Search

Background and Importance: Challenges in healthcare policy and practice have stimulated interest in dissemination and implementation science. The Institute of Medicine Committee on the Clinical Translational Science Award (CTSA) program recommended expanding the CTSA program's investment and activity in this domain. Guidance is needed to facilitate successful growth of DII science infrastructure, activity and impacts. Objectives: Several CTSAs in Southern California collaborated to identify and respond to local challenges and opportunities to expand dissemination, implementation and improvement research by strengthening capacity and relationships between DII researchers and community, health system, and population health partners. Main outcomes: Planning and outreach by the Southern California CTSAs increased awareness and interest in DII research and generated recommendations for growth. Recommendations include: increasing strong partnerships with healthcare and population health systems to guide policy research agendas and collaborative DII science; promoting multi-sector partnerships that involve researchers and delivery systems throughout DII processes; bringing together multiple disciplines; and addressing national and international barriers as well as opportunities in DII science. Implications: CTSAs through regional collaboration can increase their contributions to improved community health via skill-building, partnership development and enhanced outreach to local healthcare and public health agencies and delivery systems.

ObjectiveTo compare rates of cataract extraction in 2 prepaid health settings and in traditional fee-for-service (FFS) settings.DesignA cross-sectional analysis using 1993 health maintenance organization (HMO) Medicare claims and encounter files, the Health Care Financing Administration (HCFA) 5% Medicare Part B provider/supplier file, and the HCFA October 1992 100% Medicare population file.SettingSouthern California Medicare FFS settings and the staff-model and independent practice association (IPA) plans of a large California HMO.Patients1993 Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 years and older. The study included 43387 staff-model HMO enrollees, 19050 IPA enrollees, and 47 150 FFS beneficiaries (a 5% sample of all Southern California FFS beneficiaries).Main outcome measureAge and risk-factor adjusted rates of cataract extraction per 1000 beneficiary-years.ResultsAfter controlling for age, sex, and diabetes mellitus status, FFS beneficiaries were twice as likely to undergo cataract extraction as were prepaid beneficiaries (P

BACKGROUND: Patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) provide an important opportunity for understanding care of patients with a serious chronic condition. OBJECTIVES: We sought to characterize the complexity of care for patients with RA, including metrics describing the patient, the disease, and use of the health care system across time and place. METHODS: We undertook a prospective cohort study of 568 community-dwelling patients with RA by using observational data from clinically detailed telephone interviews at baseline and 2 years later in addition to medical record abstraction. Health status, comorbidity, use of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs, visits, providers, provider types, encounter settings, and the discontinuity between patients and providers were studied. RESULTS: Within a 12-month window, 568 patients had 8686 outpatient encounters with the health care system with a mean of 3.41 unique providers per patient associated with a mean of 5 primary care and 6 rheumatologist visits. Half did not see a primary care physician, and 20% did not see a rheumatologist during 6-month periods despite their use of potentially toxic drugs, a mean of 4 comorbidities and progressive RA. Over the course of 24 months, 29% of patients changed their primary care provider, and 15% changed their rheumatologist. Patients were moderately impaired with mean SF-12 physical component score 37 (SD, 9). CONCLUSION: Patients with RA have frequent encounters with multiple providers and also frequent discontinuity of care. Recognizing the complexity of the care of patients with a chronic disease across multiple dimensions provides an opportunity to better understand challenges and opportunities in delivering high quality care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Adherence to dementia guidelines is poor despite evidence that some guideline recommendations can improve symptoms and delay institutionalization of patients.Objective: To test the effectiveness of a dementia guideline-based disease management program on quality of care and outcomes for patients with dementia.Design: Clinic-level, cluster randomized, controlled trial.Setting: 3 health care organizations collaborating with 3 community agencies in southern California.Participants: 18 primary care clinics and 408 patients with dementia age 65 years or older paired with 408 informal caregivers.Intervention: Disease management program led by care managers and provided to 238 patient-caregiver pairs at 9 intervention clinics for more than 12 months.Measurements: Adherence to 23 guideline recommendations (primary outcome) and receipt of community resources and patient and caregiver health and quality-of-care measures (secondary outcomes).Results: The mean percentage of per-patient guideline recommendations to which care was adherent was significantly higher in the intervention group than in the usual care group (63.9% vs. 32.9%, respectively; adjusted difference, 30.1% [95% CI, 25.2% to 34.9%]; P < 0.001). Participants who received the intervention had higher care quality on 21 of 23 guidelines (P < or = 0.013 for all), and higher proportions received community agency assistance (P < or = 0.03) than those who received usual care. Patient health-related quality of life, overall quality of patient care, caregiving quality, social support, and level of unmet caregiving assistance needs were better for participants in the intervention group than for those in the usual care group (P < 0.05 for all). Caregiver health-related quality of life did not differ between the 2 groups.Limitations: Participants were well-educated, were predominantly white, had a usual source of care, and were not institutionalized. Generalizability to other patients and geographic regions is unknown. Also, costs of a care management program under fee-for-service reimbursement may impede adoption.Conclusions: A dementia guideline-based disease management program led to substantial improvements in quality of care for patients with dementia. Current Controlled Trials identifier: ISRCTN72577751. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The growing aging population and concerns about quality health care for people with dementia and other chronic illnesses have stimulated numerous efforts targeting health care providers. The 'Partnering with Your Doctor' program is the first to explore the efficacy of a consumer 'self-management' approach to improving dementia health care. The program, consisting of a workshop and accompanying informational booklet available in English and Spanish, was conducted across California. Evaluation results indicated that participants were satisfied with the program, learned new actions to take before and during doctor visits, and experienced increased confidence in their ability to work effectively with doctors to improve the quality of care received. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The U.S. Veterans Health Administration (VHA)'s Quality Enhancement Research Initiative (QUERI) is an innovative integration of health services research, policy, and clinical care delivery designed to improve the quality, outcomes, and efficiency of VHA health care through the identification and implementation of evidence-based practices in routine care settings. A total of eight condition-specific QUERI centers are currently in operation, each pursuing an integrated portfolio of activities designed to identify and correct gaps in clinical quality and performance and to derive generalizable scientific knowledge regarding quality improvement processes and methods and their effectiveness. This overview article describes QUERI's mission, history, structure, and activities and provides a brief summary of key findings and impacts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

