Connecting research discovery with care delivery in dementia: the development of the Indianapolis Discovery Network for Dementia

The methodology of the Agile Nudge University

Introduction

The Agile Nudge University is a National Institute on Aging-funded initiative to engineer a diverse, interdisciplinary network of scientists trained in Agile processes.

Methods

Members of the network are trained and mentored in rapid, iterative, and adaptive problem-solving techniques to develop, implement, and disseminate evidence-based nudges capable of addressing health disparities and improving the care of people living with Alzheimer's disease and other related dementias (ADRD).

Results

Each Agile Nudge University cohort completes a year-long online program, biweekly coaching and mentoring sessions, monthly group-based problem-solving sessions, and receives access to a five-day Bootcamp and the Agile Nudge Resource Library.

Discussion

The Agile Nudge University is evaluated through participant feedback, competency surveys, and tracking of the funding, research awards, and promotions of participating scholars. The Agile Nudge University is compounding national innovation efforts in overcoming the gaps in the ADRD discovery-to-delivery translational cycle.

Application of complexity theory in health and social care research: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Complexity theory has been chosen by many authors as a suitable lens through which to examine health and social care. Despite its potential value, many empirical investigations apply the theory in a tokenistic manner without engaging with its underlying concepts and underpinnings.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this scoping review is to synthesise the literature on empirical studies that have centred on the application of complexity theory to understand health and social care provision.

METHODS

This scoping review considered primary research using complexity theory-informed approaches, published in English between 2012 and 2021. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, Web of Science, PSYCHINFO, the NHS Economic Evaluation Database, and the Health Economic Evaluations Database were searched. In addition, a manual search of the reference lists of relevant articles was conducted. Data extraction was conducted using Covidence software and a data extraction form was created to produce a descriptive summary of the results, addressing the objectives and research question. The review used the revised Arksey and O'Malley framework and adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR).

RESULTS

2021 studies were initially identified with a total of 61 articles included for extraction. Complexity theory in health and social care research is poorly defined and described and was most commonly applied as a theoretical and analytical framework. The full breadth of the health and social care continuum was not represented in the identified articles, with the majority being healthcare focused.

DISCUSSION

Complexity theory is being increasingly embraced in health and care research. The heterogeneity of the literature regarding the application of complexity theory made synthesis challenging. However, this scoping review has synthesised the most recent evidence and contributes to translational systems research by providing guidance for future studies.

CONCLUSION

The study of complex health and care systems necessitates methods of interpreting dynamic prcesses which requires qualitative and longitudinal studies with abductive reasoning. The authors provide guidance on conducting complexity-informed primary research that seeks to promote rigor and transparency in the area.

REGISTRATION

The scoping review protocol was registered at Open Science Framework, and the review protocol was published at BMJ Open (https://bit.ly/3Ex1Inu).

Mapping the role of patient and public involvement during the different stages of healthcare innovation: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

Patient and public involvement (PPI) has become increasingly important in the development, delivery and improvement of healthcare. PPI is used in healthcare innovation; yet, how it is used has been under-reported. The aim of this scoping review is to identify and map the current available empirical evidence on the role of PPI during different stages of healthcare innovation.

METHODS

The scoping review was conducted in accordance with PRISMAScR and included any study published in a peer-reviewed journal between 2004 and 2021 that reported on PPI in healthcare innovation within any healthcare setting or context in any country. The following databases were searched: Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycInfo, HMIC and Google Scholar. We included any study type, including quantitative, qualitative and mixed-method studies. We excluded theoretical frameworks, conceptual, scientific or grey literature as well as discussion and opinion papers.

RESULTS

Of the 87 included studies, 81 (93%) focused on or were conducted by authors in developed countries. A wide range of conditions were considered, with more studies focusing on mental health (n = 18, 21%) and cancer care (n = 8, 9%). The vast majority of the studies focused on process and service innovations (n = 62, 71%). Seven studies focused on technological and clinical innovations (8%), while 12 looked at both technological and service innovations (14%). Only five studies examined systems innovation (5%) and one study looked across all types of innovations (1%). PPI is more common in the earlier stages of innovation, particularly problem identification and invention, in comparison to adoption and diffusion.

CONCLUSION

Healthcare innovation tends to be a lengthy process. Yet, our study highlights that PPI is more common across earlier stages of innovation and focuses mostly on service innovation. Stronger PPI in later stages could support the adoption and diffusion of innovation.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

One of the coauthors of the paper (S. S.) is a service user with extensive experience in PPI research. S. S. supported the analysis and writing up of the paper.

