A randomized, parallel group, pragmatic comparative-effectiveness trial comparing medication-assisted treatment induction methods in primary care practices: The HOMER study protocol.

Opioid use disorder (OUD) represents a public health crisis in the United States. Medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) with buprenorphine in primary care is a proven OUD treatment strategy. MOUD induction is when patients begin withdrawal and receive the first doses of buprenorphine. Differences between induction methods might influence short-term stabilization, long-term maintenance, and quality of life. This paper describes the protocol for a study designed to: (1) compare short-term stabilization and long-term maintenance treatment engagement in MOUD in patients receiving office, home, or telehealth induction and (2) identify clinically-relevant practice and patient characteristics associated with successful long-term treatment. The study design is a randomized, parallel group, pragmatic comparative effectiveness trial of three care models of MOUD induction in 100 primary care practices in the United States. Eligible patients are at least 16 years old, have been identified by their clinician as having opioid dependence and would benefit from MOUD. Patients will be randomized to one of three induction comparators: office, home, or telehealth induction. Primary outcomes are buprenorphine medication-taking and illicit opioid use at 30, 90, and 270 days post-induction. Secondary outcomes include quality of life and potential mediators of treatment maintenance (intentions, planning, automaticity). Potential moderators include social determinants of health, substance use history and appeal, and executive function. An intent to treat analysis will assess effects of the interventions on long-term treatment, using general/generalized linear mixed models, adjusted for covariates, for the outcomes analysis. Analysis includes practice- and patient-level random effects for hierarchical/longitudinal data. No large-scale, randomized comparative effectiveness research has compared home induction to office or telehealth MOUD induction on long-term outcomes for patients with OUD seen in primary care settings. The results of this study will offer primary care providers evidence and guidance in selecting the most beneficial induction method(s) for specific patients.

Primary Care Research: Looking Back and Moving Forward With Reflections on NAPCRG's First 50 Years.

NAPCRG celebrated 50 years of leadership and service at its 2022 meeting. A varied team of primary care investigators, clinicians, learners, patients, and community members reflected on the organization's past, present, and future. Started in 1972 by a small group of general practice researchers in the United States, Canada, and the United Kingdom, NAPCRG has evolved into an international, interprofessional, interdisciplinary, and intergenerational group devoted to improving health and health care through primary care research. NAPCRG provides a nurturing home to researchers and teams working in partnership with individuals, families, and communities. The organization builds upon enduring values to create partnerships, advance research methods, and nurture a community of contributors. NAPCRG has made foundational contributions, including identifying the need for primary care research to inform primary care practice, practice-based research networks, qualitative and mixed-methods research, community-based participatory research, patient safety, practice transformation, and partnerships with patients and communities. Landmark documents have helped define classification systems for primary care, responsible research with communities, the central role of primary care in health care systems, opportunities to revitalize generalist practice, and shared strategies to build the future of family medicine. The future of health and health care depends upon strengthening primary care and primary care research with stronger support, infrastructure, training, and workforce. New technologies offer opportunities to advance research, enhance care, and improve outcomes. Stronger partnerships can empower primary care research with patients and communities and increase commitments to diversity and quality care for all. NAPCRG offers a home for all partners in this work.

UPSTREAM! Together evaluation results from community efforts to prevent mental, emotional, and behavioral health problems.

Mental, emotional, and behavioral (MEB) health problems are prevalent globally. Despite effective programs that can prevent MEB problems and promote mental health, there has not been widespread adoption. UPSTREAM! Together was a planning project in three Colorado communities. Communities partnered with academic and policy entities to 1) translate evidence about MEB problem prevention into locally-relevant messages and materials and 2) develop long-term plans for broad implementation of interventions to prevent high-priority MEB problems. Community members recognized the need to talk about MEB problems to prevent them. The UPSTREAM! communities localized messages designed to start conversations and sustain attention on preventing MEB problems. The communities understood that prevention takes sustained community attention and advocacy, knowing that important outcomes may be years away. Long-term implementation plans aimed to strengthen families and enhance social connections among youth. Despite community readiness and capacity to implement evidence-based programs, there were few funding opportunities, delaying program implementation and revealing gaps between funding policies and community readiness. This community-engaged experience suggests an achievable approach, acceptable to communities, and worthy of further development and testing. Policies that cultivate and support local expertise may help to increase wider community adoption of evidence-based programs that promote mental health among youth.