National smoking cessation guidelines include recommended strategies for providers and health care organizations, but they offer little guidance on how to structure care. We conducted a cross-sectional survey at 40 Veterans Health Administration facilities, to describe the structure of smoking cessation care, to assess adherence to national guidelines, and to assess facilities' preferred approach to providing smoking cessation treatment. We categorized sites as those using a primary care approach (most smokers treated by the primary care provider) versus a specialty approach (medication restricted to smoking cessation clinics, to which most patients were referred). Nearly all sites reported systematic screening for smoking and counseling of smokers, usually by both nursing staff members and the primary care provider. Most sites used a specialty approach, restricting medication access to smokers attending a cessation program. Future research should evaluate whether this approach provides adequate access and responsiveness to patient preferences for the full population of smokers in primary care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: In 2018, the US Preventive Services Task Force updated cervical cancer screening recommendations to allow for screening every 5 years with primary human papillomavirus (HPV) testing in combination with cytology (cotesting) or every 5 years with primary HPV screening alone. Despite these changes, the uptake of primary HPV screening has been lower than expected. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the patient perspective of an integrated health system transition from cotesting to primary HPV testing among a 30- to 65-year-old cohort., Methods: Semistructured phone interviews were conducted from July to December 2023 at Kaiser Permanente Colorado with 16 members aged 30-65 years. Interviews asked about reactions to the forthcoming change in cervical cancer screening, personal concern about cervical cancer risk, feedback on patient-facing education materials, and preference on communication timing and modality., Results: Participants reported concerns about cervical cancer screening intervals, primarily the reduction in frequency leading to underdiagnosis of sexually transmitted infections (STIs). Participants recommended defining the rationale for the change to primary HPV testing in the patient education materials. Participants preferred communication about the change in-clinic between practitioner and patient., Discussion: The interviews identified key themes, including the differentiation between cervical cancer and STI screening methodologies, potential underdiagnosis of STI and cervical cancer, and the rationale supporting primary HPV testing and associated screening intervals., Conclusion: These qualitative findings can inform health systems of potential patient concerns to address when considering the transition from cotesting every 3 years to primary HPV testing every 5 years for cervical cancer screening.

Background: Implementation science scholars have made significant progress identifying factors that enable or obstruct the implementation of evidence-based interventions, and testing strategies that may modify those factors. However, little research sheds light on how or why strategies work, in what contexts, and for whom. Studying implementation mechanisms-the processes responsible for change-is crucial for advancing the field of implementation science and enhancing its value in facilitating equitable policy and practice change. The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality funded a conference series to achieve two aims: (1) develop a research agenda on implementation mechanisms, and (2) actively disseminate the research agenda to research, policy, and practice audiences. This article presents the resulting research agenda, including priorities and actions to encourage its execution., Method: Building on prior concept mapping work, in a semi-structured, 3-day, in-person working meeting, 23 US-based researchers used a modified nominal group process to generate priorities and actions for addressing challenges to studying implementation mechanisms. During each of the three 120-min sessions, small groups responded to the prompt: "What actions need to be taken to move this research forward?" The groups brainstormed actions, which were then shared with the full group and discussed with the support of facilitators trained in structured group processes. Facilitators grouped critical and novel ideas into themes. Attendees voted on six themes they prioritized to discuss in a fourth, 120-min session, during which small groups operationalized prioritized actions. Subsequently, all ideas were collated, combined, and revised for clarity by a subset of the authorship team., Results: From this multistep process, 150 actions emerged across 10 priority areas, which together constitute the research agenda. Actions included discrete activities, projects, or products, and ways to shift how research is conducted to strengthen the study of implementation mechanisms., Conclusions: This research agenda elevates actions to guide the selection, design, and evaluation of implementation mechanisms. By delineating recommended actions to address the challenges of studying implementation mechanisms, this research agenda facilitates expanding the field of implementation science, beyond studying what works to how and why strategies work, in what contexts, for whom, and with which interventions., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Current clinical guidelines recommended primary human papillomavirus (HPV) screening for cervical cancer testing. Previous studies reported patient-level barriers (e.g., limited knowledge and attachment to Pap test) that may hinder wide adoption of primary HPV screening. We assessed these women-level factors following the implementation of primary HPV screening (July 2020) at Kaiser Permanente Southern California (KPSC). Methods: We administered a patient survey (mail and on-line) to female KPSC members aged 30-65 years who received primary HPV screening between October and December 2020. Those who preferred English vs. Spanish language were sampled separately. The survey included domains on knowledge about HPV and HPV screening, awareness of screening guidelines, and attitudes about HPV testing. Demographic data were collected using electronic health records. We used weighted multivariable logistic and modified Poisson regressions for associations between language preference and survey responses. Results: In total, 3,009 surveys were returned (38.0% response rate). Few women (7.0%) found HPV testing as an acceptable screening method. The majority of women (92.2%) remained unaware that HPV testing can replace Pap test for screening. The Pap test was the most preferred screening approach for 33.2% Spanish-speaking women vs. 19.9% English-speaking women. Only 20.6% knew that women aged 30-65 years can be screened every 5 years with cotest or primary HPV screening. Most women (96.4%) did not perceive stigma about taking the HPV test. Conclusion: Proactive patient education will help improve women's knowledge about primary HPV screening, which may facilitate its implementation in additional health care settings.

Introduction: This article provides an overview of presentations and discussions from the inaugural Healthcare Delivery Science: Innovation and Partnerships for Health Equity Research (DESCIPHER) Symposium., Methods: The symposium brought together esteemed experts from various disciplines to explore models for translating evidence-based interventions into practice., Results: The symposium highlighted the importance of disruptive innovation in healthcare, the need for multi-stakeholder engagement, and the significance of family and community involvement in healthcare interventions., Conclusions: The article concluded with a call to action for advancing healthcare delivery science to achieve health equity., Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest., (© 2024 The Author(s). Learning Health Systems published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of University of Michigan.)

Background: It is challenging to identify and understand the specific mechanisms through which an implementation strategy affects implementation outcomes, as implementation happens in the context of complex, multi-level systems. These systems and the mechanisms within each level have their own dynamic environments that change frequently. For instance, sequencing may matter in that a mechanism may only be activated indirectly by a strategy through another mechanism. The dosage or strength of a mechanism may vary over time or across different health care system levels. To elucidate the mechanisms relevant to successful implementation amidst this complexity, systems analysis methods are needed to model and manage complexity., Methods: The fields of systems engineering and systems science offer methods-which we refer to as systems analysis methods-to help explain the interdependent relationships between and within systems, as well as dynamic changes to systems over time. When applied to studying implementation mechanisms, systems analysis methods can help (i) better identify and manage unknown conditions that may or may not activate mechanisms (both expected mechanisms targeted by a strategy and unexpected mechanisms that the methods help detect) and (ii) flexibly guide strategy adaptations to address contextual influences that emerge after the strategy is selected and used., Results: In this paper, we delineate a structured approach to applying systems analysis methods for examining implementation mechanisms. The approach includes explicit steps for selecting, tailoring, and evaluating an implementation strategy regarding the mechanisms that the strategy is initially hypothesized to activate, as well as additional mechanisms that are identified through the steps. We illustrate the approach using a case example. We then discuss the strengths and limitations of this approach, as well as when these steps might be most appropriate, and suggest work to further the contributions of systems analysis methods to implementation mechanisms research., Conclusions: Our approach to applying systems analysis methods can encourage more mechanisms research efforts to consider these methods and in turn fuel both (i) rigorous comparisons of these methods to alternative mechanisms research approaches and (ii) an active discourse across the field to better delineate when these methods are appropriate for advancing mechanisms-related knowledge., (© 2023. BioMed Central Ltd.)

