Achieving Cancer Equity by Improving Health Insurance Access for All Latinos.

Cancer is the top leading cause of death among Latino people. Lack of health insurance is a significant contributor to inadequate cancer detection and treatment. Despite healthcare policy expansions such as the Affordable Care Act, Latino people persistently maintain the highest uninsured rate among any ethnic and racial group in the US, especially among Latino individuals who are immigrants or part of a mixed immigration status household. Recognizing that immigration status is a critical factor in the ability of Latino community members to seek health insurance and access healthcare services, a few US states and the District of Columbia have implemented policies that have expanded coverage to children and adults regardless of immigration status. Expansion of Medicaid eligibility regardless of immigration status may significantly benefit Latino communities, however the facilitators and barriers to enrolling in these programs need to be evaluated to ensure reach and achieve health equity across the cancer control continuum for all Latinos.

Primary Care and Community-Based Partnerships to Enhance HPV Vaccine Delivery.

INTRODUCTION/OBJECTIVES: With growing vaccination misinformation and mistrust, strategies to improve vaccination communication across community-based settings are needed. METHODS: The Rural Adolescent Vaccine Enterprise (RAVE), a 5-year (2018-2022) stepped-wedge cluster randomized study, tested a clinic-based practice facilitation intervention designed to improve HPV vaccination. An exploratory aim sought to explore the use of partnerships between primary care clinics and a community partner of their choosing, to implement a social marketing campaign related to HPV immunization. We assessed perceptions about the value and success of the partnership, and barriers and facilitators to its implementation using a 29-item community partner survey, key informant interviews, and field notes from practice facilitators. RESULTS: Of the initial 45 clinics participating in RAVE, 9 were unable to either start or complete the study, and 36 participants (80.0%) were actively engaged. Of these, 16/36 clinics (44.4%) reported establishing successful partnerships, 10 reported attempting to develop partnerships (27.8%), and another 10 reported not developing a partnership (27.8%), which were often caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. The most common partnership was with public health departments at 27.3%. Other partnerships involved libraries, school districts, and local businesses. More than half (63.7%) reported that creating messages regarding getting HPV vaccination was moderately to very challenging. Just under half reported (45.5%) that messaging was hard because of a lack of understanding about the seriousness of diseases caused by HPV, parents being against vaccines because of safety concerns, and religious values that result in a lack of openness to HPV vaccines. Community partners' health priorities changed as a result of RAVE, with 80% prioritizing childhood immunizations as a result of the RAVE partnership. CONCLUSIONS: Community groups want to partner with primary care organizations to serve their patients and populations. More research is needed on how best to bring these groups together.

Employee Cardiometabolic Risk Following a Cluster-Randomized Workplace Intervention From the Work, Family and Health Network, 2009-2013.

Objectives. To examine whether workplace interventions to increase workplace flexibility and supervisor support and decrease work-family conflict can reduce cardiometabolic risk. Methods. We randomly assigned employees from information technology (n = 555) and long-term care (n = 973) industries in the United States to the Work, Family and Health Network intervention or usual practice (we collected the data 2009-2013). We calculated a validated cardiometabolic risk score (CRS) based on resting blood pressure, HbA1c (glycated hemoglobin), HDL (high-density lipoprotein) and total cholesterol, height and weight (body mass index), and tobacco consumption. We compared changes in baseline CRS to 12-month follow-up. Results. There was no significant main effect on CRS associated with the intervention in either industry. However, significant interaction effects revealed that the intervention improved CRS at the 12-month follow-up among intervention participants in both industries with a higher baseline CRS. Age also moderated intervention effects: older employees had significantly larger reductions in CRS at 12 months than did younger employees. Conclusions. The intervention benefited employee health by reducing CRS equivalent to 5 to 10 years of age-related changes for those with a higher baseline CRS and for older employees. Trial Registration. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02050204. (Am J Public Health. 2023;113(12):1322-1331. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2023.307413).

The role of language in mammography orders among low-income Latinas over a 10-year period.

