Pneumonia diagnosis performance in the emergency department: a mixed-methods study about clinicians' experiences and exploration of individual differences and response to diagnostic performance feedback.

OBJECTIVES: We sought to (1) characterize the process of diagnosing pneumonia in an emergency department (ED) and (2) examine clinician reactions to a clinician-facing diagnostic discordance feedback tool. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We designed a diagnostic feedback tool, using electronic health record data from ED clinicians' patients to establish concordance or discordance between ED diagnosis, radiology reports, and hospital discharge diagnosis for pneumonia. We conducted semistructured interviews with 11 ED clinicians about pneumonia diagnosis and reactions to the feedback tool. We administered surveys measuring individual differences in mindset beliefs, comfort with feedback, and feedback tool usability. We qualitatively analyzed interview transcripts and descriptively analyzed survey data. RESULTS: Thematic results revealed: (1) the diagnostic process for pneumonia in the ED is characterized by diagnostic uncertainty and may be secondary to goals to treat and dispose the patient; (2) clinician diagnostic self-evaluation is a fragmented, inconsistent process of case review and follow-up that a feedback tool could fill; (3) the feedback tool was described favorably, with task and normative feedback harnessing clinician values of high-quality patient care and personal excellence; and (4) strong reactions to diagnostic feedback varied from implicit trust to profound skepticism about the validity of the concordance metric. Survey results suggested a relationship between clinicians' individual differences in learning and failure beliefs, feedback experience, and usability ratings. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Clinicians value feedback on pneumonia diagnoses. Our results highlight the importance of feedback about diagnostic performance and suggest directions for considering individual differences in feedback tool design and implementation.

Implicit and explicit: a scoping review exploring the contribution of anthropological practice in implementation science.

BACKGROUND: This study's goal is to identify the existing variation in how, why, and by whom anthropological practice is conducted as part of implementation science projects. As doctorally trained anthropologists, we sought to characterize how and why the term "ethnography" was variously applied in the implementation science literature and characterize the practice of anthropology within and across the field. METHODS: While we follow the PRISMA-ScR checklist, we present the work with a narrative approach to accurately reflect our review process. A health services librarian developed a search strategy using subject headings and keywords for the following databases: PubMed, Embase (Elsevier), Cochrane CENTRAL (Wiley), CIHAHL (EBSCO), PsycINFO (EBSCO), Web of Science Core Collection, and Anthropology Plus (EBSCO). We focused on the practice of anthropology in implementation research conducted in a healthcare setting, in English, with no date restrictions. Studies were included if they applied one or several elements of anthropological methods in terms of study design, data collection, and/or analysis. RESULTS: The database searches produced 3450 results combined after duplicates were removed, which were added to Rayyan for two rounds of screening by title and abstract. A total of 487 articles were included in the full-text screening. Of these, 227 were included and received data extraction that we recorded and analyzed with descriptive statistics in three main domains: (1) anthropological methods; (2) implementation science methods; and (3) study context. We found the use of characteristic tools of anthropology like ethnography and field notes are usually not systematically described but often mentioned. Further, we found that research design decisions and compromises (e.g., length of time in the field, logistics of stakeholder involvement, reconciling diverse firsthand experiences) that often impact anthropological approaches are not systematically described. CONCLUSIONS: Anthropological work often supports larger, mixed-methods implementation projects without being thoroughly reported. Context is essential to anthropological practice and implicitly fundamental to implementation research, yet the goals of anthropology and how its practice informs larger research projects are often not explicitly stated.

Artificial Intelligence and Cancer Control: Toward Prioritizing Justice, Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion (JEDI) in Emerging Decision Support Technologies.

PURPOSE FOR REVIEW: This perspective piece has two goals: first, to describe issues related to artificial intelligence-based applications for cancer control as they may impact health inequities or disparities; and second, to report on a review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of artificial intelligence-based tools for cancer control to ascertain the extent to which discussions of justice, equity, diversity, inclusion, or health disparities manifest in syntheses of the field's best evidence. RECENT FINDINGS: We found that, while a significant proportion of existing syntheses of research on AI-based tools in cancer control use formal bias assessment tools, the fairness or equitability of models is not yet systematically analyzable across studies. Issues related to real-world use of AI-based tools for cancer control, such as workflow considerations, measures of usability and acceptance, or tool architecture, are more visible in the literature, but still addressed only in a minority of reviews. Artificial intelligence is poised to bring significant benefits to a wide range of applications in cancer control, but more thorough and standardized evaluations and reporting of model fairness are required to build the evidence base for AI-based tool design for cancer and to ensure that these emerging technologies promote equitable healthcare.

Barriers to family history collection among Spanish-speaking primary care patients: a BRIDGE qualitative study.

