The Potential Impact Of Comparative Effectiveness Research On The Health Of Minority Populations

A taxonomy of impacts on clinical and translational research from community stakeholder engagement

Background

Community engagement is increasingly recognized as a valuable tool in clinical and translational research; however, the impact of engagement is not fully understood. No standard nomenclature yet exists to clearly define how research changes when community stakeholders are engaged across the research spectrum. This severely limits our ability to assess the value of community engagement in research. To address this gap, we developed a taxonomy for characterizing and classifying changes in research due to community engagement.

Methods

Using an iterative process, we (a) identified areas of potential impact associated with community engagement from author experience, (b) categorized these in taxonomic bins based on research stages, (c) conducted semi‐structured interviews with researchers and community stakeholders, (d) validated the codebook in a sample dataset and (e) refined the taxonomy based on the validation. Community stakeholders were involved in every step of the process including as members of the primary study team.

Results

The final taxonomy catalogues changes into eleven domains corresponding to research phases. Each domain includes 2‐4 dimensions depicting concepts within the domain's scope and, within each dimension, 2‐10 elements labelling activities through which community engagement could change research.

Conclusions

Community engagement has great potential to enhance clinical and translational research. This taxonomy provides a common vocabulary and framework for understanding the impact of community engagement and suggests metrics for assessing the value of community engagement in research.

Translating Comparative Effectiveness Research Into Practice: Effects of Interventions on Lifestyle, Medication Adherence, and Self-care for Type 2 Diabetes, Hypertension, and Obesity Among Black, Hispanic, and Asian Residents of Chicago and Houston, 2010 to 2013

CONTEXT

In the United States, racial/ethnic minorities account for disproportionate disease and death from type 2 diabetes, hypertension, and obesity; however, interventions with measured efficacy in comparative effectiveness research are often not adopted or used widely in those communities.

OBJECTIVE

To assess implementation and effects of comparative effectiveness research-proven interventions translated for minority communities.

DESIGN

Mixed-method assessment with pretest-posttest single-group evaluation design.

SETTING

US Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Minority Health, research contractor, and advisory board; health centers, including a federally qualified community health center in Chicago, Illinois; and public housing facilities for seniors in Houston, Texas.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 97 black, Hispanic, and Asian participants with any combination of health care provider-diagnosed type 2 diabetes, hypertension, or obesity.

INTERVENTIONS

Virtual training institutes where intervention staff learned cultural competency methods of adapting effective interventions. Health educators delivered the Health Empowerment Lifestyle Program (HELP) in Chicago; community pharmacists delivered the MyRx Medication Adherence Program in Houston.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Participation rates, satisfaction with interventions during January to April 2013, and pre- to postintervention changes in knowledge, diet, and clinical outcomes were analyzed through July 2013.

RESULTS

In Chicago, 38 patients experienced statistically significant reductions in hemoglobin A1c and systolic blood pressure, increased knowledge of hypertension management, and improved dietary behaviors. In Houston, 38 subsidized housing residents had statistically nonsignificant improvements in knowledge of self-management and adherence to medication for diabetes and hypertension but high levels of participation in pharmacist home visits and group education classes.

CONCLUSION

Adaptation, adoption, and implementation of HELP and MyRx demonstrated important postintervention changes among racial/ethnic participants in Chicago and Houston. The communities faced similar implementation challenges across settings, targets of change, and cities. Available resources were insufficient to sustain benefits with measurable impact on racial/ethnic disparities beyond the study period. Results suggest the need for implementation studies of longer duration, greater power, and salience to policies and programs that can sustain longterm interventions on a community-wide scale.

Querying stakeholders to inform comparative effectiveness research

Despite the growing recognition of the value of stakeholder engagement in research, there is limited guidance on effectively eliciting stakeholder views during the comparative effectiveness research (CER) process. This article outlines the potential role of each stakeholder (patient, provider, policymaker and payer) throughout the CER process and provides examples of practical questions that researchers can ask the four primary stakeholder groups at each step of the CER process. This guide aims to assist in the development of meaningful stakeholder-researcher shared decision-making to incorporate stakeholder views in the design, conduct and dissemination of patient-centered CER.

Using community-based participatory research in patient-centered outcomes research to address health disparities in under-represented communities

The emergence of patient-centered outcomes research (PCOR) has created a paradigm shift in the way health outcomes research is designed, conducted and disseminated. While PCOR expands the potential for patients to play a key advisory role in every aspect of the research process, community-based participatory research (CBPR) has long provided this opportunity for engaging communities in research. CBPR is an excellent tool for achieving PCOR goals of improving the health of all people by providing them with evidence-based information for making informed healthcare decisions. We propose ways by which PCOR can effectively use CBPR principles to engage patients in general, and specifically patients from underserved communities. The hope is that this will help to reduce and eventually eliminate health disparities.