Making the Random the Usual: Appreciative Inquiry/Boot Camp Translation-Developing Community-Oriented Evidence That Matters.

Background: The evidence underlying clinical guidelines arising from typical scientific inquiry may not always match the needs and concerns of local communities. Our High Plains Research Network Community Advisory Council (HPRN CAC) identified a need for evidence regarding how to assist members of their community suffering from mental health issues to recognize their need for help and then obtain access to mental health care. The lack of evidence led our academic team to pursue linking Appreciative Inquiry with Boot Camp Translation (AI/BCT). This article describes the development and testing of this linked method. Method: We worked with the HPRN CAC and other communities affiliated with the State Networks of Colorado Ambulatory Practices and Partners (SNOCAP) practice-based research networks to identify 5 topics for testing of AI/BCT. For each topic, we developed AI interview recruitment strategies and guides with our community partners, conducted interviews, and analyzed the interview data. Resulting themes for each topic were then utilized by 5 groups with the BCT method to develop community relevant messages and materials to communicate the evidence generated in each AI set of interviews. At each stage for each topic, notes on adaptations, barriers, and successes were recorded by the project team. Results: Each topic successfully led to generation of community specific evidence, messages, and materials for dissemination using the AI/BCT method. Beyond this, 5 important lessons emerged regarding the AI/BCT method: Researchers must (1) first ensure whether the topic is a good fit for AI, (2) maintain a focus on "what works" throughout all stages, (3) recruit one or more experienced qualitative analysts, (4) ensure adequate time and resources for the extensive AI/BCT process, and (5) present AI findings to BCT participants in the context of existing evidence and the local community and allow time for community partners to ask questions and request additional data analyses to be done. Conclusions: AI/BCT represents an effective way of responding to a community's need for evidence around a specific topic where standard evidence and/or guidelines do not exist. AI/BCT is a method for turning the "random" successes of individuals into "usual" practice at a community level.

Institutional review board training when patients and community members are engaged as researchers.

Background: Patient engagement efforts often rely on a participatory research approach, which means engaging patients and community members in all aspects of research. As research team members, they require familiarity with the principles of human subject protection, privacy, and institutional review boards (IRB). However, the time required for individual IRB training may be a barrier to engaging community members in participatory research. As more community members participated in research, the State Networks of Colorado Practices and Partners (SNOCAP) was faced with finding a balance between including community members as part of the research team and the significant time commitment and institutional requirements for human subjects research oversight. Objective: Design and implement a community training on human subject protection in research. Methods: The SNOCAP team worked with the leadership from the Colorado Multi-Institutional Review Board (COMIRB) to develop a training programme that included the ethical principles and guidelines for the protection of human subjects. Results: The final training programme was based on the core principles of the Belmont Report: respect for persons, beneficence and justice. Privacy was taught using the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) national guidelines. Conclusions: The members of the High Plains Research Network Community Advisory Council were fully engaged in developing the training programme, as well as in the training itself. They were committed to the principles and guidelines for protecting the rights and welfare of human subjects. Patients and community members have become a critical part of our research team. They understand the principles of human subjects protection and privacy and incorporate these principles into their research activities.

The North American Primary Care Research Group's Patient and Clinician Engagement Program (PaCE): Demystifying patient engagement through a dyad model.

Background: Community engagement in research is essential for translating the best evidence into community and clinical practice to improve the health and well-being of the population. Objective: North American Primary Care Research Group's Patient and Clinician Engagement Program (PaCE) program aims to develop a robust community of patients and primary care providers with knowledge and understanding of the unique features of patient-centred outcomes research related to primary care in order to advocate for and engage in research. Methods: PaCE employs a 'dyad' model in which a patient and a primary care provider collaborate to learn about and engage in primary care, primary care research, grant review, proposal development and advocacy. A series of educational trainings held in conjunction with national primary care conferences, international webinars and local symposia make up the foundation of the PaCE curriculum. Results and Conclusions: To date, 186 participants have completed the full-day, interactive PaCE training, and more than 250 people have participated in PaCE webinars and/or symposia. A 6-month follow-up sent to PaCE participants evaluates engagement activities following training.

