligible for direct-acting antiviral treatment 1 January 2014 to 31 December 2022. We evaluated the proportion of Veterans who progressed through each step of the hepatitis C care continuum, and identified factors associated with initiating direct-acting antivirals, achieving sustained virologic response, and repeat hepatitis C viremia. RESULTS We identified 133 732 Veterans with hepatitis C viremia. Hepatitis C treatment was initiated in 107 134 (80.1%), with sustained virologic response achieved in 98 136 (91.6%). In those who achieved sustained virologic response, 1097 (1.1%) had repeat viremia and 579 (52.8%) were retreated for hepatitis C. Veterans of younger ages were less likely to initiate treatment and achieve sustained virologic response, and more likely to have repeat viremia. Stimulant use and unstable housing were negatively associated with each step of the hepatitis C care continuum. CONCLUSIONS The Veterans Health Administration has treated 80% of Veterans with hepatitis C in care 2021-2022 and achieved sustained virologic response in more than 90% of those treated. Repeat viremia is rare and is associated with younger age, unstable housing, opioid use, and stimulant use. Ongoing efforts are needed to reach younger Veterans, and Veterans with unstable housing or substance use disorders.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Cara D Varley
- Department of Medicine, Division of Infectious Diseases, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon, USA
- School of Public Health, Oregon Health & Science University-Portland State University, Portland, Oregon, USA
| | - Elliott Lowy
- Health Systems Research, Veterans Affairs Puget Sound Healthcare System, Seattle, Washington, USA
- Department of Health Systems and Population Health, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA
| | - Emily J Cartwright
- Department of Medicine, Division of Infectious Diseases, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
- Department of Medicine, Veteran Affairs Atlanta Health Care System, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
| | - Timothy R Morgan
- Gastroenterology Section, Veterans Affairs Long Beach Healthcare System, Long Beach, California, USA
| | - David B Ross
- Department of Veterans Affairs, HIV, Hepatitis, and Public Health Pathogens Programs, Washington, District of Columbia, USA
| | | | - Lauren A Beste
- Division of General Internal Medicine, Veterans Affairs Puget Sound Healthcare System, Seattle, Washington, USA
| | - Marissa M Maier
- Department of Medicine, Division of Infectious Diseases, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon, USA
- Infectious Diseases Section, Veteran Affairs Portland Health Care System, Portland, Oregon, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Lai J, Pilla B, Stephenson M, Brettle A, Zhou C, Li W, Li C, Fu J, Deng S, Zhang Y, Guo Z, Wu Y. Pre-treatment assessment of chemotherapy for cancer patients: a multi-site evidence implementation project of 74 hospitals in China. BMC Nurs 2024; 23:320. [PMID: 38734605 PMCID: PMC11088226 DOI: 10.1186/s12912-024-01997-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/31/2023] [Accepted: 05/07/2024] [Indexed: 05/13/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Chemotherapy, whilst treating tumours, can also lead to numerous adverse reactions such as nausea and vomiting, fatigue and kidney toxicity, threatening the physical and mental health of patients. Simultaneously, misuse of chemotherapeutic drugs can seriously endanger patients' lives. Therefore, to maintain the safety of chemotherapy for cancer patients and to reduce the incidence of adverse reactions to chemotherapy, many guidelines state that a comprehensive assessment of the cancer patient should be conducted and documented before chemotherapy. This recommended procedure, however, has yet to be extensively embraced in Chinese hospitals. As such, this study aimed to standardise the content of pre-chemotherapy assessment for cancer patients in hospitals and to improve nurses' adherence to pre-chemotherapy assessment of cancer patients by conducting a national multi-site evidence implementation in China, hence protecting the safety of cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy and reducing the incidence of adverse reactions to chemotherapy in patients. METHODS The national multi-site evidence implementation project was launched by a JBI Centre of Excellence in China and conducted using the JBI approach to evidence implementation. A pre- and post-audit approach was used to evaluate the effectiveness of the project. This project had seven phases: training, planning, baseline audit, evidence implementation, two rounds of follow-up audits (3 and 9 months after evidence implementation, respectively) and sustainability assessment. A live online broadcast allowed all participating hospitals to come together to provide a summary and feedback on the implementation of the project. RESULTS Seventy-four hospitals from 32 cities in China participated in the project, four withdrew during the project's implementation, and 70 hospitals completed the project. The pre-and post-audit showed a significant improvement in the compliance rate of nurses performing pre-chemotherapy assessments for cancer patients. Patient satisfaction and chemotherapy safety were also improved through the project's implementation, and the participating nurses' enthusiasm and belief in implementing evidence into practice was increased. CONCLUSION The study demonstrated the feasibility of academic centres working with hospitals to promote the dissemination of evidence in clinical practice to accelerate knowledge translation. Further research is needed on the effectiveness of cross-regional and cross-organisational collaborations to facilitate evidence dissemination.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jie Lai
- Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, PR China
- School of Nursing, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, PR China
| | - Bianca Pilla
- JBI, School of Public Health, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia
| | - Matthew Stephenson
- JBI, School of Public Health, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia
| | - Alison Brettle
- School of Health & Society, University of Salford, Manchester, UK
| | - Chunlan Zhou
- Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, PR China
| | - Wenji Li
- Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, PR China
| | - Chaixiu Li
- Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, PR China
- School of Nursing, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, PR China
| | - Jiaqi Fu
- Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, PR China
- School of Nursing, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, PR China
| | - Shisi Deng
- Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, PR China
- School of Nursing, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, PR China
| | - Yujie Zhang
- Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, PR China
- School of Nursing, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, PR China
| | - Zihan Guo
- Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, PR China
- School of Nursing, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, PR China
| | - Yanni Wu
- Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, PR China.
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Gilmartin H, Jones C, Nunnery M, Leonard C, Connelly B, Wills A, Kelley L, Rabin B, Burke RE. An implementation strategy postmortem method developed in the VA rural Transitions Nurse Program to inform spread and scale-up. PLoS One 2024; 19:e0298552. [PMID: 38457367 PMCID: PMC10923440 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0298552] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/25/2023] [Accepted: 01/25/2024] [Indexed: 03/10/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND High-quality implementation evaluations report on intervention fidelity and adaptations made, but a practical process for evaluating implementation strategies is needed. A retrospective method for evaluating implementation strategies is also required as prospective methods can be resource intensive. This study aimed to establish an implementation strategy postmortem method to identify the implementation strategies used, when, and their perceived importance. We used the rural Transitions Nurse Program (TNP) as a case study, a national care coordination intervention implemented at 11 hospitals over three years. METHODS The postmortem used a retrospective, mixed method, phased approach. Implementation team and front-line staff characterized the implementation strategies used, their timing, frequency, ease of use, and their importance to implementation success. The Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) compilation, the Quality Enhancement Research Initiative phases, and Proctor and colleagues' guidance were used to operationalize the strategies. Survey data were analyzed descriptively, and qualitative data were analyzed using matrix content analysis. RESULTS The postmortem method identified 45 of 73 ERIC strategies introduced, including 41 during pre-implementation, 37 during implementation, and 27 during sustainment. External facilitation, centralized technical assistance, and clinical supervision were ranked as the most important and frequently used strategies. Implementation strategies were more intensively applied in the beginning of the study and tapered over time. CONCLUSIONS The postmortem method identified that more strategies were used in TNP than planned and identified the most important strategies from the perspective of the implementation team and front-line staff. The findings can inform other implementation studies as well as dissemination of the TNP intervention.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Heather Gilmartin
- Denver/Seattle Center of Innovation for Veteran-Centered and Value Driven Care, VA Eastern Colorado Healthcare System, Aurora, Colorado, United States of America
- Department of Health Systems, Management and Policy, Colorado School of Public Health, University of Colorado, Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, Colorado, United States of America
| | - Christine Jones
- Denver/Seattle Center of Innovation for Veteran-Centered and Value Driven Care, VA Eastern Colorado Healthcare System, Aurora, Colorado, United States of America
- Division of Geriatric Medicine and Division of Hospital Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Colorado, Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, Colorado, United States of America
| | - Mary Nunnery
- Denver/Seattle Center of Innovation for Veteran-Centered and Value Driven Care, VA Eastern Colorado Healthcare System, Aurora, Colorado, United States of America
| | - Chelsea Leonard
- Denver/Seattle Center of Innovation for Veteran-Centered and Value Driven Care, VA Eastern Colorado Healthcare System, Aurora, Colorado, United States of America
| | - Brigid Connelly
- Denver/Seattle Center of Innovation for Veteran-Centered and Value Driven Care, VA Eastern Colorado Healthcare System, Aurora, Colorado, United States of America
| | - Ashlea Wills
- Denver/Seattle Center of Innovation for Veteran-Centered and Value Driven Care, VA Eastern Colorado Healthcare System, Aurora, Colorado, United States of America
| | - Lynette Kelley
- Denver/Seattle Center of Innovation for Veteran-Centered and Value Driven Care, VA Eastern Colorado Healthcare System, Aurora, Colorado, United States of America
| | - Borsika Rabin
- Denver/Seattle Center of Innovation for Veteran-Centered and Value Driven Care, VA Eastern Colorado Healthcare System, Aurora, Colorado, United States of America
- Herbert Wertheim School of Public Health and Human Longevity Science, University of California San Diego, San Diego, California, United States of America
- Altman Clinical and Translational Research Institute, Dissemination and Implementation Science Center, University of California San Diego, San Diego, California, United States of America
| | - Robert E. Burke
- Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, Corporal Crescenz VA Medical Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States of America
- Hospital Medicine Section – Division of General Internal Medicine, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States of America
- Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States of America
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Fakha A, de Boer B, Hamers JP, Verbeek H, van Achterberg T. Systematic development of a set of implementation strategies for transitional care innovations in long-term care. Implement Sci Commun 2023; 4:103. [PMID: 37641112 PMCID: PMC10463528 DOI: 10.1186/s43058-023-00487-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/06/2023] [Accepted: 08/09/2023] [Indexed: 08/31/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Numerous transitional care innovations (TCIs) are being developed and implemented to optimize care continuity for older persons when transferring between multiple care settings, help meet their care needs, and ultimately improve their quality of life. Although the implementation of TCIs is influenced by contextual factors, the use of effective implementation strategies is largely lacking. Thus, to improve the implementation of TCIs targeting older persons receiving long-term care services, we systematically developed a set of viable strategies selected to address the influencing factors. METHODS As part of the TRANS-SENIOR research network, a stepwise approach following Implementation Mapping (steps 1 to 3) was applied to select implementation strategies. Building on the findings of previous studies, existing TCIs and factors influencing their implementation were identified. A combination of four taxonomies and overviews of change methods as well as relevant evidence on their effectiveness were used to select the implementation strategies targeting each of the relevant factors. Subsequently, individual consultations with scientific experts were performed for further validation of the process of mapping strategies to implementation factors and for capturing alternative ideas on relevant implementation strategies. RESULTS Twenty TCIs were identified and 12 influencing factors (mapped to the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research) were designated as priority factors to be addressed with implementation strategies. A total of 40 strategies were selected. The majority of these target factors at the organizational level, e.g., by using structural redesign, public commitment, changing staffing models, conducting local consensus discussions, and organizational diagnosis and feedback. Strategies at the level of individuals included active learning, belief selection, and guided practice. Each strategy was operationalized into practical applications. CONCLUSIONS This project developed a set of theory and evidence-based implementation strategies to address the influencing factors, along further tailoring for each context, and enhance the implementation of TCIs in daily practice settings. Such work is critical to advance the use of implementation science methods to implement innovations in long-term care successfully.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Amal Fakha
- Department of Health Services Research, Maastricht University, CAPHRI Care and Public Health Research Institute, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
- Living Lab in Ageing and Long-Term Care, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
- KU Leuven, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Academic Centre for Nursing and Midwifery, Leuven, Belgium.