Objectives: Family history is an important tool for assessing disease risk, and tailoring recommendations for screening and genetic services referral. This study explored barriers to family history collection with Spanish-speaking patients. Methods: This qualitative study was conducted in two US healthcare systems. We conducted semi-structured interviews with medical assistants, physicians, and interpreters with experience collecting family history for Spanish-speaking patients. Results: The most common patient-level barrier was the perception that some Spanish-speaking patients had limited knowledge of family history. Interpersonal communication barriers related to dialectical differences and decisions about using formal interpreters vs. Spanish-speaking staff. Organizational barriers included time pressures related to using interpreters, and ad hoc workflow adaptations for Spanish-speaking patients that might leave gaps in family history collection. Conclusions: This study identified multi-level barriers to family history collection with Spanish-speaking patients in primary care. Findings suggest that a key priority to enhance communication would be to standardize processes for working with interpreters. Innovation: To improve communication with and care provided to Spanish-speaking patients, there is a need to increase healthcare provider awareness about implicit bias, to address ad hoc workflow adjustments within practice settings, to evaluate the need for professional interpreter services, and to improve digital tools to facilitate family history collection.

New Standards for Clinical Decision Support: A Survey of The State of Implementation.

OBJECTIVES: To review the current state of research on designing and implementing clinical decision support (CDS) using four current interoperability standards: Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources (FHIR); Substitutable Medical Applications and Reusable Technologies (SMART); Clinical Quality Language (CQL); and CDS Hooks. METHODS: We conducted a review of original studies describing development of specific CDS tools or infrastructures using one of the four targeted standards, regardless of implementation stage. Citations published any time before the literature search was executed on October 21, 2020 were retrieved from PubMed. Two reviewers independently screened articles and abstracted data according to a protocol designed by team consensus. RESULTS: Of 290 articles identified via PubMed search, 44 were included in this study. More than three quarters were published since 2018. Forty-three (98%) used FHIR; 22 (50%) used SMART; two (5%) used CQL; and eight (18%) used CDS Hooks. Twenty-four (55%) were in the design stage, 15 (34%) in the piloting stage, and five (11%) were deployed in a real-world setting. Only 12 (27%) of the articles reported an evaluation of the technology under development. Three of the four articles describing a deployed technology reported an evaluation. Only two evaluations with randomized study components were identified. CONCLUSION: The diversity of topics and approaches identified in the literature highlights the utility of these standards. The infrequency of reported evaluations, as well as the high number of studies in the design or piloting stage, indicate that these technologies are still early in their life cycles. Informaticists will require a stronger evidence base to understand the implications of using these standards in CDS design and implementation.

Developing a sampling method and preliminary taxonomy for classifying COVID-19 public health guidance for healthcare organizations and the general public.

BACKGROUND: Development and dissemination of public health (PH) guidance to healthcare organizations and the general public (e.g., businesses, schools, individuals) during emergencies like the COVID-19 pandemic is vital for policy, clinical, and public decision-making. Yet, the rapidly evolving nature of these events poses significant challenges for guidance development and dissemination strategies predicated on well-understood concepts and clearly defined access and distribution pathways. Taxonomies are an important but underutilized tool for guidance authoring, dissemination and updating in such dynamic scenarios. OBJECTIVE: To design a rapid, semi-automated method for sampling and developing a PH guidance taxonomy using widely available Web crawling tools and streamlined manual content analysis. METHODS: Iterative samples of guidance documents were taken from four state PH agency websites, the US Center for Disease Control and Prevention, and the World Health Organization. Documents were used to derive and refine a preliminary taxonomy of COVID-19 PH guidance via content analysis. RESULTS: Eight iterations of guidance document sampling and taxonomy revisions were performed, with a final corpus of 226 documents. The preliminary taxonomy contains 110 branches distributed between three major domains: stakeholders (24 branches), settings (25 branches) and topics (61 branches). Thematic saturation measures indicated rapid saturation (≤5% change) for the domains of "stakeholders" and "settings", and "topic"-related branches for clinical decision-making. Branches related to business reopening and economic consequences remained dynamic throughout sampling iterations. CONCLUSION: The PH guidance taxonomy can support public health agencies by aligning guidance development with curation and indexing strategies; supporting targeted dissemination; increasing the speed of updates; and enhancing public-facing guidance repositories and information retrieval tools. Taxonomies are essential to support knowledge management activities during rapidly evolving scenarios such as disease outbreaks and natural disasters.

National Media Coverage of the Veterans Affairs Waitlist Scandal: Effects on Veterans' Distrust of the VA Health Care System.