Engaging hard-to-reach patients in patient-centered outcomes research

Aims: This study aimed to identify methods to engage hard-to-reach patients in the research process. Materials & methods: With funding from the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (Washington, DC, USA), the University of Maryland (MD, USA) conducted 20 focus groups and one individual interview. The sample consisted of six groups of hard-to-reach patients, two groups of healthcare providers who work with hard-to-reach patients and two groups of surrogates of hard-to-reach patients. Results & conclusion: In order to make patient-centered outcomes research more meaningful to patients and their caregivers, patient-centered outcomes research should be conducted with a focus on building and maintaining trust, which is achieved via pre-engagement with communities and continuous engagement of study participants and their communities.

Establishing the infrastructure to conduct comparative effectiveness research toward the elimination of disparities: a community-based participatory research framework

In Tampa, Florida, researchers have partnered with community- and faith-based organizations to create the Comparative Effectiveness Research for Eliminating Disparities (CERED) infrastructure. Grounded in community-based participatory research, CERED acts on multiple levels of society to enhance informed decision making (IDM) of prostate cancer screening among Black men. CERED investigators combined both comparative effectiveness research and community-based participatory research to design a trial examining the effectiveness of community health workers and a digitally enhanced patient decision aid to support IDM in community settings as compared with "usual care" for prostate cancer screening. In addition, CERED researchers synthesized evidence through the development of systematic literature reviews analyzing the effectiveness of community health workers in changing knowledge, attitudes and behaviors of African American adults toward cancer prevention and education. An additional systematic review analyzed chemoprevention agents for prostate cancer as an emerging technique. Both of these reviews, and the comparative effectiveness trial supporting the IDM process, add to CERED's goal of providing evidence to eliminate cancer health disparities.

Issues in biomedical research: what do Hispanics think?

OBJECTIVE

To examine barriers and facilitators of biomedical research participation among Hispanics in a rural community in Washington State.

METHODS

Questionnaires addressed socio-demographics, health care access, and barriers and facilitators of participation in biomedical studies. This is a descriptive analysis of the findings.

RESULTS

Barriers include the need to care for family members (82%), fear of having to pay for research treatments (74%), cultural beliefs (65%), lack of time (75%) and trust (71%), and the degree of hassle (73%). Facilitators include having a friend/relative with the disease being researched (80%) and monetary compensation (73%).

CONCLUSION

Researchers should be mindful of these facilitators and barriers when recruiting for biomedical research studies.

Racial variation in the cost-effectiveness of chemotherapy for prostate cancer

PURPOSE

Heterogeneity of treatment effects and expenditures impacts the cost-effectiveness of health interventions. This study investigates the variation in costs, effects, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) associated with chemotherapy in elderly patients with metastatic (M1) prostate cancer (PC) across race/ethnicity subgroups (non-Hispanic whites, non-Hispanic blacks, and others).

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective observational analysis.

METHODS

We examined patients age 66 years or older, identified by using the linked Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare data set, who were diagnosed with M1 PC between 2000 and 2005. Cost data on the basis of Medicare reimbursements were available for 36 months after diagnosis. Mean costs and effects (life-years gained [LYG]) were adjusted for censoring. The baseline scenario examined PC-specific medical costs at 24 months and required survival of at least three months. Sensitivity analysis considered sampling uncertainty, selection into treatment, and adjustments to initial model assumptions.

RESULTS

We identified 3,888 patients with M1 PC, of whom 24% (n = 930) received chemotherapy (primarily docetaxel and mitoxantrone). Twenty percent of observations were censored. The full sample ICER was $99,146 per LYG (95% CI, $75,042 to $130,195). Estimates for whites (ICER, $107,095; 95% CI, $78,391 to $148,272), blacks (ICER, $59,887; 95% CI, $22,860 to $121,509), and others (ICER, $123,909; 95% CI, $37,782 to $366,376) suggest considerable variation in the likelihood of chemotherapy being cost-effective. Results were similar in sensitivity analysis.

CONCLUSION

Chemotherapy use in elderly patients with M1 PC is associated with an ICER of $99,146 per LYG. Subgroup analysis revealed heterogeneity in point estimates and considerable statistical uncertainty. To generate a reliable evidence base, efforts to increase the representation of minorities in health care data sets need to continue.