| | - Bram de Boer
- Department of Health Services Research, Maastricht University, CAPHRI Care and Public Health Research Institute, Maastricht, the Netherlands
- Living Lab in Ageing and Long-Term Care, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - Jan P Hamers
- Department of Health Services Research, Maastricht University, CAPHRI Care and Public Health Research Institute, Maastricht, the Netherlands
- Living Lab in Ageing and Long-Term Care, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - Hilde Verbeek
- Department of Health Services Research, Maastricht University, CAPHRI Care and Public Health Research Institute, Maastricht, the Netherlands
- Living Lab in Ageing and Long-Term Care, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - Theo van Achterberg
- KU Leuven, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Academic Centre for Nursing and Midwifery, Leuven, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Adejumo AC, Yakovchenko V, Morgan TR, Spoutz P, Chia L, Bajaj JS, Chang MF, Dominitz JA, Rogal SS. The road to pandemic recovery: Tracking COVID-19's impact on cirrhosis care and outcomes among 111,558 Veterans. Hepatology 2023; 77:2016-2029. [PMID: 36705024 DOI: 10.1097/hep.0000000000000306] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/15/2022] [Accepted: 12/24/2022] [Indexed: 01/28/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AIMS This study aimed to evaluate quarterly trends in process and health outcomes among Veterans with cirrhosis and assess the factors associated with cirrhosis outcomes before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. APPROACH RESULTS US Veterans with cirrhosis were identified using the Veterans Health Administration Corporate Data Warehouse. Quarterly measures were evaluated from September 30, 2018, through March 31, 2022, including twice yearly screening for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC-6), new HCC, surveillance for or treatment of esophageal varices, variceal bleeding, all-cause hospitalization, and mortality. Joinpoint analyses were used to assess the changes in trends over time. Logistic regression models were used to identify the demographic and medical factors associated with each outcome over time. Among 111,558 Veterans with cirrhosis with a mean Model for End-stage Liver Disease-Sodium of 11±5, rates of HCC-6 sharply declined from a prepandemic peak of 41%, to a nadir of 28%, and rebounded to 36% by March 2022. All-cause mortality did not significantly change over the pandemic, but new HCC diagnosis, EVST, variceal bleeding, and all-cause hospitalization significantly declined over follow-up. Quarterly HCC diagnosis declined from 0.49% to 0.38%, EVST from 50% to 41%, variceal bleeding from 0.15% to 0.11%, and hospitalization from 9% to 5%. Rurality became newly, significantly associated with nonscreening over the pandemic (aOR for HCC-6=0.80, 95% CI 0.74 to 0.86; aOR for EVST=0.95, 95% CI 0.90 to 0.997). CONCLUSIONS The pandemic continues to impact cirrhosis care. Identifying populations at the highest risk of care disruptions may help to address ongoing areas of need.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Adeyinka C Adejumo
- Division of Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition, Department of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Vera Yakovchenko
- Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Timothy R Morgan
- Gastroenterology Section, VA Long Beach Healthcare System, Long Beach, California, USA
| | - Patrick Spoutz
- Pharmacy Benefits Management, Veterans Integrated Service Network 20, Vancouver, Washington, USA
| | - Linda Chia
- Pharmacy Benefits Management, Veterans Integrated Service Network 8, Bay Pines, Florida, USA
| | - Jasmohan S Bajaj
- Division of Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia, USA
- VA Richmond Health Care System, Richmond, Virginia, USA
| | - Michael F Chang
- Gastroenterology and Hepatology, VA Portland Health Care System, Portland, Oregon, USA
| | - Jason A Dominitz
- VA Puget Sound Health Care System, Seattle, Washington, USA
- Division of Gastroenterology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington, USA
| | - Shari S Rogal
- Division of Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition, Department of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
- Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
- Department of Surgery, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Yakovchenko V, Chinman MJ, Lamorte C, Powell BJ, Waltz TJ, Merante M, Gibson S, Neely B, Morgan TR, Rogal SS. Refining Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) strategy surveys using cognitive interviews with frontline providers. Implement Sci Commun 2023; 4:42. [PMID: 37085937 PMCID: PMC10122282 DOI: 10.1186/s43058-023-00409-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/21/2022] [Accepted: 03/06/2023] [Indexed: 04/23/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) compilation includes 73 defined implementation strategies clustered into nine content areas. This taxonomy has been used to track implementation strategies over time using surveys. This study aimed to improve the ERIC survey using cognitive interviews with non-implementation scientist clinicians. METHODS Starting in 2015, we developed and fielded annual ERIC surveys to evaluate liver care in the Veterans Health Administration (VA). We invited providers who had completed at least three surveys to participate in cognitive interviews (October 2020 to October 2021). Before the interviews, participants reviewed the complete 73-item ERIC survey and marked which strategies were unclear due to wording, conceptual confusion, or overlap with other strategies. They then engaged in semi-structured cognitive interviews to describe the experience of completing the survey and elaborate on which strategies required further clarification. RESULTS Twelve VA providers completed surveys followed by cognitive interviews. The "Engage Consumer" and "Support Clinicians" clusters were rated most highly in terms of conceptual and wording clarity. In contrast, the "Financial" cluster had the most wording and conceptual confusion. The "Adapt and Tailor to Context" cluster strategies were considered to have the most redundancy. Providers outlined ways in which the strategies could be clearer in terms of wording (32%), conceptual clarity (51%), and clarifying the distinction between strategies (51%). CONCLUSIONS Cognitive interviews with ERIC survey participants allowed us to identify and address issues with strategy wording, combine conceptually indistinct strategies, and disaggregate multi-barreled strategies. Improvements made to the ERIC survey based on these findings will ultimately assist VA and other institutions in designing, evaluating, and replicating quality improvement efforts.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Vera Yakovchenko
- Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Building 30, Room 2A113, University Drive C (151C), Pittsburgh, PA 15240-1001 USA
| | - Matthew J. Chinman
- Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Building 30, Room 2A113, University Drive C (151C), Pittsburgh, PA 15240-1001 USA
- RAND Corporation, Pittsburgh, PA USA
| | - Carolyn Lamorte
- Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Building 30, Room 2A113, University Drive C (151C), Pittsburgh, PA 15240-1001 USA
| | - Byron J. Powell
- Center for Mental Health Services Research, Brown School, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO USA
- Center for Dissemination & Implementation, Institute for Public Health, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO USA
- Division of Infectious Diseases, John T. Milliken Department of Medicine, School of Medicine, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO USA
| | - Thomas J. Waltz
- Department of Psychology, Eastern Michigan University, Ypsilanti, MI USA
| | - Monica Merante
- Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Building 30, Room 2A113, University Drive C (151C), Pittsburgh, PA 15240-1001 USA
| | - Sandra Gibson
- Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Building 30, Room 2A113, University Drive C (151C), Pittsburgh, PA 15240-1001 USA
- Division of Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA USA
| | - Brittney Neely
- Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Building 30, Room 2A113, University Drive C (151C), Pittsburgh, PA 15240-1001 USA
| | - Timothy R. Morgan
- Gastroenterology Section, VA Long Beach Healthcare System, Long Beach, CA USA
- Department of Medicine, University of California, Irvine, CA USA
| | - Shari S. Rogal
- Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Building 30, Room 2A113, University Drive C (151C), Pittsburgh, PA 15240-1001 USA
- Division of Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA USA
- Department of Surgery, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA USA
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Yakovchenko V, Rogal SS, Goodrich DE, Lamorte C, Neely B, Merante M, Gibson S, Scott D, McCurdy H, Nobbe A, Morgan TR, Chinman MJ. Getting to implementation: Adaptation of an implementation playbook. Front Public Health 2023; 10:980958. [PMID: 36684876 PMCID: PMC9853037 DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2022.980958] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/29/2022] [Accepted: 12/12/2022] [Indexed: 01/09/2023] Open
Abstract
Introduction Implementation strategies supporting the translation of evidence into practice need to be tailored and adapted for maximum effectiveness, yet the field of adapting implementation strategies remains nascent. We aimed to adapt "Getting To Outcomes"® (GTO), a 10-step implementation playbook designed to help community-based organizations plan and evaluate behavioral health programs, into "Getting To Implementation" (GTI) to support the selection, tailoring, and use of implementation strategies in health care settings. Methods Our embedded evaluation team partnered with operations, external facilitators, and site implementers to employ participatory methods to co-design and adapt GTO for Veterans Health Administration (VA) outpatient cirrhosis care improvement. The Framework for Reporting Adaptations and Modifications to Evidenced-based Implementation Strategies (FRAME-IS) guided documentation and analysis of changes made pre- and post-implementation of GTI at 12 VA medical centers. Data from multiple sources (interviews, observation, content analysis, and fidelity tracking) were triangulated and analyzed using rapid techniques over a 3-year period. Results Adaptations during pre-implementation were planned, proactive, and focused on context and content to improve acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility of the GTI playbook. Modifications during and after implementation were unplanned and reactive, concentrating on adoption, fidelity, and sustainability. All changes were collaboratively developed, fidelity consistent at the level of the facilitator and/or implementer. Conclusion GTO was initially adapted to GTI to support health care teams' selection and use of implementation strategies for improving guideline-concordant medical care. GTI required ongoing modification, particularly in steps regarding team building, context assessment, strategy selection, and sustainability due to difficulties with step clarity and progression. This work also highlights the challenges in pragmatic approaches to collecting and synthesizing implementation, fidelity, and adaptation data. Trial registration This study was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (Identifier: NCT04178096).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Vera Yakovchenko
- Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Pittsburgh, PA, United States
| | - Shari S. Rogal
- Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Pittsburgh, PA, United States
- Division of Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition, Department of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, United States
- Department of Surgery, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, United States
| | - David E. Goodrich
- Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Pittsburgh, PA, United States
| | - Carolyn Lamorte
- Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Pittsburgh, PA, United States
| | - Brittney Neely
- Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Pittsburgh, PA, United States
| | - Monica Merante
- Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Pittsburgh, PA, United States
| | - Sandra Gibson
- Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Pittsburgh, PA, United States
- Division of Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition, Department of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, United States
| | - Dawn Scott
- Department of Medicine, Central Texas Veterans Healthcare System, Temple, TX, United States
| | - Heather McCurdy
- VA Ann Arbor Healthcare System, Ann Arbor, MI, United States
| | - Anna Nobbe
- Digestive Disease Section, Cincinnati VA Medical Center, Cincinnati, OH, United States
| | - Timothy R. Morgan
- Gastroenterology Section, VA Long Beach Healthcare System, Long Beach, CA, United States
- Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, University of California, Irvine, Irvine, CA, United States
| | - Matthew J. Chinman
- Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Pittsburgh, PA, United States
- RAND Corporation, Pittsburgh, PA, United States
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Yakovchenko V, Jacob DA, Rogal SS, Morgan TR, Rozenberg-Ben-Dror K. User experience of a hepatitis c population management dashboard in the Department of Veterans Affairs. PLoS One 2023; 18:e0285044. [PMID: 37130107 PMCID: PMC10153746 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0285044] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/05/2023] [Accepted: 04/13/2023] [Indexed: 05/03/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The Veterans Health Administration (VA) is the largest integrated healthcare organization in the US and cares for the largest cohort of individuals with hepatitis C (HCV). A national HCV population management dashboard enabled rapid identification and treatment uptake with direct acting antiviral agents across VA hospitals. We describe the HCV dashboard (HCVDB) and evaluate its use and user experience. METHODS A user-centered design approach created the HCVDB to include reports based on the HCV care continuum: 1) 1945-1965 birth cohort high-risk screening, 2) linkage to care and treatment of chronic HCV, 3) treatment monitoring, 4) post-treatment to confirm cure (i.e., sustained virologic response), and 5) special populations of unstably housed Veterans. We evaluated frequency of usage and user experience with the System Usability Score (SUS) and Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology 2 (UTAUT2) instruments. RESULTS Between November 2016 and July 2021, 1302 unique users accessed the HCVDB a total of 163,836 times. The linkage report was used most frequently (71%), followed by screening (13%), sustained virologic response (11%), on-treatment (4%), and special populations (<1%). Based on user feedback (n = 105), the mean SUS score was 73±16, indicating a good user experience. Overall acceptability was high with the following UTAUT2 rated from highest to least: Price Value, Performance Expectancy, Social Influence, and Facilitating Conditions. CONCLUSIONS The HCVDB had rapid and widespread uptake, met provider needs, and scored highly on user experience measures. Collaboration between clinicians, clinical informatics, and population health experts was essential for dashboard design and sustained use. Population health management tools have the potential for large-scale impacts on care timeliness and efficiency.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Vera Yakovchenko
- Center for Healthcare Organization and Implementation Research, VA Bedford Healthcare System, Bedford, MA, United States of America
- Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Pittsburgh, PA, United States of America
| | - David A Jacob
- Veteran Affairs Heart of Texas Health Care Network, Temple, TX, United States of America
| | - Shari S Rogal
- Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Pittsburgh, PA, United States of America
- Departments of Medicine and Surgery, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, United States of America
| | - Timothy R Morgan
- Gastroenterology Section, VA Long Beach Healthcare System, Long Beach, CA, United States of America
- Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology, University of California, Irvine, CA, United States of America
| | | |
Collapse
|
10
|
Karabukayeva A, Hearld LR, Kelly R, Hall A, Singh J. Association between the number of adopted implementation strategies and contextual determinants: a mixed-methods study. BMC Health Serv Res 2022; 22:1518. [PMID: 36514102 PMCID: PMC9746001 DOI: 10.1186/s12913-022-08736-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/29/2021] [Accepted: 10/25/2022] [Indexed: 12/14/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The successful implementation of evidence-based innovations to improve healthcare delivery often requires a well-planned strategy to support their use. With a greater recognition of the importance of an implementation process, researchers have turned their attention to implementation strategies and their customization to target specific organizational barriers and facilitators. Further, there is a paucity of empirical evidence demonstrating the link between implementation determinants and the number of selected implementation strategies. The purpose of this mixed methods analysis is to examine how formatively assessed barriers and facilitators to implementation relate to the number and type of implementation strategies adopted to address context-specific factors. METHODS A mixed methods evaluation that included 15 rheumatology clinics throughout the United States that were planning for implementation of an evidence-based shared decision-making aid for patients with lupus. Quantitative data consisted of a count of the number of implementation strategies used by a clinic. Qualitative data collection was guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) and relied upon semi-structured interviews with 90 clinic members between November 2018 and August 2019. RESULTS Using the CFIR, we found that local clinic factors (Inner Setting Domain) resulted in different perceptions about Planning and Executing the DA (Process Domain); these domains were most likely to distinguish between the number and type of implementation strategies adopted by the clinics. In contrast, Intervention characteristics, Individual Characteristics, and the Outer Setting did not differentiate between the groups with different numbers of implementation strategies. The number and type of chosen strategies were not those associated with the context-specific factors. CONCLUSIONS Findings show that, despite recognition of the value of customizing implementation strategies for the contexts in which they are applied, they are too often chosen in a manner that fail to adequately reflect the diverse settings that may present unique factors associated with implementation. Our findings also highlight the importance of the inner context - both in terms of structural characteristics and existing work processes - as a driving factor for why some organizations select different numbers and types of implementation strategies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Aizhan Karabukayeva
- grid.265892.20000000106344187Department of Health Services Administration, School of Health Professions, University of Alabama at Birmingham, 3201 1st Avenue North, Birmingham, AL 35222 USA
| | - Larry R. Hearld
- grid.265892.20000000106344187Department of Health Services Administration, School of Health Professions, University of Alabama at Birmingham, 3201 1st Avenue North, Birmingham, AL 35222 USA
| | - Reena Kelly
- grid.266831.80000 0001 2168 8754Department of Health Administration & Policy, School of Health Sciences, University of New Haven, West Haven, CT 06516 USA
| | - Allyson Hall
- grid.265892.20000000106344187Department of Health Services Administration, School of Health Professions, University of Alabama at Birmingham, 3201 1st Avenue North, Birmingham, AL 35222 USA
| | - Jasvinder Singh
- grid.265892.20000000106344187Division of Immunology and Rheumatology, School of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL 35222 USA
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Improvements in appropriate ambulatory antibiotic prescribing using a bundled antibiotic stewardship intervention in general pediatrics practices. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2022; 43:1894-1900. [PMID: 35098913 DOI: 10.1017/ice.2021.534] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/14/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To improve appropriate antibiotic prescribing for children in Tennessee. DESIGN We performed a before-and-after intervention study with 3 comparison periods: period 1 (P1, baseline) May 2018-September 2019; period 2 (P2, intervention before the COVID-19 pandemic) November 11, 2019-March 20, 2020; and period 3 (P3, intervention during the coronavirus disease 2019 [COVID-19] pandemic) March 21, 2020-November 10, 2020. We additionally surveyed participating providers to assess acceptance of the intervention. SETTING Community general pediatrics practices. PARTICIPANTS In total, 81 general pediatricians, family medicine physicians, and nurse practitioners in 5 general pediatrics practices participated in this study. INTERVENTIONS Each practice identified a practice and operations champion for the project. Practices chose 2-4 implementation strategies previously shown to be effective at reducing outpatient antibiotic use to implement in their practice throughout the study intervention period. Study personnel also held quarterly meetings with all providers to review deidentified peer comparison feedback both across practices enrolled in the study and at the provider level within each practice. RESULTS We detected improvements in guideline-concordant antibiotic use in the pre-COVID-19 intervention period, and they were sustained in the study period during the pandemic (P3): otitis media (P1 72.14% vs P2 81.42% vs P3 86.11%), group A streptococcal pharyngitis (P1 66.13% vs P2 81.56% vs P3 80.44%), pneumonia (P1 70.6% vs P2 76.2% vs P3 100%), sinusitis (P1 76.2% vs P2 83.78% vs P3 82.86%), skin and soft-tissue infections (P1 97.18% vs P2 100% vs P3 100%). CONCLUSIONS Bundled implementation strategies led to significant increases in guideline-concordant antibiotic prescribing for all diagnoses. Survey results demonstrate that the bundled implementation strategies were well-accepted by providers.