BACKGROUND: On April 23, 2014, US media outlets broadcast reports of excessive wait times and "secret" waitlists at some Veterans Affairs (VA) hospitals, precipitating legislation to increase Veterans' access to private sector health care. OBJECTIVE: The aims were to assess changes in Veterans' distrust in the VA health care system before and after the media coverage and explore sex and racial/ethnic differences in the temporal patterns. METHODS: Veterans completed semistructured interviews on health care satisfaction from June 2013 to January 2015, including a validated scale of health system distrust (range: 1-5). We used linear splines with knots at 90-day intervals to assess changes in distrust before and after April 23, 2014 ("day 0") in linear mixed models. To explore sex and racial/ethnic differences in temporal patterns, we stratified models by sex and tested for interactions of race/ethnicity with time. RESULTS: For women (n=600), distrust scores (mean=2.09) increased by 0.45 in days 0-90 (P<0.01), then decreased by 0.45 in days 90-180 (P<0.01). Among men (n=575), distrust scores (mean=2.05) increased by 0.18 in days 0-90 (P=0.059). Distrust levels were significantly higher for Black versus White women (time adjusted mean difference=0.21) and for Black and Hispanic versus White men (differences=0.26 and 0.18). However, the temporal patterns did not vary by race/ethnicity for women or men (interaction P=0.85 and 0.21, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Health system distrust increased in women following media coverage of VA access problems and was higher in Black/Hispanic versus White Veterans at all time periods. Such perceptions could influence Veteran decisions to seek health care in the community rather than VA.

Social dynamics of a population-level dashboard for antimicrobial stewardship: A qualitative analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate antimicrobial stewards' experiences of using a dashboard display integrating local and national antibiotic use data implemented in the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). This paper reports early formative evaluation. DESIGN: Qualitative interviewing. SETTING: Eight VA hospitals participated with established antimicrobial stewardship (AS) programs participated in the pilot. PARTICIPANTS: Six infectious disease physicians and eight clinical pharmacists agreed to be interviewed (n = 14). METHODS: A 3-part qualitative interview script was used involving a description of local stewardship activities, a Critical Incident description of dashboard use, and general questions regarding attitudes towards the tool. An inductive open coding approach was used for analysis. RESULTS: We found 4 themes showing the complexities of using stewardship tools: (1) Data validity is socially negotiated; (2) Performance feedback motivates and persuades social goals when situated in an empirical distribution; (3) Shared problem awareness is aided by authoritative data; and (4) The AS dashboard encourages connections with local quality improvement culture. CONCLUSIONS: Social dimensions of AS tool use emerged as distinct from, and equally important as decision support provided by the dashboard. Successful stewardship tools should be designed to support both the social and cognitive needs of users.

Feeling and thinking: can theories of human motivation explain how EHR design impacts clinician burnout?

The psychology of motivation can help us understand the impact of electronic health records (EHRs) on clinician burnout both directly and indirectly. Informatics approaches to EHR usability tend to focus on the extrinsic motivation associated with successful completion of clearly defined tasks in clinical workflows. Intrinsic motivation, which includes the need for autonomy, sense-making, creativity, connectedness, and mastery is not well supported by current designs and workflows. This piece examines existing research on the importance of 3 psychological drives in relation to healthcare technology: goal-based decision-making, sense-making, and agency/autonomy. Because these motives are ubiquitous, foundational to human functioning, automatic, and unconscious, they may be overlooked in technological interventions. The results are increased cognitive load, emotional distress, and unfulfilling workplace environments. Ultimately, we hope to stimulate new research on EHR design focused on expanding functionality to support intrinsic motivation, which, in turn, would decrease burnout and improve care.

Physicians' strategies for using family history data: having the data is not the same as using the data.

OBJECTIVE: To identify needs in a clinical decision support tool development by exploring how primary care providers currently collect and use family health history (FHH). DESIGN: Survey questionnaires and semi-structured interviews were administered to a mix of primary and specialty care clinicians within the University of Utah Health system (40 surveys, 12 interviews). RESULTS: Three key themes emerged regarding providers' collection and use of FHH: (1) Strategies for collecting FHH vary by level of effort; (2) Documentation practices extend beyond the electronic health record's dedicated FHH module; and (3) Providers desire feedback from genetic services consultation and are uncertain how to refer patients to genetic services. CONCLUSION: Study findings highlight the varying degrees of engagement that providers have with collecting FHH. Improving the integration of FHH into workflow, and providing decision support, as well as links and tools to help providers better utilize genetic counseling may improve patient care.

Veteran Satisfaction with Early Experiences of Health Care Through the Veterans Choice Program: a Concurrent Mixed Methods Study.