Generating actionable research findings quickly and efficiently is critical for improving the delivery of cancer-related care and outcomes. To address this issue, the National Cancer Institute convened subject matter experts, researchers, clinicians, and patients for a 2-day virtual meeting in February 2022. The purpose of this meeting was to identify how rapid cycle interventional research methods can be used to generate findings useful in improving routine clinical practice. The meeting yielded an initial conceptualization of rapid cycle interventional research as being comprised of 6 key elements: use of iterative study designs; reliance on proximal primary outcomes; early and continued engagement with community and clinical partners; use of existing data sources to measure primary outcomes; facilitative features of the study setting and context; and consideration of appropriate rigor relative to intended use of findings. The meeting also identified the types of study designs that can be leveraged to conduct rapid cycle interventional research and provided examples of these; considered this approach from the perspective of key partners; described the clinical and data infrastructure, research resources, and key collaborations needed to support this work; identified research topics best addressed using this approach; and considered needed methodological advances. The National Cancer Institute is committed to exploring opportunities to encourage further development and application of this research approach as a means for better promoting improvements in the delivery of cancer-related care., (Published by Oxford University Press 2023.)

Background: Limited guidance exists regarding implementation strategies that best facilitate cancer screening practice substitution and achieve optimal stakeholder-centered outcomes. Here we describe the protocol for a randomized pragmatic trial comparing two implementation strategies to facilitate substitution of primary HPV screening for Pap and HPV co-testing to perform routine cervical cancer screening of women aged 30-65 years at Kaiser Permanente Southern California (KPSC)., Methods: Twelve service areas within KPSC will be randomized to a "centrally-administered system-wide implementation + local-tailored implementation" strategy or a "centrally-administered system-wide implementation only" strategy. The centrally-administered strategy comprises clinician and staff educational activities. Sites in the local-tailored arm will then conduct a structured local needs assessment followed by site-specific selection and deployment of implementation interventions. Surveys and interviews will be conducted among women and providers from the primary care and ob/gyn departments prior to the system-wide transition, shortly after the transition, and after the completion of local-tailored interventions. A stakeholder advisory committee will assist with study design, defining stakeholder-centered outcomes, and developing data collection tools., Results: The primary outcome of interest is uptake of primary HPV screening. Secondary provider-centered outcomes include provider knowledge, delivery of patient education, satisfaction with the practice substitution process, and resistance to primary HPV screening. Secondary patient-centered outcomes include patient knowledge, stigma, and satisfaction with the screening process. Intervention fidelity will also be measured via surveys., Conclusions: Findings from this study will help inform future use of a local-tailored implementation strategy for adopting primary HPV screening at large health care systems. Findings may also be applicable to other types of practice substitution., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

This article provides new reflections and recommendations from authors of the initial effectiveness-implementation hybrid study manuscript and additional experts in their conceptualization and application. Given the widespread and continued use of hybrid studies, critical appraisals are necessary. The article offers reflections across five conceptual and methodological areas. It begins with the recommendation to replace the term "design" in favor of "study." The use of the term "design" and the explicit focus on trial methodology in the original paper created confusion. The essence of hybrid studies is combining research questions concerning intervention effectiveness and implementation within the same study, and this can and should be achieved by applying a full range of research designs. Supporting this recommendation, the article then offers guidance on selecting a hybrid study type based on evidentiary and contextual information and stakeholder concerns/preferences. A series of questions are presented that have been designed to help investigators select the most appropriate hybrid type for their study situation. The article also provides a critique on the hybrid 1-2-3 typology and offers reflections on when and how to use the typology moving forward. Further, the article offers recommendations on research designs that align with each hybrid study type. Lastly, the article offers thoughts on how to integrate costs analyses into hybrid studies., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Curran, Landes, McBain, Pyne, Smith, Fernandez, Chambers and Mittman.)

Our objective was to identify the influencing factors associated with the implementation of the INTERACT (Interventions to Reduce Acute Care Transfers) Quality Improvement program within a national healthcare system. INTERACT focuses on early identification and management of changes in residents' condition leading to a reduction in potentially preventable hospital transfers. The Consolidated Framework was used to evaluate implementation data from eight VA Community Living Centers. Qualitative implementation data suggest two influencing Consolidated Framework domains had a strong influence: 1) key attributes of the intervention (e.g., adaptability or complexity) and 2) internal organizational factors (e.g., culture or compatibility). Using the Consolidated Framework can assist future adaptations to this and other complex quality improvement initiatives.

Background: Communities of Practice (CoPs) are a promising approach to facilitate the implementation of evidence-based practices (EBPs) to improve care for chronic conditions like heart failure (HF). CoPs involve a complex process of acquiring and converting both explicit and tacit knowledge into clinical activities. This study describes the conceptualization, creation, capacity-building and dissemination of a CoP sustained over 9 years, and evaluates its value and impact on EBP., Methods: In July 2006, a CoP called the Heart Failure Provider Network (HF Network) was established within the United States Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) with the overarching goal of improving the quality of care for HF patients. We assessed (formative) the HF Network in terms of its various activities (inputs) and proximal impacts (mediators) at the individual level, and its distal impacts (outcomes) at the site level including implementation of new/improved EBPs at the systemwide level., Results: The HF Network membership grew steadily over the 9 years. The CoP has involved a total of 1341 multidisciplinary and multilevel members at all 144 VA Health Care Systems (sites). Most members were practising clinicians (n = 891, 66.4%), followed by administrators (n = 342, 25.5%), researchers (n = 70, 5.2%) and others (n = 38, 2.8%). Participation was assessed to be "active" for 70.6% versus "passive" for 29.4% of members. The distribution of active members (clinicians 64.7%, administrators 21.6%) was similar to the distribution of overall membership., Conclusions: Survey respondents perceived the HF Network as useful in terms of its varied activities and resources relevant for patient care. Strong evidence shows that these members, particularly those who considered themselves influential in improving quality of care, noted multiple benefits of membership, which included confirmation of their own clinical practices, evidence-based changes to their practice and help in understanding facilitators and barriers in setting up or running HF clinics and other programmes. Such CoPs have strong impacts on the quality of care being delivered for both mandated and non-mandated initiatives., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Background: High-risk medication dispenses to patients with a prior fall or hip fracture represent a potentially dangerous disease-drug interaction among older adults. The research team quantified the prevalence, identified risk factors, and generated patient and provider insights into high-risk medication dispenses in a large, community-based integrated health system using a commonly used quality measure., Methods: This was a mixed methods study with a convergent design combining a retrospective cohort study using electronic health record (EHR) data, individual interviews of primary care physicians, and a focus group of patient advisors., Results: Of 113,809 patients ≥ 65 years with a fall/fracture in 2009-2015, 35.4% had a potentially harmful medication dispensed after their fall/fracture. Most medications were prescribed by primary care providers. Older age, male gender, and race/ethnicity other than non-Hispanic White were associated with a reduced risk of high-risk medication dispenses. Patients with a pre-fall/fracture medication dispense were substantially more likely to have a post-fall/fracture medication dispense (hazard ratio [HR] = 13.26, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 12.91-13.61). Both patients and providers noted that providers may be unaware of patient falls due to inconsistent assessments and patient reluctance to disclose falls. Providers also noted the lack of a standard location to document falls and limited decision support alerts within the EHR., Conclusion: High-risk medication dispenses are common among older patients with a history of falls/fractures. Future interventions should explore improved assessment and documentation of falls, decision support, clinician training strategies, patient educational resources, building trusting patient-clinician relationships to facilitate long-term medication discontinuation among persistent medication users, and a focus on fall prevention., (Copyright © 2022 The Joint Commission. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background and Objectives: Many individuals with kidney disease, particularly those belonging to racial and ethnic minority groups and whose primary language is not English, lack knowledge related to kidney disease symptoms, physiologic functions of the kidney, and benefits and risks of kidney transplantation. Valid instruments to assess patients' knowledge of CKD and kidney transplantation are needed., Design, Setting, Participants, & Measurements: Using a sample of 977 patients with stages 3-5 CKD in the Kaiser Permanente health system, we developed the Knowledge Assessment of Renal Transplantation (KART) 2.0 instrument. We conducted cognitive interviews followed by item response theory (IRT) to reduce 48 candidate items. Construct validity was tested by examining differences in scores between patients who spent <1 and ≥1 hour receiving CKD and transplant education., Results: Cognitive interviews modified four items and omitted 11. IRT analyses resulted in two scales: the KART 2.0-Transplant Knowledge Scale (16 items; Cronbach's α =0.8) and the KART 2.0-CKD Knowledge Scale (nine items; Cronbach's α =0.79). Differential item functioning showed that the scales were unbiased to capture knowledge across self-identified race, primary language, CKD stage, and sex. Both scales distinguished patients who had spent <1 and ≥1 hour speaking with health professionals (effect size [ES]=0.33 [transplant], 0.54 [CKD]; P <0.001 for both), reading about kidney disease (ES=0.45 [transplant], 0.62 [CKD]; P <0.001), reading about kidney transplantation (ES=0.67 [transplant], 0.69 [CKD]; P <0.001), and reading about living donor kidney transplant (ES=0.76 [transplant], 0.62 [CKD]; P <0.001)., Conclusions: The KART 2.0 is a valid tool to assess patients' knowledge of CKD and kidney transplantation., (Copyright © 2022 by the American Society of Nephrology.)