Collapse
|
12
|
Ingvarsson S, Hasson H, von Thiele Schwarz U, Nilsen P, Powell BJ, Lindberg C, Augustsson H. Strategies for de-implementation of low-value care-a scoping review. Implement Sci 2022; 17:73. [PMID: 36303219 PMCID: PMC9615304 DOI: 10.1186/s13012-022-01247-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/07/2022] [Accepted: 10/13/2022] [Indexed: 11/27/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The use of low-value care (LVC) is a persistent problem that calls for knowledge about strategies for de-implementation. However, studies are dispersed across many clinical fields, and there is no overview of strategies that can be used to support the de-implementation of LVC. The extent to which strategies used for implementation are also used in de-implementing LVC is unknown. The aim of this scoping review is to (1) identify strategies for the de-implementation of LVC described in the scientific literature and (2) compare de-implementation strategies to implementation strategies as specified in the Expert Recommendation for Implementing Change (ERIC) and strategies added by Perry et al. METHOD: A scoping review was conducted according to recommendations outlined by Arksey and O'Malley. Four scientific databases were searched, relevant articles were snowball searched, and the journal Implementation Science was searched manually for peer-reviewed journal articles in English. Articles were included if they were empirical studies of strategies designed to reduce the use of LVC. Two reviewers conducted all abstract and full-text reviews, and conflicting decisions were discussed until consensus was reached. Data were charted using a piloted data-charting form. The strategies were first coded inductively and then mapped onto the ERIC compilation of implementation strategies. RESULTS The scoping review identified a total of 71 unique de-implementation strategies described in the literature. Of these, 62 strategies could be mapped onto ERIC strategies, and four strategies onto one added category. Half (50%) of the 73 ERIC implementation strategies were used for de-implementation purposes. Five identified de-implementation strategies could not be mapped onto any of the existing strategies in ERIC. CONCLUSIONS Similar strategies are used for de-implementation and implementation. However, only a half of the implementation strategies included in the ERIC compilation were represented in the de-implementation studies, which may imply that some strategies are being underused or that they are not applicable for de-implementation purposes. The strategies assess and redesign workflow (a strategy previously suggested to be added to ERIC), accountability tool, and communication tool (unique new strategies for de-implementation) could complement the existing ERIC compilation when used for de-implementation purposes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sara Ingvarsson
- Procome Research Group, Medical Management Centre, Department of Learning, Informatics, Management and Ethics, Karolinska Institutet, Karolinska, Sweden
| | - Henna Hasson
- Procome Research Group, Medical Management Centre, Department of Learning, Informatics, Management and Ethics, Karolinska Institutet, Karolinska, Sweden
- Unit for implementation and evaluation, Center for Epidemiology and Community Medicine (CES), Stockholm Region, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Ulrica von Thiele Schwarz
- Procome Research Group, Medical Management Centre, Department of Learning, Informatics, Management and Ethics, Karolinska Institutet, Karolinska, Sweden
- School of Health, Care and Social Welfare, Mälardalen University, Västerås, Sweden
| | - Per Nilsen
- Department of Health, Medicine and Caring Sciences, Division of Public Health, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden
| | - Byron J. Powell
- Center for Mental Health Services Research, Brown School, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO USA
- Center for Dissemination and Implementation, Institute for Public Health, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO USA
- Division of Infectious Diseases, John T. Milliken Department of Medicine, School of Medicine, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO USA
| | - Clara Lindberg
- Procome Research Group, Medical Management Centre, Department of Learning, Informatics, Management and Ethics, Karolinska Institutet, Karolinska, Sweden
| | - Hanna Augustsson
- Procome Research Group, Medical Management Centre, Department of Learning, Informatics, Management and Ethics, Karolinska Institutet, Karolinska, Sweden
- Unit for implementation and evaluation, Center for Epidemiology and Community Medicine (CES), Stockholm Region, Stockholm, Sweden
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Yakovchenko V, Morgan TR, Miech EJ, Neely B, Lamorte C, Gibson S, Beste LA, McCurdy H, Scott D, Gonzalez R, Park A, Powell BJ, Bajaj JS, Dominitz JA, Chartier M, Ross D, Chinman MJ, Rogal SS. Core implementation strategies for improving cirrhosis care in the Veterans Health Administration. Hepatology 2022; 76:404-417. [PMID: 35124820 PMCID: PMC9288973 DOI: 10.1002/hep.32395] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/26/2021] [Revised: 01/11/2022] [Accepted: 01/14/2022] [Indexed: 12/28/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) provides care for more than 80,000 veterans with cirrhosis. This longitudinal, multimethod evaluation of a cirrhosis care quality improvement program aimed to (1) identify implementation strategies associated with evidence-based, guideline-concordant cirrhosis care over time, and (2) use qualitative interviews to operationalize strategies for a manualized intervention. APPROACH AND RESULTS VHA providers were surveyed annually about the use of 73 implementation strategies to improve cirrhosis care in fiscal years 2018 (FY18) and 2019 (FY19). Implementation strategies linked to guideline-concordant cirrhosis care were identified using bivariate statistics and comparative configurational methods. Semistructured interviews were conducted with 12 facilities in the highest quartile of cirrhosis care to specify the successful implementation strategies and their mechanisms of change. A total of 106 VHA facilities (82%) responded at least once over the 2-year period (FY18, n = 63; FY19, n = 100). Facilities reported using a median of 12 (interquartile range [IQR] 20) implementation strategies in FY18 and 10 (IQR 19) in FY19. Of the 73 strategies, 35 (48%) were positively correlated with provision of evidence-based cirrhosis care. Configurational analysis identified multiple strategy pathways directly linked to more guideline-concordant cirrhosis care. Across both methods, a subset of eight strategies was determined to be core to cirrhosis care improvement and specified using qualitative interviews. CONCLUSIONS In a national cirrhosis care improvement initiative, a multimethod approach identified a core subset of successful implementation strategy combinations. This process of empirically identifying and specifying implementation strategies may be applicable to other implementation challenges in hepatology.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Vera Yakovchenko
- Center for Healthcare Organization and Implementation Research, VA Bedford Healthcare System, Bedford, MA
| | - Timothy R. Morgan
- Gastroenterology Section, VA Long Beach Healthcare System, Long Beach, CA,Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, University of California, Irvine, CA
| | - Edward J. Miech
- Department of Veterans Affairs, Roudebush VA Medical Center, HSR&D Center for Health Information & Communication, VA PRIS-M QUERI, Indianapolis, IN,Regenstrief Institute, Indianapolis, IN
| | - Brittney Neely
- Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Pittsburgh, PA
| | - Carolyn Lamorte
- Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Pittsburgh, PA
| | - Sandra Gibson
- Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Pittsburgh, PA,Division of Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition, Department of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA
| | - Lauren A. Beste
- Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA,General Medicine Service, VA Puget Sound Health Care System, Seattle, WA
| | | | - Dawn Scott
- Department of Medicine, Central Texas Veterans Healthcare System, Temple, TX
| | - Rachel Gonzalez
- Department of Veterans Affairs, Sierra Pacific Veterans Integrated Service Network, Pharmacy Benefits Management, Mather, CA
| | - Angela Park
- Office of Healthcare Transformation, Department of Veterans Affairs, Washington, DC
| | - Byron J. Powell
- Brown School, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO
| | - Jasmohan S. Bajaj
- Division of Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA,Division of Gastroenterology, Central Virginia Veterans Affairs Healthcare System, Richmond, VA
| | - Jason A. Dominitz
- Gastroenterology Section, Veterans Affairs Puget Sound Health Care System, Seattle, WA,Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA
| | - Maggie Chartier
- HIV, Hepatitis, and Related Conditions Programs, Office of Specialty Care Services, Veterans Health Administration, Washington, DC
| | - David Ross
- HIV, Hepatitis, and Related Conditions Programs, Office of Specialty Care Services, Veterans Health Administration, Washington, DC
| | - Matthew J. Chinman
- Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Pittsburgh, PA,RAND Corporation, Pittsburgh, PA
| | - Shari S. Rogal
- Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Pittsburgh, PA,Division of Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition, Department of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA,Department of Surgery, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Applying User-Centered Design to Develop Practical Strategies that Address Overuse in Primary Care. J Gen Intern Med 2022; 37:57-63. [PMID: 34535845 PMCID: PMC8993977 DOI: 10.1007/s11606-021-07124-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/04/2021] [Accepted: 08/26/2021] [Indexed: 10/20/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Engaging patients and frontline clinicians in re-designing clinical care is essential for improving care delivery in a complex clinical environment. This study sought to assess an innovative user-centered design approach to improving clinical care quality, focusing on the use cases of de-intensifying non-beneficial care within the following areas: (1) de-intensifying diabetes treatment in high-risk patients; (2) stopping screening for carotid artery stenosis in asymptomatic patients; and (3) stopping colorectal cancer screening in average-risk, older adults. METHODS The user-centered design approach, consisting of patient and patient-clinician charrettes (defined as intensive workshops where key stakeholders collaborate to develop creative solutions to a specific problem) and participant surveys, has been described previously. Following the charrettes, we used inductive coding to identify and categorize themes emerging from the de-intensification ideas prioritized by participants as well as facilitator notes and audio recordings from the charrettes. RESULTS Thirty-five patients participated in the patient design charrettes, generating 134 unique de-intensification ideas and prioritizing 32, which were then distilled into six patient-generated principles of de-intensification by the study team. These principles provided a starting point for a subsequent patient-clinician charrette. In this follow-up charrette, 9 patients who had participated in an earlier patient design charrette collaborated with 7 clinicians to generate 63 potential de-intensification solutions. Six of these potential solutions were developed into multi-faceted, fully operationalized de-intensification strategies. DISCUSSION The de-intensification strategies that patients and clinicians prioritized and operationalized during the co-design charrette process were detailed and multi-faceted. Each component of a strategy had a rationale based on feasibility, practical considerations, and ways of overcoming barriers. The charrette-based process may be a useful way to engage clinicians and patients in developing the complex and multi-faceted strategies needed to improve care delivery.
Collapse
|
15
|
Gonzalez R, Park A, Yakovchenko V, Rogal S, Chartier M, Morgan TR, Ross D. HCV Elimination in the US Department of Veterans Affairs. Clin Liver Dis (Hoboken) 2021; 18:1-6. [PMID: 34484696 PMCID: PMC8405054 DOI: 10.1002/cld.1150] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/22/2021] [Accepted: 06/25/2021] [Indexed: 02/04/2023] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Rachel Gonzalez
- Department of Veterans AffairsSierra Pacific Veterans Integrated Service NetworkPharmacy Benefits ManagementMatherCA
| | - Angela Park
- Department of Veterans Affairs, Office of Healthcare TransformationWashingtonDC
| | - Vera Yakovchenko
- Center for Healthcare Organization and Implementation ResearchEdith Norse Rogers Memorial VA HospitalBedfordMA
| | - Shari Rogal
- Center for Health Equity Research and PromotionVA Pittsburgh Healthcare SystemPittsburghPA,Departments of Medicine and Surgery and Center for Clinical and Translational Science InstituteUniversity of PittsburghPittsburghPA
| | - Maggie Chartier
- Veterans Health AdministrationHIV, Hepatitis, and Related Conditions ProgramsOffice of Specialty Care ServicesWashingtonDC
| | - Timothy R. Morgan
- Gastroenterology SectionVA Long Beach Healthcare SystemLong BeachCA,Department of MedicineDivision of GastroenterologyUniversity of CaliforniaIrvineCA
| | - David Ross
- Veterans Health AdministrationHIV, Hepatitis, and Related Conditions ProgramsOffice of Specialty Care ServicesWashingtonDC
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Sperber NR, Dong OM, Roberts MC, Dexter P, Elsey AR, Ginsburg GS, Horowitz CR, Johnson JA, Levy KD, Ong H, Peterson JF, Pollin TI, Rakhra-Burris T, Ramos MA, Skaar T, Orlando LA. Strategies to Integrate Genomic Medicine into Clinical Care: Evidence from the IGNITE Network. J Pers Med 2021; 11:647. [PMID: 34357114 PMCID: PMC8306482 DOI: 10.3390/jpm11070647] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/03/2021] [Revised: 06/29/2021] [Accepted: 07/02/2021] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
The complexity of genomic medicine can be streamlined by implementing some form of clinical decision support (CDS) to guide clinicians in how to use and interpret personalized data; however, it is not yet clear which strategies are best suited for this purpose. In this study, we used implementation science to identify common strategies for applying provider-based CDS interventions across six genomic medicine clinical research projects funded by an NIH consortium. Each project's strategies were elicited via a structured survey derived from a typology of implementation strategies, the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC), and follow-up interviews guided by both implementation strategy reporting criteria and a planning framework, RE-AIM, to obtain more detail about implementation strategies and desired outcomes. We found that, on average, the three pharmacogenomics implementation projects used more strategies than the disease-focused projects. Overall, projects had four implementation strategies in common; however, operationalization of each differed in accordance with each study's implementation outcomes. These four common strategies may be important for precision medicine program implementation, and pharmacogenomics may require more integration into clinical care. Understanding how and why these strategies were successfully employed could be useful for others implementing genomic or precision medicine programs in different contexts.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nina R. Sperber
- Duke Department of Population Health Sciences, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC 27701, USA
- Durham VA Health Care System, Durham, NC 27705, USA
- Center for Applied Genomics & Precision Medicine, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC 27708, USA; (O.M.D.); (G.S.G.); (T.R.-B.); (L.A.O.)