INTRODUCTION: Latinas in the United States have higher mortality from breast cancer, but longitudinal studies of mammography ordering (a crucial initial step towards screening) in primary care are lacking. METHODS: We conducted an analysis of mammography order rates in Latinas (by language preference) and non-Latina white women (N = 181,755) over a > 10 year period in a multi-state network of community health centers (CHCs). We evaluated two outcomes (ever having a mammogram order and annual rate of mammography orders) using generalized estimating equation modeling. RESULTS: Approximately one-third of all patients had ever had a mammogram order. Among those receiving mammogram orders, English-preferring Latinas had lower mammogram order rates than non-Hispanic white women (RR = 0.92, 95% CI = 0.89-0.95). Spanish-preferring Latinas had higher odds of ever having a mammogram ordered than non-Hispanic whites (odds ratio = 2.12, 95% CI = 2.06-2.18) and, if ever ordered, had a higher rate of annual mammogram orders (rate ratio = 1.53, 95% CI = 1.50-1.56). CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that breast cancer detection barriers in low-income Latinas may not stem from a lack of orders in primary care, but in the subsequent accessibility of receiving ordered services.

Differences in Use of Clinical Decision Support Tools and Implementation of Aspirin, Blood Pressure Control, Cholesterol Management, and Smoking Cessation Quality Metrics in Small Practices by Race and Sex.

Importance: Practice-level evidence is needed to clarify the value of population-based clinical decision support (CDS) tools in reducing racial and sex disparities in cardiovascular care. Objective: To evaluate the association between CDS tools and racial and sex disparities in the aspirin use, blood pressure control, cholesterol management, and smoking cessation (ABCS) care quality metrics among smaller primary care practices. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used practice-level data from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality-funded EvidenceNOW initiative. The national initiative from May 1, 2015, to April 30, 2021, spanned 12 US states and focused on improving cardiovascular preventive care by providing quality improvement support to smaller primary care practices. A total of 576 primary care practices in EvidenceNOW submitted both survey data and electronic health record (EHR)-derived ABCS data stratified by race and sex. Main Outcomes and Measures: Practice-level estimates of disparities between Black and White patients and between male and female patients were calculated as the difference in proportions of eligible patients within each practice meeting ABCS care quality metrics. The association between CDS tools (EHR prompts, standing orders, and clinical registries) and disparities was evaluated by multiply imputed multivariable models for each CDS tool, adjusted for practice rurality, ownership, and size. Results: Across the 576 practices included in the analysis, 219 (38.0%) had patient panels that were more than half White and 327 (56.8%) had panels that were more than half women. The proportion of White compared with Black patients meeting metrics for blood pressure (difference, 5.16% [95% CI, 4.29%-6.02%]; P < .001) and cholesterol management (difference, 1.49% [95% CI, 0.04%-2.93%] P = .04) was higher; the proportion of men meeting metrics for aspirin use (difference, 4.36% [95% CI, 3.34%-5.38%]; P < .001) and cholesterol management (difference, 3.88% [95% CI, 3.14%-4.63%]; P < .001) was higher compared with women. Conversely, the proportion of women meeting practice blood pressure control (difference, -1.80% [95% CI, -2.32% to -1.28%]; P < .001) and smoking cessation counseling (difference, -1.67% [95% CI, -2.38% to -0.95%]; P < .001) metrics was higher compared with men. Use of CDS tools was not associated with differences in race or sex disparities except for the smoking metric. Practices using CDS tools showed a higher proportion of men meeting the smoking counseling metric than women (coefficient, 3.82 [95% CI, 0.95-6.68]; P = .009). Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this cross-sectional study suggest that practices using CDS tools had small disparities that were not statistically significant, but CDS tools were not associated with reductions in disparities. More research is needed on effective practice-level interventions to mitigate disparities.

Uptake of a Cervical Cancer Clinical Decision Support Tool: A Mixed-Methods Study.