Background: Parkinson's disease (PD) complexity poses challenges for individuals with Parkinson's, providers, and researchers. A recent multisite randomized trial of a proactive, telephone-based, nurse-led care management intervention - Care Coordination for Health Promotion and Activities in Parkinson's Disease (CHAPS) - demonstrated improved PD care quality. Implementation details and supportive stakeholder feedback were subsequently published. To inform decisions on dissemination, CHAPS Model components require evaluations of their fidelity to the Chronic Care Model and to their implementation. Additionally, assessment is needed on whether CHAPS addresses care challenges cited in recent literature., Methods: These analyses are based on data from a subset of 140 intervention arm participants and other CHAPS data. To examine CHAPS Model fidelity, we identified CHAPS components corresponding to the Chronic Care Model's six essential elements. To assess implementation fidelity of these components, we examined data corresponding to Hasson's modified implementation fidelity framework. Finally, we identified challenges cited in current Parkinson's care management literature, grouped these into themes using open card sorting techniques, and examined CHAPS data for evidence that CHAPS met these challenges., Results: All Chronic Care Model essential elements were addressed by 17 CHAPS components, thus achieving CHAPS Model fidelity. CHAPS implementation fidelity was demonstrated by adherence to content, frequency, and duration with partial fidelity to telephone encounter frequency. We identified potential fidelity moderators for all six of Hasson's moderator types. Through card sorting, four Parkinson's care management challenge themes emerged: unmet needs and suggestions for providers (by patient and/or care partner), patient characteristics needing consideration, and standardizing models for Parkinson's care management. CHAPS activities and stakeholder perceptions addressed all these themes., Conclusions: CHAPS, a supportive nurse-led proactive Parkinson's care management program, improved care quality and is designed to be reproducible and supportive to clinicians. Findings indicated CHAPS Model fidelity occurred to the Chronic Care Model and fidelity to implementation of the CHAPS components was demonstrated. Current Parkinson's care management challenges were met through CHAPS activities. Thus, dissemination of CHAPS merits consideration by those responsible for implementing changes in clinical practice and reaching people in need., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT01532986 , registered on January 13, 2012., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

BACKGROUND: Therapy with angiotensinconverting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) requires laboratory monitoring to avoid hyperkalemia and acute kidney failure. OBJECTIVE: To assess the frequency of recommended annual serum potassium and creatinine monitoring and determine potential factors associated with care gaps among adults dispensed an ACEI or ARB. METHODS: This mixed-methods study integrated findings from a retrospective cohort study and individual patient interviews. Adults aged 21 years and over within Kaiser Permanente Southern California with at least 180 treatment days of an ACEI and/or ARB in 2015 were included. Patients invited for qualitative interviews included those who did and did not complete the recommended laboratory tests. We assessed the proportion of patients completing both recommended laboratory tests, factors associated with not receiving laboratory monitoring, and patients' insights into barriers and facilitators of recommended monitoring. RESULTS: Of 437,544 patients who received an ACEI or ARB, 9.0% did not receive both a serum potassium and creatinine laboratory test during treatment (defined as a care gap). Lower risk of a care gap was observed for patients with increasing age (rate ratio [RR] per 10-year increase = 0.78, 95% CI = 0.77-0.79); diabetes mellitus (RR = 0.62, 95% CI = 0.60-0.64); hypertension (RR = 0.71, 95% CI = 0.71-0.74); Charlson Comorbidity Index score of at least 2 (RR = 0.62, 95% CI = 0.60-0.64); those who changed medication classes (RR = 0.53, 95% CI = 0.51-0.56); and patients with a cardiologist (RR = 0.81, 95% CI = 0.73-0.90) or nephrologist (RR = 0.60, 95% CI = 0.52-0.69) as their prescribing provider. Twenty-five patients completed the qualitative interviews. Patients often lacked knowledge about the need for laboratory monitoring, cited logistical barriers to accessing the laboratory, and deemed the reminders they received through an outpatient safety program as a facilitator to completing tests. CONCLUSIONS: Given the large patient population on ACEI and ARB medications, monitoring and support strategies such as electronic clinical surveillance could be important in addressing care gaps and potentially reducing adverse drug effects. DISCLOSURES: This project was supported by grant number R01HS024437 from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. The funder had no role in the design of the study; collection, analyses, or interpretation of the data, or decision to submit this manuscript for publication. Harrison, Reynolds, Hahn, Munoz-Plaza, Yi, Fischer, Luong, Sim, Brettler, Handler, and Mittman are employees of the Southern California Permanente Medical Group. Danworth was employed by the Southern California Permanente Medical Group at the time of this study. Singh was partially supported by the Houston VA HSR&D Center for Innovations in Quality, Effectiveness and Safety (CIN13-413). Reynolds reports grants from Novartis, Amgen Inc., and Vital Strategies, Resolve to Save Lives, unrelated to this work. Yi reports grants from Novartis unrelated to this work. Kanter has nothing to disclose.

