A pilot study of participatory and rapid implementation approaches to increase depression screening in primary care.

BACKGROUND: Most individuals with depression go unidentified and untreated. In 2016 the US Preventive Services Task Force released guidelines recommending universal screening in primary care to identify patients with depression and to link them to treatment. Feasible, acceptable, and effective strategies to implement these guidelines are needed. METHODS: This three-phased study employed rapid participatory methods to design and test strategies to increase depression screening at Penn Medicine, a large health system with 90 primary care practices. First, researchers solicited ideas and barriers from stakeholders to increase screening using an innovation tournament-a crowdsourcing method that invites stakeholders to submit ideas to address a workplace challenge. Second, a panel of stakeholders and scientists deliberated over and ranked the tournament ideas. An instant runoff election was held to select the winning idea. Third, the research team piloted the winning idea in a primary care practice using rapid prototyping, an approach that quickly refines and iterates strategy designs. RESULTS: The innovation tournament yielded 31 ideas and 32 barriers from diverse stakeholders (12 primary care physicians, 10 medical assistants, 4 nurse practitioners, 2 practice managers, and 4 patient support assistants). A panel of 6 stakeholders and scientists deliberated on the ideas and voted for patient self-report (i.e., through tablet computers, text message, or an online patient portal) as the winning idea. The research team rapid prototyped tablets in one primary care practice with one physician over 5 five-hour shifts to examine the feasibility, acceptability, and effectiveness of the strategy. Most patients, the physician, and medical assistants found the tablets acceptable and feasible. However, patient support assistants struggled to incorporate them in their workflow and expressed concerns about scaling up the process. Depression screening rates were higher using tablets compared to usual care; follow-up was comparable between tablets and usual care. CONCLUSIONS: Rapid participatory methods engaged and amplified the voices of diverse stakeholders in primary care. These methods helped design an acceptable and feasible implementation strategy that showed promise for increasing depression screening in a primary care setting. The next step is to evaluate the strategy in a randomized controlled trial across primary care practices.

Behavioral Interventions to Improve Breast Cancer Screening Outreach: Two Randomized Clinical Trials.

Importance: Despite public health efforts, breast cancer screening rates remain below national goals. Objective: To evaluate whether bulk ordering, text messaging, and clinician endorsement increase breast cancer screening rates. Design, Setting, and Participants: Two concurrent, pragmatic, randomized clinical trials, each with a 2-by-2 factorial design, were conducted between October 25, 2021, and April 25, 2022, in 2 primary care regions of an academic health system. The trials included women aged 40 to 74 years with at least 1 primary care visit in the past 2 years who were eligible for breast cancer screening. Interventions: Patients in trial A were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive a signed bulk order for mammogram or no order; in a factorial design, patients were concurrently randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive or not receive text message reminders. Patients in trial B were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive a message signed by their primary care clinician (clinician endorsement) or from the organization (standard messaging); in a factorial design, patients were concurrently randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive or not receive text message reminders. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the proportion of patients who completed a screening mammogram within 3 months. Results: Among 24 632 patients included, the mean (SD) age was 60.4 (7.5) years. In trial A, at 3 months, 15.4% (95% CI, 14.6%-16.1%) of patients in the bulk order arm and 12.7% (95% CI, 12.1%-13.4%) in the no order arm completed a mammogram, showing a significant increase (absolute difference, 2.7%; 95% CI, 1.6%-3.6%; P < .001). In the text messaging comparison arms, 15.1% (95% CI, 14.3%-15.8%) of patients receiving a text message completed a mammogram compared with 13.0% (95% CI, 12.4%-13.7%) of those in the no text messaging arm, a significant increase (absolute difference of 2.1%; 95% CI, 1.0%-3.0%; P < .001). In trial B, at 3 months, 12.5% (95% CI, 11.3%-13.7%) of patients in the clinician endorsement arm completed a mammogram compared with 11.4% (95% CI, 10.3%-12.5%) of those in the standard messaging arm, which was not significant (absolute difference, 1.1%; 95% CI, -0.5% to 2.7%; P = .18). In the text messaging comparison arms, 13.2% (95% CI, 12.0%-14.4%) of patients receiving a text message completed a mammogram compared with 10.7% (95% CI, 9.7%-11.8%) of those in the no text messaging arm, a significant increase (absolute difference, 2.5%; 95% CI, 0.8%-4.0%; P = .003). Conclusions and Relevance: These findings show that text messaging women after initial breast cancer screening outreach via either electronic portal or mailings, as well as bulk ordering with or without text messaging, can increase mammogram completion rates. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05089903.

Leveraging and Improving Refill Protocols at Your Health System.

OBJECTIVES: Medication refill processing is a repetitive and predictable time-intensive task for ambulatory primary and specialty care. Refill protocols are a clinical decision support (CDS) tool that allows clinicians to quickly and safely determine appropriateness of a refill request. Our health system opted to improve the quality and breadth of electronic health record vendor-supplied protocols to consistently leverage best practices and emerging evidence and to create novel protocols that further support clinicians. METHODS: We established a refill protocol governance group to guide new protocol build and to review existing protocols regularly to keep current with emerging guidelines. Data-driven prioritization was used to create new protocols for the most frequently refilled medications, as well as for less-prescribed but higher risk medications. Ad-hoc specialist inclusion as subject-matter experts provided greater detail, accuracy, and broader consensus in protocol criteria. RESULTS: Approximately 11 million refills are processed each year by our health system's providers. The proportion of refill requests supported by a protocol increased over a 2-year period from 49 to 82%, representing a net increase of 3.63 million refills in the second measurement year as compared to the start of the first measurement year. All published refill protocols were reviewed by the governance group over the measurement years for compliance with clinical guidelines. In addition to the structure of the refill protocols' CDS, the process was supported by filters that enable practices to quickly approve refills that pass protocol, providing more time for clinicians to review refills that fail a protocol or for which no protocol exists. CONCLUSION: A refill protocol is a valuable CDS tool that can improve efficiency, effectiveness, and user satisfaction when processing refill requests. A refill protocol governance structure is an effective way to review, edit, and build refill protocols within a health system.