Tokenism in patient engagement.

Background: Patient engagement throughout research is a way to generate more relevant patient-important research questions, methods and results with the ultimate aim of facilitating translation of research into practice. Tokenism is defined as the practice of making perfunctory or symbolic efforts to engage communities or patients. Objective: We wanted to explore how tokenism might influence engaging patients in research to help researchers work towards more genuine engagement. Methods: The Community Clinician Advisory Group and Patient and Clinician Engagement program held a workshop at the 2015 North American Primary Care Research Group meeting titled 'How Do We Move beyond Tokenism in Patient Engagement?' Patients, clinicians and academic researchers contributed examples of genuine and token engagement characteristics based on personal experience and knowledge. Data were iteratively collated and categorized into domains and items. Results: Examples of genuine and token engagement were categorized into three domains: Methods/Structure of engagement, Intent and Relationship building. Members with experience in patient-engaged research projects felt that longitudinal engagement was a key element to effectively translating research into local community and practice. Conclusions: The group (i) highly valued genuine intent and relationship building as elements to combat tokenism; (ii) noted that early genuine attempts at engagement may superficially resemble tokenism as researchers build enduring and trusting relationships with patient/community partners and (iii) emphasized the importance of seeking and utilizing patient experiences throughout research. These observations may contribute to more formal methods to help researchers (and reviewers) evaluate where engagement processes sit along the 'genuine-token' continuum.

Engaging with communities, engaging with patients: amendment to the NAPCRG 1998 Policy Statement on Responsible Research With Communities.

Background: In 1998, the North American Primary Care Research Group (NAPCRG) adopted a groundbreaking Policy Statement endorsing responsible participatory research (PR) with communities. Since that time, PR gained prominence in primary care research. Objectives: To reconsider the original 1998 Policy Statement in light of increased uptake of PR, and suggest future directions and applications for PR in primary care. This work contributed to an updated Policy Statement endorsed by NAPCRG in 2015. Methods: 32 university and 30 community NAPCRG-affiliated research partners, convened a workshop to document lessons learned about implementing processes and principles of PR. This document emerged from that session and reflection and discussion regarding the original Policy Statement, the emerging PR literature, and our own experiences. Results: The foundational principles articulated in the 1998 Policy Statement remain relevant to the current PR environment. Lessons learned since its publication include that the maturation of partnerships is facilitated by participatory processes that support increased community responsibility for research projects, and benefits generated through PR extend beyond research outcomes. Future directions that will move forward the field of PR in primary care include: (i) improve assessment of PR processes to better delineate the links between how PR teams work together and diverse PR outcomes, (ii) increase the number of models incorporating PR into translational research from project inception to dissemination, and (iii) increase application of PR approaches that support patient engagement in clinical settings to patient-provider relationship and practice change research. Conclusion: PR has markedly altered the manner in which primary care research is undertaken in partnership with communities and its principles and philosophies continue to offer means to assure that research results and processes improve the health of all communities.

Is knowledge translation without patient or community engagement flawed?

Background: The engagement of patients/individuals and/or communities has become increasingly important in all aspects of the research process. Objective: The aim of this manuscript is to begin the discussion about the use and implementation of authentic engagement in the development of presentations and manuscripts which evolve from research that has engaged patients/individuals and/or communities. Methods: Community-Based Participatory Research; Transformative Action Research. Results and Discussion: In Canada, the framework for engaging patients/individuals and/or communities is clearly outlined in Chapter 9 of the Tri-Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans which indicates that when research projects involving First Nations, Inuit and Métis peoples, the peoples in these communities are to have a role in shaping/co-creating the research that affects them. It is increasingly important that presentations and manuscripts that evolve from results/findings which have engaged patients/individuals and/or communities be co-presented/co-published. Presentations are often done without patients/individuals and/or communities and manuscripts published with only academic authors. Frequently, grants submitted and subsequently funded do not consider this aspect of the process in the budget which makes integrated and outcome knowledge translation, dissemination and distribution by and with patients/individuals and/or communities difficult to facilitate. Conclusions: This manuscript was designed to begin the discussion at various levels related to authentic engagement in the development of presentations and manuscripts which evolve from research that has engaged patients/individuals and/or communities. How will you include patients/individuals and/or communities in your presentations and publications?