Health services made many changes quickly in response to the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Many more are being made. Some changes were already evaluated, and there are rigorous research methods and frameworks for evaluating their local implementation and effectiveness. But how useful are these methods for evaluating changes where evidence of effectiveness is uncertain, or which need adaptation in a rapidly changing situation? Has implementation science provided implementers with tools for effective implementation of changes that need to be made quickly in response to the demands of the pandemic? This perspectives article describes how parts of the research and practitioner communities can use and develop a combination of implementation and improvement to enable faster and more effective change in the future, especially where evidence of local effectiveness is limited. We draw on previous reviews about the advantages and disadvantages of combining these two domains of knowledge and practice. We describe a generic digitally assisted rapid cycle testing (DA-RCT) approach that combines elements of each in order to better describe a change, monitor outcomes, and make adjustments to the change when implemented in a dynamic environment., (© 2020. Society of General Internal Medicine.)

Background: High-risk medications pose serious safety risks to older adults, including increasing the risk of falls. Deprescribing potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) in older adults who have experienced a fall is a key element of fall reduction strategies. However, continued use of PIMs in older adults is common, and clinicians may face substantial deprescribing barriers., Objective: Explore patient and clinician experiences with and perceptions of deprescribing PIMs in patients with a history of falls., Design: We led guided patient feedback sessions to explore deprescribing scenarios with patient stakeholders and conducted semi-structured interviews with primary care physicians (PCPs) to explore knowledge and awareness of fall risk guidelines, deprescribing experiences, and barriers and facilitators to deprescribing., Participants: PCPs from Kaiser Permanente Southern California (KPSC) and patient members of the KPSC Regional Patient Advisory Committee., Approach: We used maximum variation sampling to identify PCPs with patients who had a fall, then categorized the resulting PIM dispense distribution for those patients into high and low frequency. We analyzed the data using a hybrid deductive-inductive approach. Coders applied initial deductively derived codes to the data, simultaneously using an open-code inductive approach to capture emergent themes., Key Results: Physicians perceived deprescribing discussions as potentially contentious, even among patients with falls. Physicians reported varying comfort levels with deprescribing strategies: some felt that the conversations might be better suited to others (e.g., pharmacists), while others had well-planned negotiation strategies. Patients reported lack of clarity as to the reasons and goals of deprescribing and poor understanding of the seriousness of falls., Conclusions: Our study suggests that key barriers to deprescribing include PCP trepidation about raising a contentious topic and insufficient patient awareness of the potential seriousness of falls. Findings suggest the need for multifaceted, multilevel deprescribing approaches with clinician training strategies, patient educational resources, and a focus on building trusting patient-clinician relationships., (© 2021. Society of General Internal Medicine.)

Background: New cervical cancer screening guidelines recommend primary human papillomavirus (HPV) testing for women age 30-65 years. Healthcare organizations are preparing to de-implement the previous recommended strategies of Pap testing or co-testing (Pap plus HPV test) and substitute primary HPV testing. However, there may be significant challenges to the replacement of this entrenched clinical practice, even with an evidence-based substitution. We sought to identify stakeholder-perceived barriers and facilitators to this substitution within a large healthcare system, Kaiser Permanente Southern California., Methods: We conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews with clinician, administrative, and patient stakeholders regarding (a) acceptability and feasibility of the planned substitution; (b) perceptions of barriers and facilitators, with an emphasis on those related to the de-implementation/implementation cycle of substitution; and (c) perceived readiness to change. Our interview guide was informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Using a team coding approach, we developed an initial coding structure refined during iterative analysis; the data were subsequently organized thematically into domains, key themes, and sub-themes using thematic analysis, followed by framework analysis informed by CFIR., Results: We conducted 23 interviews: 5 patient and 18 clinical/administrative. Clinicians perceived that patients feel more tests equals better care, and clinicians and patients expressed fear of missed cancers ("…it'll be more challenging convincing the patient that only one test is…good enough to detect cancer."). Patients perceived practice changes resulting in "less care" are driven by the desire to cut costs. In contrast, clinicians/administrators viewed changing from two tests to one as acceptable and a workflow efficiency ("…It's very easy and half the work."). Stakeholder-recommended strategies included focusing on the increased efficacy of primary HPV testing and developing clinician talking points incorporating national guidelines to assuage "cost-cutting" fears., Conclusions: Substitution to replace an entrenched clinical practice is complex. Leveraging available facilitators is key to ease the process for clinical and administrative stakeholders-e.g., emphasizing the efficiency of going from two tests to one. Identifying and addressing clinician and patient fears regarding cost-cutting and perceived poorer quality of care is critical for substitution. Multicomponent and multilevel strategies for engagement and education will be required., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, # NCT04371887., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Background: Treatment of a child who has an anxiety disorder usually begins with the question of which treatment to start first, medication or psychotherapy. Both have strong empirical support, but few studies have compared their effectiveness head-to-head, and none has investigated what to do if the treatment tried first isn't working well-whether to optimize the treatment already begun or to add the other treatment., Methods: This is a single-blind Sequential Multiple Assignment Randomized Trial (SMART) of 24 weeks duration with two levels of randomization, one in each of two 12-week stages. In Stage 1, children will be randomized to fluoxetine or Coping Cat Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT). In Stage 2, remitters will continue maintenance-level therapy with the single-modality treatment received in Stage 1. Non-remitters during the first 12 weeks of treatment will be randomized to either [1] optimization of their Stage 1 treatment, or [2] optimization of Stage 1 treatment and addition of the other intervention. After the 24-week trial, we will follow participants during open, naturalistic treatment to assess the durability of study treatment effects. Patients, 8-17 years of age who are diagnosed with an anxiety disorder, will be recruited and treated within 9 large clinical sites throughout greater Los Angeles. They will be predominantly underserved, ethnic minorities. The primary outcome measure will be the self-report score on the 41-item youth SCARED (Screen for Child Anxiety Related Disorders). An intent-to-treat analysis will compare youth randomized to fluoxetine first versus those randomized to CBT first ("Main Effect 1"). Then, among Stage 1 non-remitters, we will compare non-remitters randomized to optimization of their Stage 1 monotherapy versus non-remitters randomized to combination treatment ("Main Effect 2"). The interaction of these main effects will assess whether one of the 4 treatment sequences (CBT➔CBT; CBT➔med; med➔med; med➔CBT) in non-remitters is significantly better or worse than predicted from main effects alone., Discussion: Findings from this SMART study will identify treatment sequences that optimize outcomes in ethnically diverse pediatric patients from underserved low- and middle-income households who have anxiety disorders., Trial Registration: This protocol, version 1.0, was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov on February 17, 2021 with Identifier: NCT04760275 .