OBJECTIVES: Clinical decision support (CDS) tools that provide point-of-care reminders of patients' care needs may improve rates of guideline-concordant cervical cancer screening. However, uptake of such electronic health record (EHR)-based tools in primary care practices is often low. This study describes the frequency of factors associated with, and barriers and facilitators to adoption of a cervical cancer screening CDS tool (CC-tool) implemented in a network of community health centers. METHODS: This mixed-methods sequential explanatory study reports on CC-tool use among 480 community-based clinics, located across 18 states. Adoption of the CC-tool was measured as any instance of tool use (i.e., entry of cervical cancer screening results or follow-up plan) and as monthly tool use rates from November 1, 2018 (tool release date) to December 31, 2020. Adjusted odds and rates of tool use were evaluated using logistic and negative-binomial regression. Feedback from nine clinic staff representing six clinics during user-centered design sessions and semi-structured interviews with eight clinic staff from two additional clinics were conducted to assess barriers and facilitators to tool adoption. RESULTS: The CC-tool was used ≥1 time in 41% of study clinics during the analysis period. Clinics that ever used the tool and those with greater monthly tool use had, on average, more encounters, more patients from households at >138% federal poverty level, fewer pediatric encounters, higher up-to-date cervical cancer screening rates, and higher rates of abnormal cervical cancer screening results. Qualitative data indicated barriers to tool adoption, including lack of knowledge of the tool's existence, understanding of its functionalities, and training on its use. CONCLUSION: Without effective systems for informing users about new EHR functions, new or updated EHR tools are unlikely to be widely adopted, reducing their potential to improve health care quality and outcomes.

Latino Adolescent-Mother Language Concordance, Neighborhood Deprivation, and Vaccinations in Community Health Centers.

INTRODUCTION: Latino adolescents may face numerous barriers) to recommended vaccinations. There is little research on the association between Latino adolescent-mother preferred language concordance and vaccination completion and if it varies by neighborhood. To better understand the social/family factors associated with Latino adolescent vaccination, we studied the association of adolescent-mother language concordance and neighborhood social deprivation with adolescent vaccination completion. METHODS: We employed a multistate, electronic health record (EHR) based dataset of community health center patients to compare three Latino groups: (1) English-preferring adolescents with English-preferring mothers, (2) Spanish-preferring adolescents with Spanish-preferring mothers, and (3) English-preferring adolescents with Spanish-preferring mothers with non-Hispanic white adolescent-mother pairs for human papilloma virus (HPV), meningococcal, and influenza vaccinations. We adjusted for mother and adolescent demographics and care utilization and stratified by the social deprivation of the family's neighborhood. RESULTS: Our sample included 56,542 adolescent-mother dyads. Compared with non-Hispanic white dyads, all three groups of Latino dyads had higher odds of adolescent HPV and meningococcal vaccines and higher rates of flu vaccines. Latino dyads with Spanish-preferring mothers had higher vaccination odds/rates than Latino dyads with English-preferring mothers. The effects of variation by neighborhood social deprivation in influenza vaccination rates were minor in comparison to differences by ethnicity/language concordance. CONCLUSION: In a multistate analysis of vaccinations among Latino and non-Latino adolescents, English-preferring adolescents with Spanish-preferring mothers had the highest completion rates and English-preferring non-Hispanic white dyads the lowest. Further research can seek to understand why this language dyad may have an advantage in adolescent vaccination completion.

Latino adolescents may face numerous barriers to preventive care­especially routine immunizations, but analyses often focus on single or few factors that may affect the utilization of these services. Our analysis of not only the language preference of Latino adolescents, but the preferred language of their mothers and their neighborhood social adversity demonstrates that English-preferring Latino adolescents with Spanish preferring mothers were most likely to utilize all immunizations we studied, and there were differences in utilization among Latino families by language concordance. This adds to our knowledge of Latino adolescent health care utilization by demonstrating the differences in Latino families, and suggesting that many of these families may have assets for service utilization from which we can learn.