| | - Olivia M. Dong
- Center for Applied Genomics & Precision Medicine, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC 27708, USA; (O.M.D.); (G.S.G.); (T.R.-B.); (L.A.O.)
| | - Megan C. Roberts
- Division of Pharmaceutical Outcomes and Policy, Eshelman School of Pharmacy, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA;
| | - Paul Dexter
- Regenstrief Institute, Indianapolis, Indiana University School of Medicine and Clem McDonald Center for Biomedical Informatics, Indianapolis, IN 46202, USA;
| | - Amanda R. Elsey
- Center for Pharmacogenomics and Precision Medicine, Department of Pharmacotherapy and Translational Research, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32610, USA; (A.R.E.); (J.A.J.)
| | - Geoffrey S. Ginsburg
- Center for Applied Genomics & Precision Medicine, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC 27708, USA; (O.M.D.); (G.S.G.); (T.R.-B.); (L.A.O.)
| | - Carol R. Horowitz
- Institute for Health Equity Research, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY 10029, USA;
| | - Julie A. Johnson
- Center for Pharmacogenomics and Precision Medicine, Department of Pharmacotherapy and Translational Research, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32610, USA; (A.R.E.); (J.A.J.)
| | - Kenneth D. Levy
- Division of Clinical Pharmacology, Department of Medicine, Indiana University School of Medicine, 950 W. Walnut Street, Indianapolis, IN 46202, USA; (K.D.L.); (T.S.)
| | - Henry Ong
- Department of Biomedical Informatics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN 37232, USA; (H.O.); (J.F.P.)
| | - Josh F. Peterson
- Department of Biomedical Informatics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN 37232, USA; (H.O.); (J.F.P.)
| | - Toni I. Pollin
- Division of Endocrinology, Diabetes and Nutrition, Department of Medicine, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21201, USA;
| | - Tejinder Rakhra-Burris
- Center for Applied Genomics & Precision Medicine, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC 27708, USA; (O.M.D.); (G.S.G.); (T.R.-B.); (L.A.O.)
| | - Michelle A. Ramos
- Department of Population Health Science and Policy, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY 10029, USA;
| | - Todd Skaar
- Division of Clinical Pharmacology, Department of Medicine, Indiana University School of Medicine, 950 W. Walnut Street, Indianapolis, IN 46202, USA; (K.D.L.); (T.S.)
| | - Lori A. Orlando
- Center for Applied Genomics & Precision Medicine, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC 27708, USA; (O.M.D.); (G.S.G.); (T.R.-B.); (L.A.O.)
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Moghe A, Yakovchenko V, Morgan T, McCurdy H, Scott D, Rozenberg-Ben-Dror K, Rogal S. Strategies to Improve Delivery of Cirrhosis Care. CURRENT TREATMENT OPTIONS IN GASTROENTEROLOGY 2021; 19:369-379. [PMID: 34054289 PMCID: PMC8142883 DOI: 10.1007/s11938-021-00345-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 03/16/2021] [Indexed: 11/18/2022]
Abstract
Purpose of review This review provides an overview of the current state of research around improving healthcare delivery for patients with cirrhosis in the outpatient, inpatient, and transitional care settings. Recent findings Recent studies have broadly employed changes to the model of care delivery, team composition, and technology to improve cirrhosis care. In the outpatient setting, approaches have included engaging caregivers, patient navigators, and non-physicians and using virtual care, smartphone applications, and wearables. Inpatient care approaches have focused on the role of interdisciplinary teams, education interventions, and changes to the medical record system, while post-discharge interventions have included day hospitals and care coordinator interventions. This review also describes the Veterans Health Administration's novel, population-level approach to delivery of cirrhosis care, and addressed how the pandemic has impacted the delivery of cirrhosis care. Summary Comprehensive, evidence-based approaches to delivering high-quality cirrhosis care continue to evolve to meet the needs of a growing population in an ever-changing healthcare environment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Akshata Moghe
- Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA USA
| | - Vera Yakovchenko
- Center for Healthcare Organization and Implementation Research, Edith Nourse Rogers Memorial VA Hospital, Bedford, MA USA
| | - Timothy Morgan
- Gastroenterology Section, VA Long Beach Healthcare System, Long Beach, CA USA
- Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, University of California, Irvine, CA USA
| | | | - Dawn Scott
- Central Texas Veterans Healthcare System, Temple, TX USA
| | | | - Shari Rogal
- Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Research Office Building (151R), University Drive C, Pittsburgh, PA 15240 USA
- Departments of Medicine and Surgery, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA USA
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Rogal SS, Yakovchenko V, Gonzalez R, Park A, Beste LA, Rozenberg-Ben-Dror K, Bajaj JS, Scott D, McCurdy H, Comstock E, Sidorovic M, Gibson S, Lamorte C, Nobbe A, Chartier M, Ross D, Dominitz JA, Morgan TR. The Hepatic Innovation Team Collaborative: A Successful Population-Based Approach to Hepatocellular Carcinoma Surveillance. Cancers (Basel) 2021; 13:cancers13092251. [PMID: 34067177 PMCID: PMC8125814 DOI: 10.3390/cancers13092251] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/10/2021] [Revised: 04/24/2021] [Accepted: 04/26/2021] [Indexed: 02/07/2023] Open
Abstract
Simple Summary Liver cancer is a growing problem that largely impacts people with cirrhosis. This article describes the Veterans Health Administration’s national cirrhosis quality improvement program and its focus on early detection of liver cancer. Abstract After implementing a successful hepatitis C elimination program, the Veterans Health Administration’s (VHA) Hepatic Innovation Team (HIT) Collaborative pivoted to focus on improving cirrhosis care. This national program developed teams of providers across the country and engaged them in using systems redesign methods and population health approaches to improve care. The HIT Collaborative developed an Advanced Liver Disease (ALD) Dashboard to identify Veterans with cirrhosis who were due for surveillance for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and other liver care, promoted the use of an HCC Clinical Reminder in the electronic health record, and provided training and networking opportunities. This evaluation aimed to describe the VHA’s approach to improving cirrhosis care and identify the facility factors and HIT activities associated with HCC surveillance rates, using a quasi-experimental design. Across all VHA facilities, as the HIT focused on cirrhosis between 2018–2019, HCC surveillance rates increased from 46% (IQR 37–53%) to 51% (IQR 42–60%, p < 0.001). The median HCC surveillance rate was 57% in facilities with high ALD Dashboard utilization compared with 45% in facilities with lower utilization (p < 0.001) and 58% in facilities using the HCC Clinical Reminder compared with 47% in facilities not using this tool (p < 0.001) in FY19. Increased use of the ALD Dashboard and adoption of the HCC Clinical Reminder were independently, significantly associated with HCC surveillance rates in multivariate models, controlling for other facility characteristics. In conclusion, the VHA’s HIT Collaborative is a national healthcare initiative associated with significant improvement in HCC surveillance rates.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shari S. Rogal
- Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, University Drive (151C), Pittsburgh, PA 15240, USA; (S.G.); (C.L.)
- Departments of Medicine and Surgery, University of Pittsburgh, 3550 Terrace Street, Pittsburgh, PA 15240, USA
- Correspondence: ; Tel.: +1-412-360-6177
| | - Vera Yakovchenko
- Center for Healthcare Organization and Implementation Research, VA Bedford Healthcare System, 200 Springs Road (152), Building 70, Bedford, MA 01730, USA;
| | - Rachel Gonzalez
- Department of Veterans Affairs, Sierra Pacific Veterans Integrated Service Network, Pharmacy Benefits Management, Mather, CA 94523, USA;
| | - Angela Park
- Office of Healthcare Transformation, Department of Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont Avenue, Washington, DC 20420, USA;
| | - Lauren A. Beste
- Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Washington School of Medicine, 1959 NE Pacific Street, Seattle, WA 98195, USA;
- General Medicine Service, VA Puget Sound Health Care System, 1660 S Columbian Way, Seattle, WA 98108, USA
| | - Karine Rozenberg-Ben-Dror
- Veteran Affairs Great Lakes Health Care System, VISN 12 PBM, 11301 W Cermak Road, Ste 810, Westchester, IL 60154, USA;
| | - Jasmohan S. Bajaj
- Division of Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition, Virginia Commonwealth University, 1200 E Broad Street, West Hospital, 14th Floor, Box 980341, Richmond, VA 23298, USA;
- Division of Gastroenterology, Central Virginia Veterans Affairs Healthcare System, 1201 Broad Rock Blvd, Richmond, VA 23249, USA
| | - Dawn Scott
- Department of Medicine, Central Texas Veterans Healthcare System, 1901 Veterans Memorial Drive, Temple, TX 76504, USA;
| | - Heather McCurdy
- VA Ann Arbor Healthcare System, 2215 Fuller Rd, Ann Arbor, MI 48105, USA;
| | - Emily Comstock
- Department of Infectious Diseases, Baltimore VA Medical Center, 10 N Greene Street, Baltimore, MD 21201, USA;
| | - Michael Sidorovic
- Salisbury VA Medical Center, 1601 Brenner Avenue, Salisbury, NC 28144, USA;
| | - Sandra Gibson
- Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, University Drive (151C), Pittsburgh, PA 15240, USA; (S.G.); (C.L.)
