Search

Abstract Background This study aimed to capture the implementation process of the ALIGN Study, (An individualized Pain Plan with Patient and Provider Access for Emergency Department care of Sickle Cell Disease). ALIGN aimed to embed Individualized Pain Plans in the electronic health record (E-IPP) and provide access to the plan for both adult patients with sickle cell disease (SCD) and emergency department providers when a person with SCD comes to the emergency department in vaso-occlusive crises. Methods Semi-structured interviews were conducted with research teams from the 8 participating sites from the ALIGN study. Seventeen participants (principal investigators and study coordinators) shared their perspectives about the implementation of ALIGN in their sites. Data were analyzed in three phases using open coding steps adapted from grounded theory and qualitative content analysis. Results A total of seven overarching themes were identified: (1) the E-IPP structure (location and upkeep) and collaboration with the informatics team, (2) the role of ED champion, (3) the role of research coordinators, (4) research team communication, and communication between research team and clinical team, (5) challenges with the study protocol, (6) provider feedback: addressing over-utilizers, patient mistrust, and the positive feedback about the intervention, and (7) COVID-19 and its effects on study implementation. Conclusions Findings from this study contribute to learning how to implement E-IPPs for adult patients with SCD in ED. The study findings highlight the importance of early engagement with different team members, a champion from the emergency department, study coordinators with different skills and enhancement of communication and trust among team members. Further recommendations are outlined for hospitals aiming to implement E-IPP for patients with SCD in ED.

BackgroundHydroxyurea is an evidence-based disease-modifying therapy for sickle cell disease (SCD) but is underutilized. The Integration of Mobile Health into Sickle Cell Disease Care to Increase Hydroxyurea Utilization (meSH) multicenter study leveraged mHealth to deliver targeted interventions to patients and providers. SCD studies often underenroll; and recruitment strategies in the SCD population are not widely studied. Unanticipated events can negatively impact enrollment, making it important to study strategies that ensure adequate study accrual. ObjectiveThe goal of this study was to evaluate enrollment barriers and the impact of modified recruitment strategies among patients and providers in the meSH study in response to a global emergency. MethodsRecruitment was anticipated to last 2 months for providers and 6 months for patients. The recruitment strategies used with patients and providers, new recruitment strategies, and recruitment rates were captured and compared. To document recruitment adaptations and their reasons, study staff responsible for recruitment completed an open-ended 9-item questionnaire eliciting challenges to recruitment and strategies used. Themes were extrapolated using thematic content analysis. ResultsTotal enrollment across the 7 sites included 89 providers and 293 patients. The study acceptance rate was 85.5% (382/447) for both patients and providers. The reasons patients declined participation were most frequently a lack of time and interest in research, while providers mostly declined because of self-perceived high levels of SCD expertise, believing they did not need the intervention. Initially, recruitment involved an in-person invitation to participate during clinic visits (patients), staff meetings (providers), or within the office (providers). We identified several important recruitment challenges, including (1) lack of interest in research, (2) lack of human resources, (3) unavailable physical space for recruitment activities, and (4) lack of documentation to verify eligibility. Adaptive strategies were crucial to alleviate enrollment disruptions due to the COVID-19 pandemic. These included remote approaching and consenting (eg, telehealth, email, and telephone) for patients and providers. Additionally, for patients, recruitment was enriched by simplification of enrollment procedures (eg, directly approaching patients without a referral from the provider) and a multitouch method (ie, warm introductions with flyers, texts, and patient portal messages). We found that patient recruitment rates were similar between in-person and adapted (virtual with multitouch) approaches (167/200, 83.5% and 126/143, 88.1%, respectively; P=.23). However, for providers, recruitment was significantly higher for in-person vs remote recruitment (48/50, 96% and 41/54, 76%, respectively, P

Abstract Background The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the American Academy of Pediatrics recommend that symptomatic children remain home and get tested to identify potential coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases. As the pandemic moves into a new phase, approaches to differentiate symptoms of COVID-19 versus other childhood infections can inform exclusion policies and potentially prevent future unnecessary missed school days. Methods Retrospective analysis of standardized symptom and exposure screens in symptomatic children 0–18 years tested for SARS-CoV-2 at three outpatient sites April to November 2020. Likelihood ratios (LR), number needed to screen to identify one COVID-19 case, and estimated missed school days were calculated. Results Of children studied (N = 2,167), 88.9% tested negative. Self-reported exposure to COVID-19 was the only factor that statistically significantly increased the likelihood of a positive test for all ages (Positive LR, 5–18 year olds: 5.26, 95% confidence interval (CI): 4.37–6.33; 0–4 year olds: 5.87, 95% CI: 4.67–7.38). Across ages 0–18, nasal congestion/rhinorrhea, sore throat, abdominal pain, and nausea/vomiting/diarrhea were commonly reported, and were either not associated or had decreased association with testing positive for COVID-19. The number of school days missed to identify one case of COVID-19 ranged from 19 to 48 across those common symptoms. Conclusions We present an approach for identifying symptoms that are non-specific to COVID-19, for which exclusion would likely lead to limited impact on school safety but contribute to school-days missed. As variants and symptoms evolve, students and schools could benefit from reconsideration of exclusion and testing policies for non-specific symptoms, while maintaining testing for those who were exposed.