Scaling Beyond Early Adopters: a Content Analysis of Literature and Key Informant Perspectives

BACKGROUND

Innovations and improvements in care delivery are often not spread across all settings that would benefit from their uptake. Scale-up and spread efforts are deliberate efforts to increase the impact of innovations successfully tested in pilot projects so as to benefit more people. The final stages of scale-up and spread initiatives must contend with reaching hard-to-engage sites.

OBJECTIVE

To describe the process of scale-up and spread initiatives, with a focus on hard-to-engage sites and strategies to approach them.

DESIGN

Qualitative content analysis of systematically identified literature and key informant interviews.

PARTICIPANTS

Leads from large magnitude scale-up and spread projects.

APPROACH

We conducted a systematic literature search on large magnitude scale-up and spread and interviews with eight project leads, who shared their perspectives on strategies to scale-up and spread clinical and administrative practices across healthcare systems, focusing on hard-to-engage sites. We synthesized these data using content analysis.

KEY RESULTS

Searches identified 1919 titles, of which 52 articles were included. Thirty-four discussed general scale-up and spread strategies, 11 described hard-to-engage sites, and 7 discussed strategies for hard-to-engage sites. These included publications were combined with interview findings to describe a fourth phase of the national scale-up and spread process, common challenges for spreading to hard-to-engage sites, and potential benefits of working with hard-to-engage sites, as well as useful strategies for working with hard-to-engage sites.

CONCLUSIONS

We identified scant published evidence that describes strategies for reaching hard-to-engage sites. The sparse data we identified aligned with key informant accounts. Future work could focus on better documentation of the later stages of spread efforts, including specific tailoring of approaches and strategies used with hard-to-engage sites. Spread efforts should include a "flexible, tailored approach" for this highly variable group, especially as implementation science is looking to expand its impact in routine care settings.

Knowledge mobilization in bridging patient-practitioner-researcher boundaries: A systematic integrative review

AIM

To review when, how, and in what context knowledge mobilization (KMb) has crossed patient-practitioner-researcher boundaries.

BACKGROUND

KMb is essential in contemporary health care, yet little is known about how patients are engaged.

DESIGN

Integrative review.

DATA SOURCES

Ten academic databases and grey literature.

REVIEW METHODS

We followed integrative review methodology to identify publications from 2006-2019 which contributed to understanding of cross-boundary KMb. We extracted data using a bespoke spreadsheet and the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) framework. We used meta-summary to organize key findings.

RESULTS

Thirty-three papers collectively provide new insights into 'when' and 'how' KMb has crossed patient-researcher-practitioner boundaries and the impact this has achieved. Knowledge is mobilized to improve care, promote health, or prevent ill health. Most studies focus on creating or re-shaping knowledge to make it more useful. Knowledge is mobilized in small community groups, in larger networks, and intervention studies. Finding the right people to engage in activities is crucial, as activities can be demanding and time-consuming. Devolving power to communities and using local people to move knowledge can be effective. Few studies report definitive outcomes of KMb.

CONCLUSION

Cross-boundary KMb can and does produce new and shared knowledge for health care. Positive outcomes can be achieved using diverse public engagement strategies. KMb process and theory is an emerging discipline, further research is needed on effective cross-boundary working and on measuring the impact of KMb.

IMPACT

This review provides new and nuanced understandings of how KMb theory has been used to bridge patient-researcher-practitioner boundaries. We have assessed 'how', 'when', and in what context patients, practitioners and researchers have attempted to mobilize knowledge and identified impact. We have developed a knowledge base about good practice and what can and potentially should be avoided in cross-boundary KMb.

State of Science: Bridging the Science-Practice Gap in Aging, Dementia and Mental Health

The workforce available to care for older adults has not kept pace with the need. In response to workforce limitations and the growing complexity of healthcare, scientists have tested new models of care that redesign clinical practice. This article describes why new models of care in aging, dementia, and mental health diffuse inadequately into the healthcare systems and communities where they might benefit older adults. We review a general framework for the diffusion of innovations and highlight the importance of other features of innovations that deter or facilitate diffusion. Although scientists often focus on generating evidence-based innovations, end-users apply their own criteria to determine an innovation's value. In 1962, Rogers suggested six features of an innovation that facilitate or deter diffusion suggested: relative advantage, compatibility with the existing environment, ease or difficulty of implementation, trial-ability or ability to "test drive", adaptability, and observed effectiveness. We describe examples of models of care in aging, dementia and mental health that enjoy a modicum of diffusion into practice and place the features of these models in the context of deterrents and facilitators for diffusion. Developers of models of care in aging, dementia, and mental health typically fail to incorporate the complexities of health systems, the barriers to diffusion, and the role of emotion into design considerations of new models. We describe agile implementation as a strategy to facilitate the speed and scale of diffusion in the setting of complex adaptive systems, social networks, and dynamic macroenvironments.