| | - Carolyn Lamorte
- Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, University Drive (151C), Pittsburgh, PA 15240, USA; (S.G.); (C.L.)
| | - Anna Nobbe
- Digestive Disease Section, Cincinnati VA Medical Center, 3200 Vine Street, Cincinnati, OH 45220, USA;
| | - Maggie Chartier
- HIV, Hepatitis, and Related Conditions, Office of Specialty Care Services (10P11I), Department of Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont Avenue, Washington, DC 20420, USA; (M.C.); (D.R.)
| | - David Ross
- HIV, Hepatitis, and Related Conditions, Office of Specialty Care Services (10P11I), Department of Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont Avenue, Washington, DC 20420, USA; (M.C.); (D.R.)
| | - Jason A. Dominitz
- Gastroenterology Section, Veterans Affairs Puget Sound Health Care System, 1660 S Columbian Way, Seattle, WA 98108, USA;
- Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, RR-512, Health Sciences Building, University of Washington School of Medicine, Box 356420, 1959 NE Pacific Street, Seattle, WA 98195, USA
| | - Timothy R. Morgan
- Gastroenterology Section, VA Long Beach Healthcare System, 5901 E 7th Street, Long Beach, CA 90822, USA;
- Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, University of California, 333 City Blvd. West, Suite 400, Orange, CA 92868, USA
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Hu TH, Su WW, Yang CC, Yang CC, Kuo WH, Chen YY, Yeh YH, Chen SS, Tsao YY, Chen KM, Yan SL, Lai JH, Yao CD, Lim CH, Jen HH, Yeh YP, Chen SLS, Chen HH, Chen SC. Elimination of Hepatitis C Virus in a Dialysis Population: A Collaborative Care Model in Taiwan. Am J Kidney Dis 2021; 78:511-519.e1. [PMID: 33940114 DOI: 10.1053/j.ajkd.2021.03.017] [Citation(s) in RCA: 22] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/23/2020] [Accepted: 03/18/2021] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE Hemodialysis facilities are high-risk environments for the spread of hepatitis C virus (HCV). Eliminating HCV from all dialysis facilities in a community may be achieved more effectively under a collaborative care model. STUDY DESIGN Quality improvement study of multidisciplinary collaborative care teams including nephrologists, gastroenterologists, and public health practitioners. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS All dialysis patients in Changhua County, Taiwan were treated using an interdisciplinary collaborative care model implemented within a broader Changhua-Integrated Program to Stop HCV Infection (CHIPS-C). QUALITY IMPROVEMENT ACTIVITIES Provision of an HCV care cascade to fill 3 gaps, including screening and testing, diagnosis, and universal direct-acting antiviral (DAA) treatment implemented by collaborating teams of dialysis practitioners and gastroenterologists working under auspices of Changhua Public Health Bureau. OUTCOME Outcome measures included quality indicators pertaining to 6 steps in HCV care ranging from HCV screening to treatment completion to cure. ANALYTICAL APPROACH A descriptive analysis. RESULTS A total of 3,657 patients from 31 dialysis facilities were enrolled. All patients completed HCV screening. The DAA treatment initiation rate and completion rate were 88.9% and 94.0%, respectively. The collaborative care model achieved a cure rate of 166 (96.0%) of 173 patients. No virologic failure occurred. The cumulative treatment ratios for patients with chronic HCV infection increased from 5.3% before interferon-based therapy (2017) to 25.6% after restricted provision of DAA (2017-2018), and then to 89.1% after universal access to DAA (2019). LIMITATIONS Unclear impact of this collaborative care program on incident dialysis patients entering dialysis facilities each year and on patients with earlier stages of chronic kidney disease. CONCLUSIONS A collaborative care model in Taiwan increased the rates of diagnosis and treatment for HCV in dialysis facilities to levels near those established by the World Health Organization.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tsung-Hui Hu
- Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Kaohsiung, Taiwan; Chang Gung University College of Medicine, Kaohsiung, Taiwan
| | - Wei-Wen Su
- Changhua Christian Hospital, Changhua, Taiwan
| | | | - Chih-Chao Yang
- Ministry of Health and Welfare, Taipei, Taiwan; Changhua Hospital, Ministry of Health and Welfare, Changhua, Taiwan
| | | | | | | | | | - Yu-Yu Tsao
- Changhua Public Health Bureau, Changhua, Taiwan
| | | | - Sheng-Lei Yan
- Chang Bing Show Chwan Memorial Hospital, Changhua, Taiwan
| | | | | | | | - Hsiao Hsuan Jen
- Innovation and Policy Center for Population Health and Sustainable Environment, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan; Institute of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan
| | - Yen-Po Yeh
- Changhua Public Health Bureau, Changhua, Taiwan; Innovation and Policy Center for Population Health and Sustainable Environment, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan; Institute of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan.
| | - Sam Li-Sheng Chen
- School of Oral Hygiene, College of Oral Medicine, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan
| | - Hsiu-Hsi Chen
- Innovation and Policy Center for Population Health and Sustainable Environment, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan; Institute of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
20
|
Landsverk J, Proctor EK. From Research Training to Scientific Advancement-Contributions from the Implementation Research Institute: An Introduction to the Special Issue. ADMINISTRATION AND POLICY IN MENTAL HEALTH AND MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH 2021; 47:169-175. [PMID: 31970568 DOI: 10.1007/s10488-020-01015-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/22/2022]
Abstract
The special series is designed to provide examples of funded implementation research conducted by alumni of the first four cohorts of the Implementation Research Institute (IRI). The introduction links the six substantive papers to the conceptual and methodological challenges laid out in a 2009 publication in this journal which led to the IRI training program in the emerging science of implementation with a special focus on behavior health settings. The 7th paper in the series illustrates an innovative evaluative approach to design and measurement of IRI fellow publications and grants informed by the training program such as bibliometrics. The introduction also notes some elements identified in the 2009 foundational paper not represented in these papers such as costs as well as important developments and foci in the decade since 2009 such as de-implementation, sustainability, dynamic adaptation processes, and hybrid designs that need to be an integral part of training programs in implementation research.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- John Landsverk
- Oregon Social Learning Center, 10 Shelton McMurphy Blvd., Eugene, OR, 97401, USA.
| | - Enola K Proctor
- Brown School of Social Work, Washington University in St. Louis, 1 Brookings Drive, Campus Box 1196, St. Louis, MO, 63130, USA
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Khan MQ, Belopolsky Y, Gampa A, Greenberg I, Beig MI, Imas P, Sonnenberg A, Fimmel CJ. Effect of a Best Practice Alert on Birth-Cohort Screening for Hepatitis C Virus. Clin Transl Gastroenterol 2021; 12:e00297. [PMID: 33522731 PMCID: PMC7806234 DOI: 10.14309/ctg.0000000000000297] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/22/2020] [Accepted: 11/23/2020] [Indexed: 12/11/2022] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION We assessed the influence of a best practice alert (BPA) embedded within the electronic medical record on improving hepatitis C virus (HCV) birth-cohort screening by primary care physicians (PCPs). METHODS Screening by 155 PCPs was monitored during 2 consecutive 9-month periods before and after implementation of the BPA. All tests were reviewed to differentiate true screening from other testing indications. RESULTS Of 155 PCPs, 131 placed screening orders before and after BPA. Twenty-two PCPs started testing after BPA (P = 0.02). The number of tests placed and screening rates per PCP increased from 16 to 84 and from 3.3% to 13.2%, respectively (P < 0.0001). Before BPA, most PCPs rarely ordered screening HCV tests, whereas a small group of physicians generated most tests, indicative of an underlying power-law distribution. After the BPA, a new group of high-performing PCPs emerged, whose screening patterns were again characterized by a power-law distribution. However, pre-BPA test rates of individual PCPs were not predictive of their post-BPA rates. Overall, the introduction of the BPA narrowed the gap between low- and high-performing testers, indicating that modest increases in testing by a large number of low-performing PCPs could drive substantial improvement in program implementation. DISCUSSION HCV birth-cohort screening by PCPs was shaped by an underlying power-law distribution. This distribution was preserved after the implementation of a BPA, although pre-BPA test rates were not predictive of post-BPA rates. Increases in test rates by high- and low-performing PCPs both contributed to the overall success of the BPA.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mohammad Qasim Khan
- Department of Gastroenterology, NorthShore University Health System, Evanston, Illinois, USA
| | - Yuliya Belopolsky
- Department of Medicine, NorthShore University Health System, Evanston, Illinois, USA
| | - Anuhya Gampa
- Department of Gastroenterology, NorthShore University Health System, Evanston, Illinois, USA
| | - Ian Greenberg
- Department of Medicine, NorthShore University Health System, Evanston, Illinois, USA
| | - Muhammad Imran Beig
- Department of Clinical Analytics, NorthShore University Health System, Skokie, Illinois, USA
| | - Polina Imas
- Department of Clinical Analytics, NorthShore University Health System, Skokie, Illinois, USA
| | - Amnon Sonnenberg
- Portland VA Medical Center and Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, Oregon, USA
| | - Claus J. Fimmel
- Department of Gastroenterology, NorthShore University Health System, Evanston, Illinois, USA
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Waltz TJ, Powell BJ, Matthieu MM, Smith JL, Damschroder LJ, Chinman MJ, Proctor EK, Kirchner JE. Consensus on strategies for implementing high priority mental health care practices within the US Department of Veterans Affairs. IMPLEMENTATION RESEARCH AND PRACTICE 2021; 2:26334895211004607. [PMID: 37090006 PMCID: PMC9978675 DOI: 10.1177/26334895211004607] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Identifying feasible and effective implementation strategies remains a significant challenge. At present, there is a gap between the number of strategies prospectively included in implementation trials, typically four or fewer, and the number of strategies utilized retrospectively, often 20 or more. This gap points to the need for developing a better understanding of the range of implementation strategies that should be considered in implementation science and practice. Methods This study elicited expert recommendations to identify which of 73 discrete implementation strategies were considered essential for implementing three mental health care high priority practices (HPPs) in the US Department of Veterans Affairs: depression outcome monitoring in primary care mental health (n = 20), prolonged exposure therapy for treating posttraumatic stress disorder (n = 22), and metabolic safety monitoring for patients taking antipsychotic medications (n = 20). Participants had expertise in implementation science, the specific HPP, or both. A highly structured recommendation process was used to obtain recommendations for each HPP. Results Majority consensus was identified for 26 or more strategies as absolutely essential; 53 or more strategies were identified as either likely essential or absolutely essential across the three HPPs. Conclusions The large number of strategies identified as essential starkly contrasts with existing research that largely focuses on application of single strategies to support implementation. Systematic investigation and documentation of multi-strategy implementation initiatives is needed. Plain Language Summary Most implementation studies focus on the impact of a relatively small number of discrete implementation strategies on the uptake of a practice. However, studies that systematically survey providers find that dozens or more discrete implementation strategies can be identified in the context of the implementation initiative. This study engaged experts in implementation science and clinical practice in a structured recommendation process to identify which of the 73 Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) implementation strategies were considered absolutely essential, likely essential, likely inessential, and absolutely inessential for each of the three distinct mental health care practices: depression outcome monitoring in primary care, prolonged exposure therapy for posttraumatic stress disorder, and metabolic safety monitoring for patients taking antipsychotic medications. The results highlight that experts consider a large number of strategies as absolutely or likely essential for supporting the implementation of mental health care practices. For example, 26 strategies were identified as absolutely essential for all three mental health care practices. Another 27 strategies were identified as either absolutely or likely essential across all three practices. This study points to the need for future studies to document the decision-making process an initiative undergoes to identify which strategies to include and exclude in an implementation effort. In particular, a structured approach to this documentation may be necessary to identify strategies that may be endogenous to a care setting and that may not be otherwise be identified as being "deliberately" used to support a practice or intervention.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Thomas J Waltz