Delivery of Cervical and Colorectal Cancer Screenings During the Pandemic in Community Health Centers: Practice Changes and Recovery Strategies.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic led to clinical practice changes, which affected cancer preventive care delivery. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic on the delivery of colorectal cancer (CRC) and cervical cancer (CVC) screenings. RESEARCH DESIGN: Parallel mixed methods design using electronic health record data (extracted between January 2019 and July 2021). Study results focused on 3 pandemic-related periods: March-May 2020, June-October 2020, and November 2020-September 2021. SUBJECTS: Two hundred seventeen community health centers located in 13 states and 29 semistructured interviews from 13 community health centers. MEASURES: Monthly up-to-date CRC and CVC screening rates and monthly rates of completed colonoscopies, fecal immunochemical test (FIT)/fecal occult blood test (FOBT) procedures, Papanicolaou tests among age and sex-eligible patients. Analysis used generalized estimating equations Poisson modeling. Qualitative analysts developed case summaries and created a cross-case data display for comparison. RESULTS: The results showed a reduction of 75% for colonoscopy [rate ratio (RR) = 0.250, 95% CI: 0.224-0.279], 78% for FIT/FOBT (RR = 0.218, 95% CI: 0.208-0.230), and 87% for Papanicolaou (RR = 0.130, 95% CI: 0.125-0.136) rates after the start of the pandemic. During this early pandemic period, CRC screening was impacted by hospitals halting services. Clinic staff moved toward FIT/FOBT screenings. CVC screening was impacted by guidelines encouraging pausing CVC screening, patient reluctance, and concerns about exposure. During the recovery period, leadership-driven preventive care prioritization and quality improvement capacity influenced CRC and CVC screening maintenance and recovery. CONCLUSIONS: Efforts supporting quality improvement capacity could be key actionable elements for these health centers to endure major disruptions to their care delivery system and to drive rapid recovery.

Chronic overlapping pain conditions and long-term opioid treatment.

OBJECTIVES: One in 5 people in the United States lives with chronic pain. Many patients with chronic pain experience a subset of specific co-occurring pain conditions that may share a common pain mechanism and that have been designated as chronic overlapping pain conditions (COPCs). Little is known about chronic opioid prescribing patterns among patients with COPCs in primary care settings, especially among socioeconomically vulnerable patients. This study aims to evaluate opioid prescribing among patients with COPCs in US community health centers and to identify individual COPCs and their combinations that are associated with long-term opioid treatment (LOT). STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. METHODS: We conducted analyses of more than 1 million patients 18 years and older based on electronic health record data from 449 US community health centers across 17 states between January 1, 2009, and December 31, 2018. Logistic regression models were used to assess the relationship between COPCs and LOT. RESULTS: Individuals with COPCs were prescribed LOT 4 times more often than individuals without a COPC (16.9% vs 4.0%). The presence of chronic low back pain, migraine headache, fibromyalgia, or irritable bowel syndrome combined with any of the other COPCs increased the odds of LOT prescribing compared with the presence of a single COPC. CONCLUSIONS: Although LOT prescribing has declined over time, it remains relatively high among patients with certain COPCs and for those with multiple COPCs. These study findings suggest target populations for future interventions to manage chronic pain among socioeconomically vulnerable patients.

Social Risk Screening and Response Equity: Assessment by Race, Ethnicity, and Language in Community Health Centers.

INTRODUCTION: Little has previously been reported about the implementation of social risk screening across racial/ethnic/language groups. To address this knowledge gap, the associations between race/ethnicity/language, social risk screening, and patient-reported social risks were examined among adult patients at community health centers. METHODS: Patient- and encounter-level data from 2016 to 2020 from 651 community health centers in 21 U.S. states were used; data were extracted from a shared Epic electronic health record and analyzed between December 2020 and February 2022. In adjusted logistic regression analyses stratified by language, robust sandwich variance SE estimators were applied with clustering on patient's primary care facility. RESULTS: Social risk screening occurred at 30% of health centers; 11% of eligible adult patients were screened. Screening and reported needs varied significantly by race/ethnicity/language. Black Hispanic and Black non-Hispanic patients were approximately twice as likely to be screened, and Hispanic White patients were 28% less likely to be screened than non-Hispanic White patients. Hispanic Black patients were 87% less likely to report social risks than non-Hispanic White patients. Among patients who preferred a language other than English or Spanish, Black Hispanic patients were 90% less likely to report social needs than non-Hispanic White patients. CONCLUSIONS: Social risk screening documentation and patient reports of social risks differed by race/ethnicity/language in community health centers. Although social care initiatives are intended to promote health equity, inequitable screening practices could inadvertently undermine this goal. Future implementation research should explore strategies for equitable screening and related interventions.