Reinventing The Wheel Of Medical Evidence: How The Boot Camp Translation Process Is Making Gains.

Medical guidelines use language and concepts that are not understood by many patients, which makes it difficult for patients to choose the best treatment. The High Plains Research Network's Community Advisory Council, made up of farmers, teachers, and other community members in eastern Colorado, identified a lack of community knowledge about colon cancer and developed a process the council named Boot Camp Translation to turn complex screening guidelines into locally relevant messages. This article provides a brief history of the process and describes how it has been used to translate and disseminate evidence-based medical guidelines. The Colorado Clinical and Translational Sciences Institute tested the Boot Camp Translation process on multiple topics in communities throughout the United States from 2012 to 2015. During that period the institute used the process more than twenty-five times, addressing the topics of cancer prevention, hypertension, asthma, diabetes, and mental health. Multiple studies show that use of the process has led to improvement in cancer testing, asthma management, and hypertension control. Policies that support the translation of medical evidence into local programs will improve the health of patients.

Translating the medical home into patient-centred language.

Background The patient-centred medical home (PCMH) is a healthcare delivery model that aims to make health care more effective and affordable and to curb the rise in episodic care resulting from increasing costs and sub-specialisation of health care. Although the PCMH model has been implemented in many different healthcare settings, little is known about the PCMH in rural or underserved settings. Further, less is known about patients' understanding of the PCMH and its effect on their care. Aims The goal of this project was to ascertain the patient perspective of the PCMH and develop meaningful language around the PCMH to help inform and promote patients' participation with the PCMH. Method The High Plains Research Network Community Advisory Council (CAC) is comprised of a diverse group of individuals from rural eastern Colorado. The CAC and its academic partners started this project by receiving a comprehensive education on the PCMH. Using a community-based participatory research approach, the CAC translated technical medical jargon on the PCMH into a core message that the 'Medical Home is Relationship'. Results The PCMH should focus on the relationship of the patient with their personal physician. Medical home activities should be used to support and strengthen this relationship. Conclusion The findings serve as a reminder of the crucial elements of the PCMH that make it truly patient centred and the importance of engaging local patients in developing and implementing the medical home.

Testing to prevent colon cancer: how rural community members took on a community-based intervention.

Participatory research can elevate research relevance and effectiveness. The literature contains few first-hand descriptions of community members engaged in research. In 2003, the High Plains Research Network convened a Community Advisory Council (CAC) that quickly began providing input, feedback, innovation, and dissemination efforts. After receiving a participatory research grant from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention aimed at increasing colorectal cancer screening, the CAC participated in an intensive training on colon cancer prevention and spent 6 months developing a locally relevant intervention-Testing to Prevent Colon Cancer. CAC members participated in all aspects of the research including intervention messaging, survey design, recruitment, implementation, analysis and interpretation of data, and dissemination of results including presentations at national venues and coauthoring manuscripts. Our experience attests to the power of participatory research in efforts to improve health outcomes.

Researching together: a CTSA partnership of academicians and communities for translation.