Supporting breast cancer screening decisions for caregivers of older women with dementia: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRD) impact a woman's life expectancy and her ability to participate in medical decision-making about breast cancer screening, necessitating the involvement of family caregivers. Making decisions about mammography screening for women with ADRD is stressful. There are no data that suggest that breast cancer screening helps women with ADRD live longer or better. Decision aids may improve the quality of decision-making about mammography for ADRD patients and may inform family caregivers about the risks, benefits, and need for decision-making around mammography screening.

METHODS/DESIGN

The Decisions about Cancer Screening in Alzheimer's Disease (DECAD) trial, a randomized controlled clinical trial, will enroll 426 dyads of older women with ADRD (≥75 years) and a family caregiver from clinics and primary-care practices in Indiana to test a novel, evidence-based decision aid. This decision aid includes information about the impact of ADRD on life expectancy, the benefit of mammograms, and the impact on the quality of life for older women with ADRD. Dyads will be randomized to receive the decision aid or active control information about home safety. This trial will examine the effect on the caregiver's decisional conflict (primary outcome) and the caregiver's decision-making self-efficacy (secondary outcome). A second follow-up at 15 months will include a brief, semi-structured interview with the caregiver regarding the patient's experience with mammograms and decision-making about mammograms. At the same time, a review of the patient's electronic medical record (EMR) will look at discussions about mammography with their primary-care physician and mammogram orders, receipt, results, and burden (e.g., additional diagnostic procedures due to false-positive results, identification of an abnormality on the screening exam but further work-up declined, and identification of a clinically unimportant cancer). A third follow-up at 24 months will extract EMR data on mammogram orders, occurrences, results, and the burden of mammograms.

DISCUSSION

We hypothesize that caregivers who receive the decision aid will have lower levels of decisional conflict and higher levels of decision-making self-efficacy compared to the control group. We also hypothesize that the DECAD decision aid will reduce mammography use among older women with ADRD.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinical Trials Register, NCT03282097 . Registered on 13 September 2017.

Patient engagement in research related to dementia: A scoping review

Patient 'engagement' or 'involvement' in health research broadly refers to including people with lived experience (i.e. individuals with personal experience of a health issue and their friends, family and caregivers or carers) in the research process. Although previous reviews have systematically summarized approaches to patient engagement in research, it is unclear whether and how engagement activities have been implemented or adapted for research related to dementia. We conducted a scoping review to describe the extent and nature of patient engagement approaches that have been used to involve persons with dementia and their care partners in research. We then summarized the reported barriers, enablers, and impacts of this engagement. Fifty-four research articles were included in the review and almost all were published after 2010. Persons with dementia and their care partners have been engaged in diverse phases of the research process. The majority of engagement involved both persons with dementia and care partners. Barriers and enablers to engagement included those identified for general patient engagement in research, but some more specific to engaging persons with dementia and their care partners were also reported. Very few studies assessed the impact of patient engagement. While the arguments for patient engagement in research are compelling, research to demonstrate the impact - on the research process and outcomes as well as on persons with dementia, care partners, researchers, research institutions and society - is still needed.

The intensive care delirium research agenda: a multinational, interprofessional perspective

Delirium, a prevalent organ dysfunction in critically ill patients, is independently associated with increased morbidity. This last decade has witnessed an exponential growth in delirium research in hospitalized patients, including those critically ill, and this research has highlighted that delirium needs to be better understood mechanistically to help foster research that will ultimately lead to its prevention and treatment. In this invited, evidence-based paper, a multinational and interprofessional group of clinicians and researchers from within the fields of critical care medicine, psychiatry, pediatrics, anesthesiology, geriatrics, surgery, neurology, nursing, pharmacy, and the neurosciences sought to address five questions: (1) What is the current standard of care in managing ICU delirium? (2) What have been the major recent advances in delirium research and care? (3) What are the common delirium beliefs that have been challenged by recent trials? (4) What are the remaining areas of uncertainty in delirium research? (5) What are some of the top study areas/trials to be done in the next 10 years? Herein, we briefly review the epidemiology of delirium, the current best practices for management of critically ill patients at risk for delirium or experiencing delirium, identify recent advances in our understanding of delirium as well as gaps in knowledge, and discuss research opportunities and barriers to implementation, with the goal of promoting an integrated research agenda.