Association of Clinician Practice Ownership With Ability of Primary Care Practices to Improve Quality Without Increasing Burnout.

Importance: Work environments and practice structural features are associated with both burnout and the ability of practices to enhance quality of care. Objective: To characterize factors associated with primary care practices successfully improving quality scores without increasing clinician and staff burnout. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study assessed small- to medium-sized primary care practices that participated in the EvidenceNOW: Advancing Heart Health initiative using surveys that were administered at baseline (September 2015 to April 2017) and after the intervention (January 2017 to October 2018). Data were analyzed from February 2022 to January 2023. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome of being a quality and well-being positive deviant practice was defined as a practice with a stable or improved percentage of clinicians and staff reporting burnout over the study period and with practice-level improvement in all 3 cardiovascular quality measures: aspirin prescribing, blood pressure control, and smoking cessation counseling. Results: Of 727 practices with complete burnout and aspirin prescribing, blood pressure control, and smoking cessation counseling data, 18.3% (n = 133) met the criteria to be considered quality and well-being positive deviant practices. In analyses adjusted for practice location, accountable care organization and demonstration project participation, and practice specialty composition, clinician-owned practices had greater odds of being a positive deviant practice (odds ratio, 2.02; 95% CI, 1.16-3.54) than practices owned by a hospital or health system. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study, clinician-owned practices were more likely to achieve improvements in cardiovascular quality outcomes without increasing staff member burnout than were practices owned by a hospital or health system. Given increasing health care consolidation, our findings suggest the value of studying cultural features of clinician-owned practices that may be associated with positive quality and experience outcomes.

Clinic-level differences in human papillomavirus vaccination rates among rural and urban Oregon primary care clinics.

PURPOSE: Human papillomavirus (HPV) infection contributes to vaccine-preventable malignancies. Rural populations experience lower HPV vaccination rates despite similar rates of other childhood vaccinations. Individual- and clinic-level characteristics likely contribute to this disparity, but little is known about the separate roles of each. We compared clinic-level HPV vaccination rates among rural versus urban primary care clinics, identified factors associated with HPV vaccination, and separately assessed the impact of individual- and clinic-level characteristics on rural disparities in HPV vaccination. METHODS: This cross-sectional study included 537 Oregon primary care clinics participating in the Vaccines for Children (VFC) program during 2019. Vaccination status was assessed using Oregon's ALERT Immunization Information System and included HPV vaccine ≥ 1 dose for ages 11 and 12; HPV vaccination up to date (UTD) for ages 13-17, and coadministration with tetanus, diphtheria, and acellular pertussis (Tdap). Rural versus urban clinic-level outcomes were assessed using negative binomial regression. FINDINGS: Participating clinics were 24.5% rural and 75.6% urban. Family medicine clinics comprised 71.1%; pediatrics, 16.9%; and mixed, 12.1%. Across clinics, the average proportion of patients qualifying for VFC was 43%, and non-White patients were 14.1%. The mean rate of HPV vaccine ≥1 dose was lower among rural clinics (46.9% vs 51.1%, P = .039), as was vaccination UTD (40.5% vs 49.9%, P < .001). Adjusting for differences in individual- and clinic-level characteristics, rural disparities were no longer statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Both individual- and clinic-level characteristics play a role in rural disparities in HPV vaccination, and modifiable clinic-level differences may be opportune targets to address these disparities.

How Does Prior Experience Pay Off in Large-Scale Quality Improvement Initiatives?