- Department of Psychology, Eastern
Michigan University, Ypsilanti, MI, USA
| | - Byron J Powell
- Brown School, Washington University in
St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA
| | - Monica M Matthieu
- HSR&D Center of Innovation Center
for Mental Healthcare & Outcomes Research, Department of Veterans Affairs
Medical Center, Central Arkansas Veterans Healthcare System, North Little Rock, AR,
USA
- School of Social Work, College for
Public Health and Social Justice, Saint Louis University, St. Louis, MO, USA
| | - Jeffrey L Smith
- VA Quality Enhancement Research
Initiative (QUERI) for Team-Based Behavioral Health, Little Rock, AR, USA
- Central Arkansas Veterans Healthcare
System, Little Rock, AR, USA
- Psychiatric Research Institute and
College of Medicine, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, AR,
USA
| | - Laura J Damschroder
- VA Ann Arbor Center for Clinical
Management Research and Diabetes QUERI, VA Ann Arbor Healthcare System, Ann Arbor,
MI, USA
| | - Matthew J Chinman
- VISN 4 MIRECC, VA Pittsburgh,
Pittsburgh, PA, USA
- RAND Corporation, Pittsburgh, PA,
USA
| | - Enola K Proctor
- Brown School, Washington University in
St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA
| | - JoAnn E Kirchner
- VA Quality Enhancement Research
Initiative (QUERI) for Team-Based Behavioral Health, Little Rock, AR, USA
- Central Arkansas Veterans Healthcare
System, Little Rock, AR, USA
- Psychiatric Research Institute and
College of Medicine, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, AR,
USA
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Rogal SS, Powell BJ, Chinman M. Moving Toward Impact: An Introduction to Implementation Science for Gastroenterologists and Hepatologists. Gastroenterology 2020; 159:2007-2012. [PMID: 32950522 PMCID: PMC7498466 DOI: 10.1053/j.gastro.2020.07.063] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/26/2020] [Revised: 07/07/2020] [Accepted: 07/20/2020] [Indexed: 12/02/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Shari S Rogal
- Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System and, Departments of Medicine and Surgery, Division of Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
| | - Byron J Powell
- Brown School, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri
| | - Matthew Chinman
- Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System and, RAND Corporation, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Rudd BN, Davis M, Beidas RS. Integrating implementation science in clinical research to maximize public health impact: a call for the reporting and alignment of implementation strategy use with implementation outcomes in clinical research. Implement Sci 2020; 15:103. [PMID: 33239097 PMCID: PMC7690013 DOI: 10.1186/s13012-020-01060-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 55] [Impact Index Per Article: 13.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/20/2020] [Accepted: 10/25/2020] [Indexed: 01/06/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Although comprehensive reporting guidelines for implementation strategy use within implementation research exist, they are rarely used by clinical (i.e., efficacy and effectiveness) researchers. In this debate, we argue that the lack of comprehensive reporting of implementation strategy use and alignment of those strategies with implementation outcomes within clinical research is a missed opportunity to efficiently narrow research-to-practice gaps. MAIN BODY We review ways that comprehensively specifying implementation strategy use can advance science, including enhancing replicability of clinical trials and reducing the time from clinical research to public health impact. We then propose that revisions to frequently used reporting guidelines in clinical research (e.g., CONSORT, TIDieR) are needed, review current methods for reporting implementation strategy use (e.g., utilizing StaRI), provide pragmatic suggestions on how to both prospectively and retrospectively specify implementation strategy use and align these strategies with implementation outcomes within clinical research, and offer a case study of using these methods. CONCLUSIONS The approaches recommended in this article will not only contribute to shared knowledge and language among clinical and implementation researchers but also facilitate the replication of efficacy and effectiveness research. Ultimately, we hope to accelerate translation from clinical to implementation research in order to expedite improvements in public health.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Brittany N Rudd
- Institute for Juvenile Research, Department of Psychiatry, University of Illinois at Chicago, 1747 West Roosevelt Road, Chicago, IL, 60608, USA.
- Department of Psychiatry, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
- Penn Implementation Science Center, Leonard Davis Institute (PISCE@LDI), Philadelphia, PA, USA.
| | - Molly Davis
- Department of Psychiatry, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
- Penn Implementation Science Center, Leonard Davis Institute (PISCE@LDI), Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Rinad S Beidas
- Department of Psychiatry, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
- Penn Implementation Science Center, Leonard Davis Institute (PISCE@LDI), Philadelphia, PA, USA
- Department of Medical Ethics and Health Policy, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
- Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
25
|
Rogal SS, Yakovchenko V, Morgan T, Bajaj JS, Gonzalez R, Park A, Beste L, Miech EJ, Lamorte C, Neely B, Gibson S, Malone PS, Chartier M, Taddei T, Garcia-Tsao G, Powell BJ, Dominitz JA, Ross D, Chinman MJ. Getting to implementation: a protocol for a Hybrid III stepped wedge cluster randomized evaluation of using data-driven implementation strategies to improve cirrhosis care for Veterans. Implement Sci 2020; 15:92. [PMID: 33087156 PMCID: PMC7579930 DOI: 10.1186/s13012-020-01050-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/05/2020] [Accepted: 10/05/2020] [Indexed: 02/07/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Cirrhosis is a rapidly increasing cause of global mortality. To improve cirrhosis care, the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) developed the Hepatic Innovation Team (HIT) Collaborative to support VA Medical Centers (VAMCs) to deliver evidence-based cirrhosis care. This randomized HIT program evaluation aims to develop and assess a novel approach for choosing and applying implementation strategies to improve the quality of cirrhosis care. METHODS Evaluation aims are to (1) empirically determine which combinations of implementation strategies are associated with successful implementation of evidence-based practices (EBPs) for Veterans with cirrhosis, (2) manualize these "data-driven" implementation strategies, and (3) assess the effectiveness of data-driven implementation strategies in increasing cirrhosis EBP uptake. Aim 1 will include an online survey of all VAMCs' use of 73 implementations strategies to improve cirrhosis care, as defined by the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change taxonomy. Traditional statistical as well as configurational comparative methods will both be employed to determine which combinations of implementation strategies are associated with site-level adherence to EBPs for cirrhosis. In aim 2, semi-structured interviews with high-performing VAMCs will be conducted to operationalize successful implementation strategies for cirrhosis care. These data will be used to inform the creation of a step-by-step guide to tailoring and applying the implementation strategies identified in aim 1. In aim 3, this manualized implementation intervention will be assessed using a hybrid type III stepped-wedge cluster randomized design. This evaluation will be conducted in 12 VAMCs, with four VAMCs crossing from control to intervention every 6 months, in order to assess the effectiveness of using data-driven implementation strategies to improve guideline-concordant cirrhosis care. DISCUSSION Successful completion of this innovative evaluation will establish the feasibility of using early evaluation data to inform a manualized, user-friendly implementation intervention for VAMCs with opportunities to improve care. This evaluation will provide implementation support tools that can be applied to enhance the implementation of other evidence-based practices. TRIAL REGISTRATION This project was registered at ClinicalTrials.Gov ( NCT04178096 ) on 4/29/20.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shari S Rogal
- Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Research Office Building (151R), University Drive C, Pittsburgh, PA, 15240, USA. .,Departments of Medicine and Surgery, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
| | - Vera Yakovchenko
- Center for Healthcare Organization and Implementation Research, Edith Nourse Rogers Memorial VA Hospital, Bedford, MA, USA
| | - Timothy Morgan
- Gastroenterology Section, VA Long Beach Healthcare System, Long Beach, CA, USA.,Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, University of California, Irvine, CA, USA
| | - Jasmohan S Bajaj
- Division of Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, USA.,Division of Gastroenterology, Hunter Holmes McGuire VA Medical Center, Richmond, VA, USA
| | - Rachel Gonzalez
- Department of Veterans Affairs, Sierra Pacific Veterans Integrated Service Network, Pharmacy Benefits Management, Mather, CA, USA
| | - Angela Park
- Office of Healthcare Transformation, Veterans Engineering Resource Center, Washington, DC, USA
| | - Lauren Beste
- Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, VA Puget Sound Healthcare System, Seattle, WA, USA.,Division of General Internal Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Edward J Miech
- Department of Veterans Affairs, Roudebush VA Medical Center, HSR&D Center for Health Information & Communication, VA PRIS-M QUERI, Indianapolis, IN, USA
| | - Carolyn Lamorte
- Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Research Office Building (151R), University Drive C, Pittsburgh, PA, 15240, USA
| | - Brittney Neely
- Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Research Office Building (151R), University Drive C, Pittsburgh, PA, 15240, USA
| | - Sandra Gibson
- Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Research Office Building (151R), University Drive C, Pittsburgh, PA, 15240, USA
| | | | - Maggie Chartier
- HIV, Hepatitis and Related Conditions Programs, Office of Specialty Care Services, Veterans Health Administration, Washington, DC, USA
| | - Tamar Taddei
- VA Connecticut Healthcare System, West Haven, CT, USA.,Department of Medicine, Yale University, West Haven, CT, USA
| | - Guadalupe Garcia-Tsao
- VA Connecticut Healthcare System, West Haven, CT, USA.,Department of Medicine, Yale University, West Haven, CT, USA
| | - Byron J Powell
- Brown School, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA
| | - Jason A Dominitz