BACKGROUND: The Colorado Clinical and Translational Sciences Institute (CCTSI) aims to translate discovery into clinical practice. The Partnership of Academicians and Communities for Translation (PACT) represents a robust campus-community partnership. METHODS: The CCTSI collected data on all PACT activities including meeting notes, staff activity logs, stakeholder surveys and interviews, and several key component in-depth evaluations. Data analysis by Evaluation and Community Engagement Core and PACT Council members identified critical shifts that changed the trajectory of community engagement efforts. RESULTS: Ten "critical shifts" in six broad rubrics created change in the PACT. Critical shifts were decision points in the development of the PACT that represented quantitative and qualitative changes in the work and trajectory. Critical shifts occurred in PACT management and leadership, financial control and resource allocation, and membership and voice. DISCUSSION: The development of a campus-community partnership is not a smooth linear path. Incremental changes lead to major decision points that represent an opportunity for critical shifts in developmental trajectory. We provide an enlightening, yet cautionary, tale to others considering a campus-community partnership so they may prepare for crucial decisions and critical shifts. The PACT serves as a genuine foundational platform for dynamic research efforts aimed at eliminating health disparities.

Boot camp translation: a method for building a community of solution.

OBJECTIVE: A crucial yet currently insufficient step in biomedical research is the translation of scientific, evidence-based guidelines and recommendations into constructs and language accessible to every-day patients. By building a community of solution that integrates primary care with public health and community-based organizations, evidence-based medical care can be translated into language and constructs accessible to community members and readily implemented to improve health. METHODS: Using a community-based participatory research approach, the High Plains Research Network (HPRN) and its Community Advisory Council developed a process to translate evidence into messages and dissemination methods to improve health in rural Colorado. This process, called Boot Camp Translation, has brought together various community members, organizations, and primary care practices to build a community of solution to address local health problems. RESULTS: The HPRN has conducted 4 Boot Camp Translations on topics including colon cancer prevention, asthma diagnosis and management, hypertension, and the patient-centered medical home. Thus far, the HPRN has used Boot Camp Translations to engage more than 1000 rural community members and providers. Dissemination of boot camp messaging through the community of solution has led to increased colon cancer screening, improved care for asthma, and increased rates of controlled blood pressure. CONCLUSIONS: Boot Camp Translation successfully engages community members in a process to translate evidence-based medical care into locally relevant and culturally appropriate language and constructs. Boot Camp Translation is an appropriate method for engaging community members in patient-centered outcomes research and may be an appropriate first step in building a local or regional community of solution.

A community translational research pilot grants program to facilitate community--academic partnerships: lessons from Colorado's clinical translational science awards.

BACKGROUND: National growth in translational research has increased the need for practical tools to improve how academic institutions engage communities in research. METHODS: One used by the Colorado Clinical and Translational Sciences Institute (CCTSI) to target investments in community-based translational research on health disparities is a Community Engagement (CE) Pilot Grants program. Innovative in design, the program accepts proposals from either community or academic applicants, requires that at least half of requested grant funds go to the community partner, and offers two funding tracks: One to develop new community-academic partnerships (up to $10,000), the other to strengthen existing partnerships through community translational research projects (up to $30,000). RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: We have seen early success in both traditional and capacity building metrics: the initial investment of $272,742 in our first cycle led to over $2.8 million dollars in additional grant funding, with grantees reporting strengthening capacity of their community- academic partnerships and the rigor and relevance of their research.

Use of colon cancer testing in rural Colorado primary care practices.

BACKGROUND: People living in rural areas may be less likely to be up to date (UTD) with screening guidelines for colorectal cancer (CRC). OBJECTIVES: To determine (1) rates of being UTD with screening or ever having had a test for CRC and (2) correlates for testing among patients living in a rural area who visit a provider. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey. PARTICIPANTS: Five hundred seventy patients aged 50 years and older who visited their health-care provider in High Plains Research Network (HPRN) practices. MEASUREMENTS: (1) Ever having had a CRC screening test, (2) being UTD with CRC screening, and (3) intention to get tested. RESULTS: The survey completion rate was 65%; 71% of patients had ever had any CRC screening test, while 52% of patients were UTD. Correlates of intending to get tested included having a family history of CRC, having a doctor recommend a test, knowing somebody who got tested, and believing that testing for CRC gives one a feeling of being in control of their health. Of those who had never had a CRC screening test, 12% planned on getting tested in the future, while 55% of those who were already up to date intended to be tested again (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Prevalence of being UTD with CRC testing in the HPRN was on par with statewide CRC testing rates, but over three quarters of patients who had not yet been screened had no intention of getting tested for CRC, despite having a medical home.