Using Learning Communities to Support Adoption of Health Care Innovations.

BACKGROUND: Diffusion of innovations can be a slow process, posing a major challenge to quality improvement in health care. Learning communities can provide a rich, collaborative environment that supports the adoption of health care innovations and motivates organizational change. From 2014-2016, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) Health Care Innovations Exchange established and supported three learning communities focused on adopting innovations in three high-priority areas: (1) advancing the practice of patient- and family-centered care in hospitals, (2) promoting medication therapy management for at-risk populations, and (3) reducing non-urgent emergency services. METHODS: Members of each learning community worked collaboratively in facilitated settings to adapt and implement strategies featured in the Health Care Innovations Exchange, receiving technical assistance from content experts. Project staff conducted a mixed methods evaluation of the initiative, both formative and summative. RESULTS: The activities and outcomes of the three learning communities provided insights about how this approach can support local implementation efforts, and about factors influencing innovation adoption. Using a qualitative synthesis method, lessons were identified related to learning community startup (recruitment and goal setting), learning community operations (engagement, collaborative decision-making, and sustainability), and innovation implementation (changing care delivery processes and/or policies). CONCLUSIONS: Findings from this work indicate that the learning community model of group learning can serve as an effective method to support dissemination and implementation of innovations, and to achieve desired outcomes in local settings.

Regional interventions to eliminate healthcare-associated infections.

BACKGROUND: The development of the Health and Human Services (HHS) Action Plan to eliminate healthcare-associated infections (HAIs) and the coordinated efforts of the federal and private sectors to address this patient safety problem present an unprecedented effort to "bend the cost curve" of delivering care through improving quality. Key to this strategy was a multipronged approach at the federal, state, and regional levels. OBJECTIVES: To examine the impact of HHS's Regional Office projects in support of the implementation of the National Action Plan to Eliminate HAIs and to clarify the role played by HHS regions in the multipronged federal effort to combat HAIs. RESEARCH DESIGN: Qualitative; 13 individual semistructured interviews with representatives from 9 regions. Eight interviews were conducted initially and follow-up interviews were conducted 1-year later with original participants. MEASURES: Evaluated results against the modified Context-Input-Process-Product system functions and properties used to evaluate the HAI National Action Plan, including: HAI data and monitoring, knowledge development, infrastructure development, HAI prevention and practice adoption, prioritization, coordination and alignment, accountability and incentives, stakeholder engagement, and resources. RESULTS: Results from the interviews were systematically coded against a framework that documents specific system and properties that characterize the roadmap laid out by the Action Plan. This review assesses progress toward Action Plan goals achieved by these OASH-funded regional projects and finds that these regional activities furthered the National Action Plan goals by addressing the key regional needs. CONCLUSIONS: Key to the success of the National Action Plan was the multilevel approach to implementation of initiatives at the federal, regional, and state levels.

The national response for preventing healthcare-associated infections: infrastructure development.

BACKGROUND: In 2009, the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) launched the Action Plan to Prevent Healthcare-associated Infections (HAIs). The Action Plan adopted national targets for reduction of specific infections, making HHS accountable for change across the healthcare system over which federal agencies have limited control. OBJECTIVES: This article examines the unique infrastructure developed through the Action Plan to support adoption of HAI prevention practices. RESEARCH DESIGN: Interviews of federal (n=32) and other stakeholders (n=38), reviews of agency documents and journal articles (n=260), and observations of interagency meetings (n=17) and multistakeholder conferences (n=17) over a 3-year evaluation period. MEASURES: We extract key progress and challenges in the development of national HAI prevention infrastructure--1 of the 4 system functions in our evaluation framework encompassing regulation, payment systems, safety culture, and dissemination and technical assistance. We then identify system properties--for example, coordination and alignment, accountability and incentives, etc.--that enabled or hindered progress within each key development. RESULTS: The Action Plan has developed a model of interagency coordination (including a dedicated "home" and culture of cooperation) at the federal level and infrastructure for stimulating change through the wider healthcare system (including transparency and financial incentives, support of state and regional HAI prevention capacity, changes in safety culture, and mechanisms for stakeholder engagement). Significant challenges to infrastructure development included many related to the same areas of progress. CONCLUSIONS: The Action Plan has built a foundation of infrastructure to expand prevention of HAIs and presents useful lessons for other large-scale improvement initiatives.

The national response for preventing healthcare-associated infections: data and monitoring.

BACKGROUND: Historically, the ability to accurately track healthcare-associated infections (HAIs) was hindered due to a lack of coordination among data sources and shortcomings in individual data sources. OBJECTIVES: This paper presents the results of the evaluation of the HAI data and the monitoring component of the Action Plan, focusing on context (goals), inputs, and processes. RESEARCH DESIGN: We used the Content-Input-Process-Product framework, together with the HAI prevention system framework, to describe the transformative processes associated with data and monitoring efforts. RESULTS: Six HAI priority conditions in the 2009 Action Plan created a focus for the selection of goals and activities. Key Action Plan decisions included a phased-in data and monitoring approach, commitment to linking the selection of priority HAIs to highly visible national 5-year prevention targets, and the development of a comprehensive HAI database inventory. Remaining challenges relate to data validation, resources, and the opportunity to integrate electronic health and laboratory records with other provider data systems. CONCLUSIONS: The Action Plan's data and monitoring program has developed a sound infrastructure that builds upon technological advances and embodies a firm commitment to prioritization, coordination and alignment, accountability and incentives, stakeholder engagement, and an awareness of the need for predictable resources. With time, and adequate resources, it is likely that the investment in data-related infrastructure during the Action Plan's initial years will reap great rewards.