Background: A recent nurse-led proactive care management intervention, Care Coordination for Health Promotion and Activities in Parkinson Disease (CHAPS), improved care quality when compared to usual care in a randomized controlled trial. Therefore, stakeholder (patient participants, nurse care managers, and Parkinson disease (PD) specialists) perceptions of key intervention components merit evaluation to inform decisions about dissemination., Methods: This multi-site study occurred in five southwest United States Veterans Health Administration medical centers. Stakeholders were surveyed on their perceptions of CHAPS including the CHAPS Assessment, CHAPS nurse care managers, the Siebens Domain Management Model™ (a practical clinical model), and the Siebens Health Care Notebook (Notebook) (self-care tool). Participants' electronic medical records were abstracted for perceptions of the Notebook. Statistical analysis software was used to provide summary statistics; open card sorting methodology was used to identify themes and attributes in qualitative data including usability of some components., Results: Participants, overall, highly rated their medication self-management, acknowledged some challenges with the CHAPS self-care tools, reported knowledge of PD specialist follow-up and PD red flags, and rated CHAPS nurse care managers as helpful. Nurse care manager responses indicated the CHAPS Assessment and Program highly facilitated care of their patients. Most all PD specialists would refer other patients to CHAPS. Nurse care manager and PD specialist responses indicated improved participant management of their PD. Three themes emerged in participant perceptions of the Notebook: Notebook Assets (e.g., benefits and features-liked); Deferring Notebook Review (e.g., no time to review); and Reasons for Not Using (e.g., participant preference). Shared attributes regarding the Siebens Domain Management Model and Notebook usability, reported by nurse care managers, were user-friendly, person/patient-centered, and organized. Some challenges to their use were also reported., Conclusions: Overall, stakeholder perceptions of the proactive nurse-led CHAPS intervention indicated its value in the care of individuals with PD. Responses about the CHAPS Assessment, Siebens Domain Management Model, and Notebook self-care tool signified their usefulness. Stakeholders' constructive suggestions indicated their engagement in CHAPS. These findings support CHAPS dissemination and contribute to research in care management., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT01532986 , registered on January 13, 2012.

Introduction: Complex health interventions (CHIs) are increasingly studied in comparative effectiveness research (CER), and there is a need for improvements in CHI research practices. The Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) Methodology Committee (MC) launched an effort in 2016 to develop formal guidance on this topic., Objective: To develop a set of minimal standards for scientifically valid, transparent, and reproducible CER studies of CHIs. The standards are intended to apply to research examining a broad range of healthcare interventions including delivery system, behavior change, and other non-pharmacological interventions., Methods: We conducted a literature review, reviewed existing methods guidance, and developed standards through an iterative process involving the MC, two panels of external research methods experts, and a 60-day public comment period. The final standards were approved by the PCORI MC and adopted by the PCORI Board of Governors on April 30, 2018., Results: The final standards include the following: (1) fully describe the intervention and comparator and define their core functions, (2) specify the hypothesized causal pathways and their theoretical basis, (3) specify how adaptations to the form of the intervention and comparator will be allowed and recorded, (4) plan and describe a process evaluation, and (5) select patient outcomes informed by the causal pathway., Discussion: The new standards offer three major contributions to research: (1) they provide a simple framework to help investigators address the major methodological features of a CHI study, (2) they emphasize the importance of the causal model and the need to understand how a CHI achieves its effects rather than simply measuring these effects, and (3) they require description of a CHI using the concepts of core functions and forms. While these standards apply formally to PCORI-funded CER studies, they have broad applicability.

Background: Health systems need evidence about how best to deliver home-based palliative care (HBPC) to meet the growing needs of seriously ill patients. We hypothesised that a tech-supported model that aimed to promote timely inter-professional team coordination using video consultation with a remote physician while a nurse is in the patient's home would be non-inferior compared with a standard model that includes routine home visits by nurses and physicians., Methods: We conducted a pragmatic, cluster randomised non-inferiority trial across 14 sites (HomePal Study). Registered nurses (n=111) were randomised to the two models so that approximately half of the patients with any serious illness admitted to HBPC and their caregivers were enrolled in each study arm. Process measures (video and home visits and satisfaction) were tracked. The primary outcomes for patients and caregivers were symptom burden and caregiving preparedness at 1-2 months., Results: The study was stopped early after 12 months of enrolment (patients=3533; caregivers=463) due to a combination of low video visit uptake (31%), limited substitution of video for home visits, and the health system's decision to expand telehealth use in response to changes in telehealth payment policies, the latter of which was incompatible with the randomised design. Implementation barriers included persistent workforce shortages and inadequate systems that contributed to scheduling and coordination challenges and unreliable technology and connectivity., Conclusions: We encountered multiple challenges to feasibility, relevance and value of conducting large, multiyear pragmatic randomised trials with seriously ill patients in the real-world settings where care delivery, regulatory and payment policies are constantly shifting., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: A recent nurse-led, telephone-administered 18-month intervention, Care Coordination for Health Promotion and Activities in Parkinson's Disease (CHAPS), was tested in a randomized controlled trial and improved care quality. Therefore, intervention details on nurse care manager activity (types and frequencies) and participant actions are needed to support potential dissemination. Activities include nurse care manager use of a holistic organizing framework, identification of Parkinson's disease (PD)-related problems/topics, communication with PD specialists and care coordination, participant coaching, and participant self-care actions including use of a notebook self-care tool., Methods: This article reports descriptive data on the CHAPS intervention. The study setting was five sites in the Veterans Affairs Healthcare System. Sociodemographic data were gathered from surveys of study participants (community-dwelling veterans with PD). Nurse care manager intervention activities were abstracted from electronic medical records and logbooks. Statistical analysis software was used to provide summary statistics; closed card sorting was used to group some data., Results: Intervention participants (n = 140) were primarily men, mean age 69.4 years (standard deviation 10.3) and community-dwelling. All received the CHAPS Initial Assessment, which had algorithms designed to identify 31 unique CHAPS standard problems/topics. These were frequently documented (n = 4938), and 98.6% were grouped by assigned domain from the Organizing Framework (Siebens Domain Management Model™). Nurse care managers performed 27 unique activity types to address identified problems, collaborating with participants and PD specialists. The two most frequent unique activities were counseling/emotional support (n = 387) and medication management (n = 349). Both were among 2749 total performed activities in the category Implementing Interventions (coaching). Participants reported unique self-care action types (n = 23) including use of a new notebook self-care tool., Conclusions: CHAPS nurse care managers implemented multiple activities including participant coaching and care coordination per the CHAPS protocol. Participants reported various self-care actions including use of a personalized notebook. These findings indicate good quality and extent of implementation, contribute to ensuring reproducibility, and support CHAPS dissemination as a real-world approach to improve care quality., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT01532986 , registered on January 13, 2012.

We conducted a process evaluation in the context of a Hybrid Type 1 randomized controlled trial testing two treatments for post-traumatic stress, using a web-based social network survey and semi-structured interviews to illustrate the relationship between providers' influence and likelihood of referring patients to the RCT. Providers with high indegree centrality (designated by other providers as someone they seek information from) were significantly more likely to refer patients to the RCT, and serve as an influence to others' referral behavior. Interviews provided additional data to consider for future studies aimed at increasing the uptake of evidence-based practices.