INTRODUCTION: To examine the association of prior investment on the effectiveness of organizations delivering large-scale external support to improve primary care. METHODS: Mixed-methods study of 7 EvidenceNOW grantees (henceforth, Cooperatives) and their recruited practices (n = 1720). Independent Variable: Cooperatives's experience level prior to EvidenceNOW, defined as a sustained track record in delivering large-scale quality improvement (QI) to primary care practices (high, medium, or low). Dependent Variables: Implementation of external support, measured as facilitation dose; effectiveness at improving (1) clinical quality, measured as practices' performance on Aspirin, Blood Pressure, Cholesterol, and Smoking (ABCS); and (2) practice capacity, measured using the Adaptive Reserve (AR) score and Change Process Capacity Questionnaire (CPCQ). Data were analyzed using multivariable linear regressions and a qualitative inductive approach. RESULTS: Cooperatives with High (vs low) levels of prior experience with and investment in large-scale QI before EvidenceNOW recruited more geographically dispersed and diverse practices, with lower baseline ABCS performance (differences ranging from 2.8% for blood pressure to 41.5% for smoking), delivered more facilitation (mean=+20.3 hours, P = .04), and made greater improvements in practices' QI capacity (CPCQ: +2.04, P < .001) and smoking performance (+6.43%, P = .003). These Cooperatives had established networks of facilitators at the start of EvidenceNOW and leadership experienced in supporting this workforce, which explained their better recruitment, delivery of facilitation, and improvement in outcomes. DISCUSSION: Long-term investment that establishes regionwide organizations with infrastructure and experience to support primary care practices in QI is associated with more consistent delivery of facilitation support, and greater improvement in practice capacity and some clinical outcomes.

Association of parent influenza vaccination and early childhood vaccinations using linked electronic health record data.

INTRODUCTION: Parent and child vaccination behavior is related for human papillomavirus (HPV) and flu vaccine. Thus, it is likely that parental vaccination status is also associated with their children's adherence to guideline-concordant childhood vaccination schedules. We hypothesized that parent influenza (flu) vaccination would be associated with their child's vaccination status at age two. METHODS: We used electronic health record data to identify children and linked parents seen in a community health center (CHC) within the OCHIN network (292 CHCs in 16 states). We randomly selected a child aged <2 years with ≥1 ambulatory visit between 2009-2018. Employing a retrospective, cohort study design, we used general estimating equations logistic regression to estimate the odds of a child being up-to-date on vaccinations based on their linked parents' flu vaccination status. We adjusted for relevant parent and child covariates and stratified by mother only, father only, and two-parent samples. RESULTS: The study included 40,007 family-units: mother only = 35,444, father only = 2,784, and two parents = 1,779. A higher percentage of children were fully vaccinated if their parent or parents received a flu vaccine. Children in the two-parent sample whose parents both received a flu vaccine had more than twice the odds of being fully vaccinated, and two and a half times the odds of being fully vaccinated except flu vaccine compared to children with two parents who did not receive a flu vaccine (covariate-adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 2.39, 95% CI = 1.67, 3.43 and aOR = 2.54, 95% CI = 1.54, 4.19, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Parent flu vaccination is associated with routine child vaccination. Future research is needed to understand if this relationship persists over time and in different settings.

Racial, ethnic, and language differences in screening measures for statin therapy following a major guideline change.

Atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) disproportionally affects racial and ethnic minority populations. Statin prescribing guidelines changed in 2013 to improve ASCVD prevention. It is unknown whether risk screening for statin eligibility differed across race and ethnicity over this guideline change. We examine racial/ethnic/language differences in screening measure prevalence for period-specific statin consideration using a retrospective cohort design and linked electronic health records from 635 community health centers in 24 U.S. states. Adults 50+ years, without known ASCVD, and ≥ 1 visit in 2009-2013 and/or 2014-2018 were included, grouped as: Asian, Latino, Black, or White further distinguished by language preference. Outcomes included screening measure prevalence for statin consideration, 2009-2013: low-density lipoprotein (LDL), 2014-2018: pooled cohort equation (PCE) components age, sex, race, systolic blood pressure, total cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein, smoking status. Among patients seen both periods, change in period-specific measure prevalence was assessed. Adjusting for sociodemographic and clinical factors, compared to English-preferring White patients, all other groups were more likely to have LDL documented (2009-2013, n = 195,061) and all PCE components documented (2014-2018, n = 344,504). Among patients seen in both periods (n = 128,621), all groups had lower odds of PCE components versus LDL documented in the measures' respective period; English-preferring Black adults experienced a greater decline compared to English-preferring White adults (OR 0.81; 95% CI: 0.72-0.91). Racial/ethnic/language disparities in documented screening measures that guide statin therapy for ASCVD prevention were unaffected by a major guideline change advising this practice. It is important to understand whether the newer guidelines have altered disparate prescribing and morbidity/mortality for this disease.

Effective Facilitator Strategies for Supporting Primary Care Practice Change: A Mixed Methods Study.

PURPOSE: Practice facilitation is an evidence-informed implementation strategy to support quality improvement (QI) and aid practices in aligning with best evidence. Few studies, particularly of this size and scope, identify strategies that contribute to facilitator effectiveness. METHODS: We conducted a sequential mixed methods study, analyzing data from EvidenceNOW, a large-scale QI initiative. Seven regional cooperatives employed 162 facilitators to work with 1,630 small or medium-sized primary care practices. Main analyses were based on facilitators who worked with at least 4 practices. Facilitators were defined as more effective if at least 75% of their practices improved on at least 1 outcome measure-aspirin use, blood pressure control, smoking cessation counseling (ABS), or practice change capacity, measured using Change Process Capability Questionnaire-from baseline to follow-up. Facilitators were defined as less effective if less than 50% of their practices improved on these outcomes. Using an immersion crystallization and comparative approach, we analyzed observational and interview data to identify strategies associated with more effective facilitators. RESULTS: Practices working with more effective facilitators had a 3.6% greater change in the mean percentage of patients meeting the composite ABS measure compared with practices working with less effective facilitators (P <.001). More effective facilitators cultivated motivation by tailoring QI work and addressing resistance, guided practices to think critically, and provided accountability to support change, using these strategies in combination. They were able to describe their work in detail. In contrast, less effective facilitators seldom used these strategies and described their work in general terms. Facilitator background, experience, and work on documentation did not differentiate between more and less effective facilitators. CONCLUSIONS: Facilitation strategies that differentiate more and less effective facilitators have implications for enhancing facilitator development and training, and can assist all facilitators to more effectively support practice changes.

How Does Prior Experience Pay Off in Large-Scale Quality Improvement Initiatives?

INTRODUCTION: To examine the association of prior investment on the effectiveness of organizations delivering large-scale external support to improve primary care. METHODS: Mixed-methods study of 7 EvidenceNOW grantees (henceforth, Cooperatives) and their recruited practices (n = 1720). Independent Variable: Cooperatives's experience level prior to EvidenceNOW, defined as a sustained track record in delivering large-scale quality improvement (QI) to primary care practices (high, medium, or low). Dependent Variables: Implementation of external support, measured as facilitation dose; effectiveness at improving (1) clinical quality, measured as practices' performance on Aspirin, Blood Pressure, Cholesterol, and Smoking (ABCS); and (2) practice capacity, measured using the Adaptive Reserve (AR) score and Change Process Capacity Questionnaire (CPCQ). Data were analyzed using multivariable linear regressions and a qualitative inductive approach. RESULTS: Cooperatives with High (vs low) levels of prior experience with and investment in large-scale QI before EvidenceNOW recruited more geographically dispersed and diverse practices, with lower baseline ABCS performance (differences ranging from 2.8% for blood pressure to 41.5% for smoking), delivered more facilitation (mean=+20.3 hours, P = .04), and made greater improvements in practices' QI capacity (CPCQ: +2.04, P < .001) and smoking performance (+6.43%, P = .003). These Cooperatives had established networks of facilitators at the start of EvidenceNOW and leadership experienced in supporting this workforce, which explained their better recruitment, delivery of facilitation, and improvement in outcomes. DISCUSSION: Long-term investment that establishes regionwide organizations with infrastructure and experience to support primary care practices in QI is associated with more consistent delivery of facilitation support, and greater improvement in practice capacity and some clinical outcomes.