BACKGROUND: The 2014 Veterans Access, Choice and Accountability Act (i.e., "Choice") allows eligible Veterans to receive covered health care outside the Veterans Affairs (VA) Healthcare System. The initial implementation of Choice was challenging, and use was limited in the first year. OBJECTIVE: To assess satisfaction with Choice, and identify reasons for satisfaction and dissatisfaction during its early implementation. DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS: Semi-structured telephone interviews from July to September 2015 with Choice-eligible Veterans from 25 VA facilities across the USA. MAIN MEASURES: Satisfaction was assessed with 5-point Likert scales and open-ended questions. We compared ratings of satisfaction with Choice and VA health care, and identified reasons for satisfaction/dissatisfaction with Choice in a thematic analysis of open-ended qualitative data. RESULTS: Of 195 participants, 35 had not attempted to use Choice; 43 attempted but had not received Choice care (i.e., attempted only); and 117 attempted and received Choice care. Among those who attempted only, a smaller percentage were somewhat/very satisfied with Choice than with VA health care (17.9% and 71.8%, p < 0.001); among participants who received Choice, similar percentages were somewhat/very satisfied with Choice and VA health care (66.6% and 71.1%, p = 0.45). When asked what contributed to Choice ratings, participants who attempted but did not receive Choice care reported poor access (50%), scheduling problems (20%), and care coordination issues (10%); participants who received Choice care reported improved access (27%), good quality of care (19%), and good distance to Choice provider (16%). Regardless of receipt of Choice care, most participants expressed interest in using Choice in the future (70-82%). CONCLUSIONS: Access and scheduling barriers contributed to dissatisfaction for Veterans unsuccessfully attempting to use Choice during its initial implementation, whereas improved access and good care contributed to satisfaction for those receiving Choice care. With Veterans' continued interest in using services outside VA facilities, subsequent policy changes should address Veterans' barriers to care.

Forming a successful public health collaborative: A qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Coordinated approaches are needed to optimally control the spread of resistant organisms across facilities that share patients. Our goal was to understand social tensions that may inhibit public health-led community partnerships and to identify factors for success. METHODS: A collaborative to control transmission of multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs) was formed in Utah following a regional outbreak, with members from public health, hospitals, laboratories, and transport services. We conducted and qualitatively analyzed 3 focus groups among collaborative stakeholders to discuss their experiences. RESULTS: Via 3 focus groups and additional interviews, we found the collaborative made institutional tensions between stakeholders explicit. We identified 4 factors that facilitated the ability to overcome institutional tensions: public health leadership to establish a safe space, creation of cross-institutional group identity with mutual respect and support, standardized communication, and group cohesiveness through shared mental models of interdependencies. DISCUSSION: Stakeholders' concerns regarding being blamed for MDRO transmission versus contributing to shared health care community MDRO control efforts resembled a "prisoner's dilemma." Four social components mitigated tensions and facilitated cooperation in this public health-led collaborative. CONCLUSIONS: This study identified strategies that public health-led coordinated approaches can use to facilitate cooperation.

Understanding Primary Care Providers' Information Gathering Strategies in the Care of Children and Youth with Special Health Care Needs.

Background: Effective care coordination of children and youth with special health care needs (CYSHCN) is critical but challenging. Objective: To investigate clinicians' information-gathering strategies while preparing for visits with CYSHCN. Methods: Critical incident interviews with primary care physicians and care coordinators. Results: Six themes emerged indicating 1) substantial reliance on the electronic health record; 2) a central role of the problem list in organizing and summarizing information; 3) Medical Home's central role in organizing clinical documentation; 4) universal need to integrate information from external records; 5) lack of well-organized and labeled encounter documentation; and 6) lack of tools reconcile medication lists. Conclusion: Our findings have important implications to the design of informatics tools to support information-gathering in the care of CYSHCN.

Indigenous, colonist, and government Impacts on Nicaragua's Bosawas Reserve.

We studied the impacts of colonists, two groups of indigenous residents (Miskitu and Mayangna), and management by the Nicaraguan Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources (MARENA) on the forest of the Bosawas International Biosphere Reserve. Indigenous people and colonists subsist on the natural resources of the reserve, and MARENA is responsible for protecting the area from colonization and illicit exploitation. Using geostatistical procedures and Landsat images at three different time periods, we compared per capita deforestation and boundary stabilization in areas with colonists and areas with indigenous peoples. We also examined whether the Mayangna deforested less than the Miskitu and whether the Nicaraguan government has effectively defended the Bosawas boundary against the advance of the agricultural frontier. In addition, we analyzed the current distribution of land uses within the reserve and its contiguous indigenous areas with a supervised classification of current land cover. Indigenous demarcations protected the forest successfully, whereas the Bosawas boundary itself did not inhibit colonization and consequent deforestation. Indigenous farmers deforested significantly less per capita than colonists, and the two indigenous groups in Bosawas did not differ significantly in their effects on the forest. Our results show that indigenous common-property institutions and indigenous defense of homeland have been powerful factors in protecting the forests of Bosawas and that the difficult evolution of a nested cross-scale governance system in Bosawas-under pressure from indigenous peoples-is probably the key to the forest's survival thus far.