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is a major cause of morbidity among people living with HIV (PLWH). Statins can safely and effectively reduce CVD risk in PLWH, but evidence-based statin therapy is under-prescribed in PLWH. Developed using an implementation science framework, INcreasing Statin Prescribing in HIV Behavioral Economics REsearch (INSPIRE) is a stepped-wedge cluster randomized trial that addresses organization-, clinician- and patient-level barriers to statin uptake in Los Angeles community health clinics serving racially and ethnically diverse PLWH. After assessing knowledge about statins and barriers to clinician prescribing and patient uptake, we will design, implement and measure the effectiveness of (1) educational interventions targeting leadership, clinicians, and patients, followed by (2) behavioral economics-informed clinician feedback on statin uptake. In addition, we will assess implementation outcomes, including changes in clinician acceptability of statin prescribing for PLWH, clinician acceptability of the education and feedback interventions, and cost of implementation., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

To better understand VA providers' approaches to and perspectives on providing care to women Veterans, providers (n = 97) in primary care and mental health settings were interviewed about women's perceived treatment needs, types of care provided, and perceptions of evidence-based treatments (EBTs) for this population. Providers perceived that women Veteran VA users are often diagnostically complex and require a coordinated approach to treatment planning. They struggled with decisions about how to offer services such as EBTs and collaborative care in light of comorbidity and psychosocial stressors, and endorsed the belief that a tailored approach and consideration of these factors is essential in providing care.

Background: Organizational readiness assessments have a history of being developed as important support tools for successful implementation. However, it remains unclear how best to operationalize readiness across varied projects or settings. We conducted a synthesis and content analysis of published readiness instruments to compare how investigators have operationalized the concept of organizational readiness for change., Methods: We identified readiness assessments using a systematic review and update search. We mapped individual assessment items to the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), which identifies five domains affecting implementation (outer setting, inner setting, intervention characteristics, characteristics of individuals, and implementation process) and multiple constructs within each domain., Results: Of 1370 survey items, 897 (68%) mapped to the CFIR domain of inner setting, most commonly related to constructs of readiness for implementation (n = 220); networks and communication (n = 207); implementation climate (n = 204); structural characteristics (n = 139); and culture (n = 93). Two hundred forty-two items (18%) mapped to characteristics of individuals (mainly other personal attributes [n = 157] and self-efficacy [n = 52]); 80 (6%) mapped to outer setting; 51 (4%) mapped to implementation process; 40 (3%) mapped to intervention characteristics; and 60 (4%) did not map to CFIR constructs. Instruments were typically tailored to specific interventions or contexts., Discussion: Available readiness instruments predominantly focus on contextual factors within the organization and characteristics of individuals, but the specificity of most assessment items suggests a need to tailor items to the specific scenario in which an assessment is fielded. Readiness assessments must bridge the gap between measuring a theoretical construct and factors of importance to a particular implementation.

Background: Timely follow-up of abnormal laboratory results is important for high-quality care. We sought to identify risk factors, facilitators, and barriers to timely follow-up of an abnormal estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) for the diagnosis of chronic kidney disease., Study Design: Mixed-methods study: retrospective electronic health record (EHR) analyses, physician interviews., Setting & Participants: Large integrated health care delivery system. Quantitative analyses included 244,540 patients 21 years or older with incident abnormal eGFRs from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2015, ordered by 7,164 providers. Qualitative analyses included 15 physician interviews., Exposures: Patient-, physician-, and system-level factors., Outcome: Timely follow-up of incident abnormal eGFRs, defined as repeat eGFR obtained within 60 to 150 days, follow-up testing before 60 days that indicated normal kidney function, or diagnosis before 60 days of chronic kidney disease or kidney cancer., Analytical Approach: Multivariable robust Poisson regression models accounting for clustering within provider were used to estimate risk ratios (RRs) and 95% CIs for lack of timely follow-up. Team coding was used to identify themes from physician interviews., Results: 58% of patients lacked timely follow-up of their incident abnormal eGFRs (ie, had a care gap). An abnormal creatinine result flag in the EHR was associated with better follow-up (RR for care gap, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.64-0.66). Patient online portal use and physician panel size were weakly associated with follow-up. Patients seen by providers behind on managing their EHR message box were at higher risk for care gaps. Physician interviews identified system-level (eg, panel size and assistance in managing laboratory results) and provider-level (eg, proficiency using EHR tools) factors that influence laboratory result management., Limitations: Unable to capture intentional delays in follow-up testing., Conclusions: Timely follow-up of abnormal results remains challenging in an EHR-based integrated health care delivery system. Strategies improving provider EHR message box management and leveraging health information technology (eg, flagging abnormal eGFR results), making organizational/staffing changes (eg, increasing the role of nurses in managing laboratory results), and boosting patient engagement through better patient portals may improve test follow-up., (Copyright © 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: As health care systems strive to meet the growing needs of seriously ill patients with high symptom burden and functional limitations, they need evidence about how best to deliver home-based palliative care (HBPC). We compare a standard HBPC model that includes routine home visits by nurses and prescribing clinicians with a tech-supported model that aims to promote timely interprofessional team coordination using video consultation with the prescribing clinician while the nurse is in the patient's home. We hypothesize that tech-supported HBPC will be no worse compared with standard HBPC. Methods: This study is a pragmatic, cluster randomized noninferiority trial conducted across 14 Kaiser Permanente sites in Southern California and the Pacific Northwest. Registered nurses ( n  = 102) were randomized to the two models so that approximately half of the participating patient-caregiver dyads will be in each study arm. Adult English or Spanish-speaking patients (estimate 10,000) with any serious illness and a survival prognosis of 1-2 years and their caregivers (estimate 4800) are being recruited to the HomePal study over ∼2.5 years. The primary patient outcomes are symptom improvement at one month and days spent at home. The primary caregiver outcome is perception of preparedness for caregiving. Study Implementation-Challenges and Contributions: During implementation we had to balance the rigors of conducting a clinical trial with pragmatic realities to ensure responsiveness to culture, structures, workforce, workflows of existing programs across multiple sites, and emerging policy and regulatory changes. We built close partnerships with stakeholders across multiple representative groups to define the comparators, prioritize and refine measures and study conduct, and optimize rigor in our analytical approaches. We have also incorporated extensive fidelity monitoring, mixed-method implementation evaluations, and early planning for dissemination to anticipate and address challenges longitudinally. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT#03694431.

Background: Hospital benchmarking is essential to quality improvement, but its usefulness depends on the ability of statistical models to adequately control for inter-hospital differences in patient mix. We explored whether the addition of injury-specific clinical variables to the current American College of Surgeons-Trauma Quality Improvement Program (TQIP) algorithm would improve model fit., Methods: We analyzed a prospective registry containing all adult patients who presented to a regional consortium of 14 trauma centers between 2010 and 2011 with severe traumatic brain injury (TBI). We used hierarchical logistic regression and stepwise forward selection to develop two novel risk-adjustment models. We then tested our novel models against the current TQIP model and ranked hospitals by their risk-adjusted mortality rates under each model to determine how model selection affects quality benchmarking., Results: Seven hundred thirty-four patients met inclusion criteria. Stepwise selection resulted in two distinct models: one that added three TBI-specific variables (pupil reactivity, cerebral edema, loss of basal cisterns) to the model specification currently used by TQIP and another that combined two TBI-specific variables (pupil reactivity, cerebral edema) with a three-variable subset of TQIP (age, Abbreviated Injury Scale score for the head region, Glasgow Coma Scale motor score). Both novel models outperformed TQIP. Although rankings remained largely unchanged across model configurations, several hospitals moved across quality terciles., Conclusion: The inclusion of injury-specific variables improves risk adjustment for patients with severe TBI. Trauma Quality Improvement Program should consider replacing several of its general patient characteristics with injury-specific clinical predictors to increase efficiency, reduce the risk of overfitting, and improve the accuracy of hospital benchmarking., Level of Evidence: Prognostic and epidemiological, level II.