Improving Delivery of Cardiovascular Disease Preventive Services in Small-to-Medium Primary Care Practices.

BACKGROUND: The EvidenceNOW initiative provided smaller primary care practices with external support interventions to implement quality improvement strategies focused on cardiovascular disease prevention. This manuscript reports effectiveness of EvidenceNOW interventions in improving quality metrics. METHODS: Seven regional Cooperatives delivered external support interventions (practice facilitation, health information technology support to assist with audit and feedback, performance benchmarking, learning collaboratives, and establishing community linkages) to 1278 smaller primary care practices. Outcomes included proportion of eligible patients meeting Centers for Medicaid and Medicare Services-specified ABCS metrics, that is, Aspirin for those at risk of ischemic vascular disease; achieving target Blood pressure among hypertensives; prescribing statin for those with elevated Cholesterol, diabetes, or increased cardiovascular disease risk; and screening for Smoking and providing cessation counseling. An event study compared prepost changes in outcomes among intervention practices and a difference-in-differences design compared intervention practices to 688 external comparison practices. RESULTS: Mean baseline outcomes ranged from 61.5% (cholesterol) to 64.9% (aspirin). In the event study, outcomes improved significantly (aspirin: +3.39 percentage points, 95% CI, 0.61-6.17; blood pressure: +1.59, 95% CI, 0.12-3.06; cholesterol: +4.43, 95% CI, 0.33-8.53; smoking: +7.33, 95% CI, 4.70-9.96). Difference-in-differences estimates were similar in magnitude but statistically significant for smoking alone. Preintervention trends were significant for smoking, but parallel-trends tests were not significant. CONCLUSIONS: EvidenceNOW Cooperatives improved cardiovascular prevention quality metrics among small and medium sized primary care practices across the US. While estimated improvements were small, they reflected average changes across a large and diverse sample of practices.

Smoking-Cessation Assistance Among Older Adults by Ethnicity/Language Preference.

INTRODUCTION: Although smoking prevalence is lower among Hispanic adults than among non-Hispanic White adults, smoking remains a leading cause of preventable death among older Hispanics. This study examines the differences in tobacco assessment and smoking-cessation assistance among older patients seen in community health centers by ethnicity and language preference. METHODS: Electronic health record data were extracted from the Accelerating Data Value Across a National Community Health Center Network of community health centers from patients aged 55‒80 years with ≥1 primary care visit between January 1, 2017 and December 31, 2018. Binary outcomes included tobacco use assessment and, among those with ≥1 status indicating current smoking, having a smoking-cessation medication ordered. The independent variable combined ethnicity and language preference, categorized as non-Hispanic White (reference), Spanish-preferring Hispanic, and English-preferring Hispanic. Multivariable generalized estimating equation logistic regressions, clustering by primary care clinic using an exchangeable working correlation structure, modeled the odds of tobacco use assessment and cessation medication orders by ethnicity/preferred language, adjusting for patient covariates, health system, and clinic location. Analyses were conducted in 2021. RESULTS: The study included 116,328 patients. Spanish-preferring Hispanic patients had significantly lower odds of having tobacco use assessed than non-Hispanic White patients (AOR=0.89, 95% CI=0.82, 0.95). Both Spanish- and English-preferring Hispanic patients had lower odds of having a smoking-cessation medication ordered (AOR=0.53, 95% CI=0.47, 0.60; AOR=0.77, 95% CI=0.67, 0.89, respectively) than non-Hispanic White patients. CONCLUSIONS: Significant disparities were found in tobacco assessment and cessation assistance by ethnicity and language preference among older adults seen in safety-net clinics. Future research is needed to understand the etiology of these smoking-related disparities.