- Gastroenterology Section, VA Puget Sound Health Care System, Seattle, WA, USA.,Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - David Ross
- HIV, Hepatitis and Related Conditions Programs, Office of Specialty Care Services, Veterans Health Administration, Washington, DC, USA
| | - Matthew J Chinman
- Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Research Office Building (151R), University Drive C, Pittsburgh, PA, 15240, USA.,RAND Corporation, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Rogal SS, Chinman M, Gellad WF, Mor MK, Zhang H, McCarthy SA, Mauro GT, Hale JA, Lewis ET, Oliva EM, Trafton JA, Yakovchenko V, Gordon AJ, Hausmann LRM. Tracking implementation strategies in the randomized rollout of a Veterans Affairs national opioid risk management initiative. Implement Sci 2020. [PMID: 32576214 DOI: 10.1186/s13012‐020‐01005‐y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/08/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND In 2018, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) issued Notice 2018-08 requiring facilities to complete "case reviews" for Veterans identified in the Stratification Tool for Opioid Risk Mitigation (STORM) dashboard as high risk for adverse outcomes among patients prescribed opioids. Half of the facilities were randomly assigned to a Notice version including additional oversight. We evaluated implementation strategies used, whether strategies differed by randomization arm, and which strategies were associated with case review completion rates. METHODS Facility points of contact completed a survey assessing their facility's use of 68 implementation strategies based on the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change taxonomy. We collected respondent demographic information, facility-level characteristics, and case review completion rates (percentage of high-risk patients who received a case review). We used Kruskal-Wallis tests and negative binomial regression to assess strategy use and factors associated with case reviews. RESULTS Contacts at 89 of 140 facilities completed the survey (64%) and reported using a median of 23 (IQR 16-31) strategies. The median case review completion rate was 71% (IQR 48-95%). Neither the number or types of strategies nor completion rates differed by randomization arm. The most common strategies were using the STORM dashboard (97%), working with local opinion leaders (80%), and recruiting local partners (80%). Characteristics associated with case review completion rates included respondents being ≤ 35 years old (incidence rate ratio, IRR 1.35, 95% CI 1.09-1.67) and having < 5 years in their primary role (IRR 1.23; 95% CI 1.01-1.51), and facilities having more prior academic detailing around pain and opioid safety (IRR 1.40, 95% CI 1.12-1.75). Controlling for these characteristics, implementation strategies associated with higher completion rates included (1) monitoring and adjusting practices (adjusted IRR (AIRR) 1.40, 95% CI 1.11-1.77), (2) identifying adaptations while maintaining core components (AIRR 1.28, 95% CI 1.03-1.60), (3) conducting initial training (AIRR 1.16, 95% CI 1.02-1.50), and (4) regularly sharing lessons learned (AIRR 1.32, 95% CI 1.09-1.59). CONCLUSIONS In this national evaluation of strategies used to implement case reviews of patients at high risk of opioid-related adverse events, point of contact age and tenure in the current role, prior pain-related academic detailing at the facility, and four specific implementation strategies were associated with case review completion rates, while randomization to additional centralized oversight was not. TRIAL REGISTRATION This project is registered at the ISRCTN Registry with number ISRCTN16012111. The trial was first registered on May 3, 2017.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shari S Rogal
- Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Pittsburgh, PA, USA. .,Department of Surgery, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA. .,Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
| | - Matthew Chinman
- Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.,Veterans Integrated Service Network 4 Mental Illness Research, Education and Clinical Center, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.,RAND Corporation, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
| | - Walid F Gellad
- Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.,Division of General Internal Medicine, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
| | - Maria K Mor
- Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.,Department of Biostatistics, University of Pittsburgh Graduate School of Public Health, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
| | - Hongwei Zhang
- Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
| | - Sharon A McCarthy
- Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.,Veterans Integrated Service Network 4 Mental Illness Research, Education and Clinical Center, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
| | - Genna T Mauro
- Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
| | - Jennifer A Hale
- Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
| | - Eleanor T Lewis
- VA Office of Mental Health and Suicide Prevention, VA Palo Alto Healthcare System, Menlo Park, CA, USA.,VA Center for Innovation to Implementation, VA Palo Alto Healthcare System, Menlo Park, CA, USA
| | - Elizabeth M Oliva
- VA Office of Mental Health and Suicide Prevention, VA Palo Alto Healthcare System, Menlo Park, CA, USA.,VA Center for Innovation to Implementation, VA Palo Alto Healthcare System, Menlo Park, CA, USA
| | - Jodie A Trafton
- VA Office of Mental Health and Suicide Prevention, VA Palo Alto Healthcare System, Menlo Park, CA, USA.,VA Center for Innovation to Implementation, VA Palo Alto Healthcare System, Menlo Park, CA, USA.,Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, CA, USA
| | - Vera Yakovchenko
- Center for Healthcare Organization & Implementation Research, Edith Nourse Rogers Memorial Veterans Hospital, Bedford, MA, USA
| | - Adam J Gordon
- Program for Addiction Research, Clinical Care, Knowledge, and Advocacy, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.,Informatics, Decision-Enhancement, and Analytic Sciences Center, VA Salt Lake City Health Care System, Salt Lake City, UT, USA
| | - Leslie R M Hausmann
- Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.,Division of General Internal Medicine, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
27
|
Rogal SS, Chinman M, Gellad WF, Mor MK, Zhang H, McCarthy SA, Mauro GT, Hale JA, Lewis ET, Oliva EM, Trafton JA, Yakovchenko V, Gordon AJ, Hausmann LRM. Tracking implementation strategies in the randomized rollout of a Veterans Affairs national opioid risk management initiative. Implement Sci 2020; 15:48. [PMID: 32576214 PMCID: PMC7313133 DOI: 10.1186/s13012-020-01005-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/04/2020] [Accepted: 05/29/2020] [Indexed: 11/25/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND In 2018, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) issued Notice 2018-08 requiring facilities to complete "case reviews" for Veterans identified in the Stratification Tool for Opioid Risk Mitigation (STORM) dashboard as high risk for adverse outcomes among patients prescribed opioids. Half of the facilities were randomly assigned to a Notice version including additional oversight. We evaluated implementation strategies used, whether strategies differed by randomization arm, and which strategies were associated with case review completion rates. METHODS Facility points of contact completed a survey assessing their facility's use of 68 implementation strategies based on the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change taxonomy. We collected respondent demographic information, facility-level characteristics, and case review completion rates (percentage of high-risk patients who received a case review). We used Kruskal-Wallis tests and negative binomial regression to assess strategy use and factors associated with case reviews. RESULTS Contacts at 89 of 140 facilities completed the survey (64%) and reported using a median of 23 (IQR 16-31) strategies. The median case review completion rate was 71% (IQR 48-95%). Neither the number or types of strategies nor completion rates differed by randomization arm. The most common strategies were using the STORM dashboard (97%), working with local opinion leaders (80%), and recruiting local partners (80%). Characteristics associated with case review completion rates included respondents being ≤ 35 years old (incidence rate ratio, IRR 1.35, 95% CI 1.09-1.67) and having < 5 years in their primary role (IRR 1.23; 95% CI 1.01-1.51), and facilities having more prior academic detailing around pain and opioid safety (IRR 1.40, 95% CI 1.12-1.75). Controlling for these characteristics, implementation strategies associated with higher completion rates included (1) monitoring and adjusting practices (adjusted IRR (AIRR) 1.40, 95% CI 1.11-1.77), (2) identifying adaptations while maintaining core components (AIRR 1.28, 95% CI 1.03-1.60), (3) conducting initial training (AIRR 1.16, 95% CI 1.02-1.50), and (4) regularly sharing lessons learned (AIRR 1.32, 95% CI 1.09-1.59). CONCLUSIONS In this national evaluation of strategies used to implement case reviews of patients at high risk of opioid-related adverse events, point of contact age and tenure in the current role, prior pain-related academic detailing at the facility, and four specific implementation strategies were associated with case review completion rates, while randomization to additional centralized oversight was not. TRIAL REGISTRATION This project is registered at the ISRCTN Registry with number ISRCTN16012111. The trial was first registered on May 3, 2017.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shari S Rogal
- Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
- Department of Surgery, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
- Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
| | - Matthew Chinman
- Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
- Veterans Integrated Service Network 4 Mental Illness Research, Education and Clinical Center, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
- RAND Corporation, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
| | - Walid F Gellad
- Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
- Division of General Internal Medicine, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
| | - Maria K Mor
- Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
- Department of Biostatistics, University of Pittsburgh Graduate School of Public Health, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
| | - Hongwei Zhang
- Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
| | - Sharon A McCarthy
- Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
- Veterans Integrated Service Network 4 Mental Illness Research, Education and Clinical Center, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
| | - Genna T Mauro
- Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
| | - Jennifer A Hale
- Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
| | - Eleanor T Lewis
- VA Office of Mental Health and Suicide Prevention, VA Palo Alto Healthcare System, Menlo Park, CA, USA
- VA Center for Innovation to Implementation, VA Palo Alto Healthcare System, Menlo Park, CA, USA
| | - Elizabeth M Oliva
- VA Office of Mental Health and Suicide Prevention, VA Palo Alto Healthcare System, Menlo Park, CA, USA
- VA Center for Innovation to Implementation, VA Palo Alto Healthcare System, Menlo Park, CA, USA
| | - Jodie A Trafton
- VA Office of Mental Health and Suicide Prevention, VA Palo Alto Healthcare System, Menlo Park, CA, USA
- VA Center for Innovation to Implementation, VA Palo Alto Healthcare System, Menlo Park, CA, USA
- Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, CA, USA
| | - Vera Yakovchenko
- Center for Healthcare Organization & Implementation Research, Edith Nourse Rogers Memorial Veterans Hospital, Bedford, MA, USA
| | - Adam J Gordon
- Program for Addiction Research, Clinical Care, Knowledge, and Advocacy, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT, USA
- Informatics, Decision-Enhancement, and Analytic Sciences Center, VA Salt Lake City Health Care System, Salt Lake City, UT, USA
| | - Leslie R M Hausmann
- Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
- Division of General Internal Medicine, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
| |
Collapse
|