The Indiana University Center for Healthcare Innovation and Implementation Science: Bridging healthcare research and delivery to build a learning healthcare system

In the United States, it is estimated that 75,000 deaths every year could be averted if the healthcare system implemented high quality care more effectively and efficiently. Patient harm in the hospital occurs as a consequence of inadequate procedures, medications and other therapies, nosocomial infections, diagnostic evaluations and patient falls. Implementation science, a new emerging field in healthcare, is the development and study of methods and tools aimed at enhancing the implementation of new discoveries and evidence into daily healthcare delivery. The Indiana University Center for Healthcare Innovation and Implementation Science (IU-CHIIS) was launched in September 2013 with the mission to use implementation science and innovation to produce great-quality, patient-centered and cost-efficient healthcare delivery solutions for the United States of America. Within the first 24 months of its initiation, the IU-CHIIS successfully scaled up an evidence-based collaborative care model for people with dementia and/or depression, successfully expanded the Accountable Care Unit model positively impacting the efficiency and quality of care, created the first Certificate in Innovation and Implementation Science in the US and secured funding from National Institutes of Health to investigate innovations in dementia care. This article summarizes the establishment of the IU-CHIIS, its impact and outcomes and the lessons learned during the journey.

Characterization of hepatic enzyme activity in older adults with dementia: potential impact on personalizing pharmacotherapy

Objective

To determine the frequency of pharmacogenomic variants and concurrent medications that may alter the efficacy and tolerability of acetylcholinesterase inhibitors (AChEIs).

Materials and methods

A multisite cross-sectional study was carried out across four memory care practices in the greater Indianapolis area. Participants were adults aged 65 years and older with a diagnosis of probable or possible Alzheimer’s disease (AD) (n=105). Blood samples and self-reported medication data were collected. Since two of the three AChEIs are metabolized by cytochrome P450 (CYP)-2D6, we determined the frequency of functional genetic variants in the CYP2D6 gene and calculated their predicted CYP2D6-activity scores. Concurrent medication data were collected from self-reported medication surveys, and their predicted effect on the pharmacokinetics of AChEIs was determined based on their known effects on CYP2D6 and CYP3A4/5 enzyme activities.

Results

Among the 105 subjects enrolled, 72% were female and 36% were African American. Subjects had a mean age of 79.6 years. The population used a mean of eight medications per day (prescription and nonprescription). The CYP2D6 activity score frequencies were 0 (3.8%), 0.5 (4.8%), 1.0 (36.2%), 1.5–2.0 (51.4%), and >2.0 (3.8%). Nineteen subjects (18.1%) used a medication considered a strong or moderate inhibitor of CYP2D6, and eight subjects (7.6%) used a medication considered a strong or moderate inhibitor of CYP3A4/5. In total, 28.6% of the study population was predicted to have reduced activity of the CYP2D6 or CYP3A4/5 enzymes due to either genetic variants or concomitant medications.

Conclusion

Both pharmacogenetic variants and concurrent drug therapies that are predicted to alter the pharmacokinetics of AChEIs should be evaluated in older adults with AD. Pharmacogenetic and drug-interaction data may help personalize AD therapy and increase adherence by improving tolerability.

Medication adherence and tolerability of Alzheimer's disease medications: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background

The class of acetylcholinesterase inhibitors (ChEI), including donepezil, rivastigmine, and galantamine, have similar efficacy profiles in patients with mild to moderate Alzheimer’s disease (AD). However, few studies have evaluated adherence to these agents. We sought to prospectively capture the rates and reasons for nonadherence to ChEI and determine factors influencing tolerability and adherence.

Methods/design

We designed a pragmatic randomized clinical trial to evaluate the adherence to ChEIs among older adults with AD. Participants include AD patients receiving care within memory care practices in the greater Indianapolis area. Participants will be followed at 6-week intervals up to 18 weeks to measure the primary outcome of ChEI discontinuation and adherence rates and secondary outcomes of behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia. The primary outcome will be assessed through two methods, a telephone interview of an informal caregiver and electronic medical record data captured from each healthcare system through a regional health information exchange. The secondary outcome will be measured by the Healthy Aging Brain Care Monitor and the Neuropsychiatric Inventory. In addition, the trial will conduct an exploratory evaluation of the pharmacogenomic signatures for the efficacy and the adverse effect responses to ChEIs. We hypothesized that patient-specific factors, including pharmacogenomics and pharmacokinetic characteristics, may influence the study outcomes.

Discussion

This pragmatic trial will engage a diverse population from multiple memory care practices to evaluate the adherence to and tolerability of ChEIs in a real world setting. Engaging participants from multiple healthcare systems connected through a health information exchange will capture valuable clinical and non-clinical influences on the patterns of utilization and tolerability of a class of medications with a high rate of discontinuation.

Trial Registration

Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT01362686