Search

Introduction Collabo RATE is a brief patient survey focused on shared decision making. This paper aims to (i) provide insight on facilitators and challenges to implementing a real-time patient survey and (ii) evaluate Collabo RATE scores and response rates across multiple clinical settings with varied patient populations. Method All adult patients at three United States primary care practices were eligible to complete Collabo RATE post-visit. To inform key learnings, we aggregated all mentions of unanticipated decisions, problems and administration errors from field notes and email communications. Mixed-effects logistic regression evaluated the impact of site, clinician, patient age and patient gender on the Collabo RATE score. Results While Collabo RATE score increased only slightly with increasing patient age ( OR 1.018, 95% CI 1.014-1.021), female patient gender was associated with significantly higher Collabo RATE scores ( OR 1.224, 95% CI 1.073-1.397). Clinician also predicts Collabo RATE score (random effect variance 0.146). Site-specific factors such as clinical workflow and checkout procedures play a key role in successful in-clinic implementation and are significantly related to Collabo RATE scores, with Site 3 scoring significantly higher than Site 1 ( OR 1.759, 95% CI 1.216 to 2.545) or Site 2 (z=−2.71, 95% CI −1.114 to −0.178). Discussion This study demonstrates that Collabo RATE can be used in diverse primary care settings. A clinic's workflow plays a crucial role in implementation. Patient experience measurement risks becoming a burden to both patients and administrators. Episodic use of short measurement tools could reduce this burden. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This section offers updates related to civic affairs in the U.S. as of June 1994. There has been a civic journalism boom in the country as evidenced by an increase in the number of papers and broadcasters that have adopted community debates. A formal organization is being established by Los Angeles County, California to support money-making ventures. A decision was made by the Massachusetts Department of Social Services (DSS) to privatize its revenue-generating operation to recover lost federal reimbursement dollars.

Despite more than 30 years of public health programs to reduce tobacco use, smoking is still the leading preventable cause of death in the United States. In response to this continuing epidemic, voters in California (1988), Massachusetts (1992), Arizona (1994), and Oregon (19%) approved ballot initiatives that established state- wide tobacco control programs funded by cigarette excise tax revenues. Evaluating these innovative public health interventions is important, both to improve existing programs and to guide other states in developing and implementing similar interventions. In this paper we describe the methods being used to evaluate the statewide anti-tobacco campaigns in California and Massachusetts, and review the findings of process and outcome evaluations of both programs. Our review suggests that both programs have had a substantial impact on the public `s health by reducing cigarette consumption and stimulating the development of policies to reduce environmental tobacco smoke exposure. However, it does not appear that either program has reduced smoking initiation among adolescents. Our evaluation suggests three problems in pm gram implementation that future anti-tobacco campaigns must avoid in order to produce long-term, sustained effects: (1) the gradual erosion of program funding by the state legislatures and governors; (2) the lack of a consistent, supportive constituency within state government and (3) inconsistency in campaign themes, messages, and programs. We conclude by offering recommendations to correct these problems so that state- wide cigarette-tax -funded anti-tobacco campaigns can realize their potential to become one of the most effective public health interventions available. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]