Approach for conducting the longitudinal program evaluation of the US Department of Health and Human Services National Action Plan to prevent healthcare-associated infections: roadmap to elimination.

BACKGROUND: In response to mounting evidence about skyrocketing morbidity, mortality, and costs associated with healthcare-associated infections (HAIs), in 2009, the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) issued the HHS HAI Action Plan to enhance collaboration and coordination and to strengthen the impact of national efforts to address HAIs. To optimize timely understanding of the Action Plan's approach and outcomes, as well as improve the likely success of this effort, HHS requested an independent longitudinal and formative program evaluation. OBJECTIVES: This article describes the evaluation approach to assessing HHS's progress and the challenges encountered as HHS attempted to transform the national strategy to HAI elimination. RESEARCH DESIGN: The Context-Input-Process-Product (CIPP) model, a structured-yet-flexible formative and summative evaluation tool, supported the assessment of: (1) the Context in which the Action Plan developed, (2) the Inputs and decisions made about selecting activities for implementation, (3) Processes or implementation of selected activities, and (4) Products and outcomes. MEASURES: A system framework consisting of 4 system functions and 5 system properties. RESULTS: The CIPP evaluation model provides a structure for tracking the components of the program, the relationship between components, and the way in which components change with time. The system framework allows the evaluation team to understand what the Action Plan is doing and how it aims to facilitate change in the healthcare system to address the problem of HAIs. CONCLUSIONS: With coordination and alignment becoming increasingly important among large programs within healthcare and other fields, program evaluations like this can inform the policy community about what works and why, and how future complex large-scale programs should be evaluated.

The national response for preventing healthcare-associated infections: research and adoption of prevention practices.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare-associated infections (HAIs) have long been the subject of research and prevention practice. When findings show potential to significantly impact outcomes, clinicians, policymakers, safety experts, and stakeholders seek to bridge the gap between research and practice by identifying mechanisms and assigning responsibility for translating research to practice. OBJECTIVES: This paper describes progress and challenges in HAI research and prevention practices, as explained through an examination of Health and Human Services (HHS) Action Plan's goals, inputs, and implementation in each area. RESEARCH DESIGN: We used the Context-Input-Process-Product evaluation model, together with an HAI prevention system framework, to assess the transformative processes associated with HAI research and adoption of prevention practices. RESULTS: Since the introduction of the Action Plan, HHS has made substantial progress in prioritizing research projects, translating findings from those projects into practice, and designing and implementing research projects in multisite practice settings. Research has emphasized the basic science and epidemiology of HAIs, the identification of gaps in research, and implementation science. The basic, epidemiological, and implementation science communities have joined forces to better define mechanisms and responsibilities for translating HAI research into practice. Challenges include the ongoing need for better evidence about intervention effectiveness, the growing implementation burden on healthcare providers and organizations, and challenges implementing certain practices. CONCLUSIONS: Although these HAI research and prevention practice activities are complex spanning multiple system functions and properties, HHS is making progress so that the right methods for addressing complex HAI problems at the interface of patient safety and clinical practice can emerge.

A State Financial Incentive Policy to Improve Emergency Department Treatment for Opioid Use Disorder: A Qualitative Study.

OBJECTIVE: In 2019, Pennsylvania established a voluntary financial incentive program designed to increase the engagement in addiction treatment for Medicaid patients with opioid use disorder after emergency department (ED) encounters. In this qualitative study involving hospital leaders, the authors examined decisions leading to participation in this program as well as barriers and facilitators that influenced its implementation. METHODS: Twenty semistructured interviews were conducted with leaders from a diverse sample of hospitals and health systems across Pennsylvania. Interviews were planned and analyzed following the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. An iterative approach was used to analyze the interviews and determine key themes and patterns regarding implementation of this policy initiative in hospitals. RESULTS: The authors identified six key themes that reflected barriers and facilitators to hospital participation in the program. Participation in the program was facilitated by community partners capable of arranging outpatient treatment for opioid use disorder, incentive payments focusing hospital leadership on opioid treatment pathways, multidisciplinary planning, and flexibility in adapting pathways for local needs. Barriers to program participation concerned the implementation of buprenorphine prescribing and the measurement of treatment outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: A financial incentive policy encouraged hospitals to enact rapid system and practice changes to support treatment for opioid use disorder, although challenges remained in implementing evidence-based treatment-specifically, initiation of buprenorphine-for patients visiting the ED. Analysis of treatment outcomes is needed to further evaluate this policy initiative, but new delivery and payment models may improve systems to treat patients who have an opioid use disorder.

Assessing the nation's progress toward elimination of disparities in health care.

The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality submitted the first annual National Healthcare Disparities Report to Congress in December, 2003. This first report will provide a snapshot of the state of racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic disparities in access and quality of care in America. It examines disparities in the general population and within the Agency's priority populations. While focused on extant data, the first report will form the foundation for future versions, which examines causes of disparities and shape solutions to the problem. As patient advocates and agents of change, primary care physicians play a critical role in efforts to eliminate disparities in health care. Continuing participation by primary care physicians in the development and refinement of the National Healthcare Disparities Report is essential.