Despite policy and practice support to develop and test interventions designed to increase access to quality care among high-need patients, many of these interventions fail to meet expectations once deployed in real-life clinical settings. One example is the Patient-Centered Medical Home (PCMH) model, designed to deliver coordinated care. A meta-analysis of PCMH initiatives found mixed evidence of impacts on service access, quality, and costs. Conceptualizing PCMH as a complex health intervention can generate insights into the mechanisms by which this model achieves its effects. It can also address heterogeneity by distinguishing PCMH core functions (the intervention's basic purposes) from forms (the strategies used to meet each function). We conducted a scoping review to identify core functions and forms documented in published PCMH models from 2007 to 2017. We analyzed and summarized the data to develop a PCMH Function and Form Matrix. The matrix contributes to the development of an explicit theory-based depiction of how an intervention achieves its effects, and can guide decision-support tools in the field. This innovative approach can support transformations of clinical settings and implementation efforts by building on a clear understanding of the intervention's standard core functions and the forms adapted to local contexts' characteristics.

Objective: To test effects on care quality of Chronic Care Model-based Parkinson disease (PD) management., Methods: This 2-group stratified randomized trial involved 328 veterans with PD in southwestern United States. Guided care management, led by PD nurses, was compared to usual care. Primary outcomes were adherence to 18 PD care quality indicators. Secondary outcomes were patient-centered outcome measures. Data sources were telephone survey and electronic medical record (EMR). Outcomes were analyzed as intent-to-treat comparing initial and final survey and repeated-measures mixed-effects models., Results: Average age was 71 years; 97% of participants were male. Mean proportion of participants receiving recommended PD care indicators was significantly higher for the intervention than for usual care (0.77 vs 0.58) (mean difference 0.19, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.16, 0.22). Of 8 secondary outcomes, the only significant difference of the changes over time was in the positive Patient Health Questionnaire-2 depression screen for intervention minus usual care (-11.52 [95% CI -20.42, -2.62])., Conclusion: A nurse-led chronic care management intervention, Care Coordination for Health Promotion and Activities in Parkinson's Disease (CHAPS), substantially increased adherence to PD quality of care indicators among veterans with PD, as documented in the EMR. Of 8 secondary outcomes assessed, a screening measure for depressive symptomatology was the only measure that was better in the intervention compared to usual care. More telephone calls in CHAPS were the only utilization difference over usual care. While CHAPS appears promising for improving PD care, additional iterative research is needed to refine the CHAPS model in routine clinical care so that it measurably improves patient-centered outcomes (NCT01532986)., Classification of Evidence: This study provides Class I evidence that for patients with PD, CHAPS increased adherence to PD quality of care indicators., (© 2019 American Academy of Neurology.)

The wide variety of dissemination and implementation designs now being used to evaluate and improve health systems and outcomes warrants review of the scope, features, and limitations of these designs. This article is one product of a design workgroup that was formed in 2013 by the National Institutes of Health to address dissemination and implementation research, and whose members represented diverse methodologic backgrounds, content focus areas, and health sectors. These experts integrated their collective knowledge on dissemination and implementation designs with searches of published evaluations strategies. This article emphasizes randomized and nonrandomized designs for the traditional translational research continuum or pipeline, which builds on existing efficacy and effectiveness trials to examine how one or more evidence-based clinical/prevention interventions are adopted, scaled up, and sustained in community or service delivery systems. We also mention other designs, including hybrid designs that combine effectiveness and implementation research, quality improvement designs for local knowledge, and designs that use simulation modeling.

Purpose: Breast cancer offers several opportunities for reducing use of ineffective practices based on American Society of Clinical Oncology guidelines. We assessed oncologist-perceived factors associated with use of one such practice-serum tumor markers for post-treatment breast cancer surveillance-focusing on medical oncologists with high, medium, or low test use., Methods: Using a mixed-methods design, we identified patients who had been treated for early-stage breast cancer diagnosed between January 1, 2009, and December 31, 2012, within Kaiser Permanente Southern California and calculated the number of tests ordered from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2014. We identified oncologists with high, medium, or low use and subsequently performed semistructured interviews. We used patient satisfaction data to assess association between pattern of use and satisfaction score., Results: We identified 7,363 patients, with 40,114 tests ordered. High-use oncologists were defined as those ordering at least one test annually for 35% of patients or more, low-use oncologists as those ordering at least one test for 5% of patients or less; 42% of oncologists were high, 27% low, and 31% medium users. We interviewed 17 oncologists: six high, eight low, and three medium users. Factors associated with high use included: perceived patient anxiety, oncologist anxiety, belief that there was nothing else to offer, concern about satisfaction, patient competition, peer use, and system barriers. Factors associated with low use included: beliefs about consequences (eg, causes harms) and medical center culture (eg, collective decision to follow guidelines). We found no association between satisfaction score and pattern of use., Conclusion: Barriers to deimplementation are numerous and complex. Traditional strategies of practice change alone are unlikely to be effective. Multifaceted, multilevel strategies deployed to address patient-, clinician-, and system-related barriers may be required.

Background: Many advances in health care fail to reach patients. Implementation science is the study of novel approaches to mitigate this evidence-to-practice gap., Methods: The American Thoracic Society (ATS) created a multidisciplinary ad hoc committee to develop a research statement on implementation science in pulmonary, critical care, and sleep medicine. The committee used an iterative consensus process to define implementation science and review the use of conceptual frameworks to guide implementation science for the pulmonary, critical care, and sleep community and to explore how professional medical societies such as the ATS can promote implementation science., Results: The committee defined implementation science as the study of the mechanisms by which effective health care interventions are either adopted or not adopted in clinical and community settings. The committee also distinguished implementation science from the act of implementation. Ideally, implementation science should include early and continuous stakeholder involvement and the use of conceptual frameworks (i.e., models to systematize the conduct of studies and standardize the communication of findings). Multiple conceptual frameworks are available, and we suggest the selection of one or more frameworks on the basis of the specific research question and setting. Professional medical societies such as the ATS can have an important role in promoting implementation science. Recommendations for professional societies to consider include: unifying implementation science activities through a single organizational structure, linking front-line clinicians with implementation scientists, seeking collaborations to prioritize and conduct implementation science studies, supporting implementation science projects through funding opportunities, working with research funding bodies to set the research agenda in the field, collaborating with external bodies responsible for health care delivery, disseminating results of implementation science through scientific journals and conferences, and teaching the next generation about implementation science through courses and other media., Conclusions: Implementation science plays an increasingly important role in health care. Through support of implementation science, the ATS and other professional medical societies can work with other stakeholders to lead this effort.