Patient, Clinician, and Communication Factors Associated with Colorectal Cancer Screening.

INTRODUCTION: Screening for colorectal cancer is beneficial. Yet, screening remains suboptimal, and underserved populations are at greater risk for not being appropriately screened. Although many barriers to screening are understood, less is known about how the decision-making process on whether to receive colonoscopy or stool testing influences screening. METHODS: As part of a randomized controlled trial to test engaging underserved populations in preventive care through online, personalized, educational material, 2417 patients aged 50 to 74 years were randomly selected from the 70,998 patients with an office visit the year prior and mailed a survey to assess decision-making for colorectal cancer screening. Twenty practices in practice-based research networks from 5 diverse states participated. Survey data were supplemented with electronic health record data. RESULTS: Among respondents, 64% were or became up to date with screening within 3 months of their office visit. The main factor associated with being up to date was the length of the patient-clinician relationship (<6 months vs 5+ years: odds ratio [OR], 0.49; 95% CI, 0.30-0.80). Sharing the decision about screening options with the clinician was a predictor for being up to date compared with patients who made the decision for themselves (OR, 1.75; 95% CI, 1.27-2.44). Only 36% of patients reported being given a choice about screening options. Traditional factors like race, employment, insurance, and education were not associated with screening. CONCLUSIONS: Having a long-term relationship with a primary care clinician and sharing decisions may be key drivers to ensure evidence-based preventive care for underserved populations.

Hepatitis C Management at Federally Qualified Health Centers during the Opioid Epidemic: A Cost-Effectiveness Study.

BACKGROUND: The opioid epidemic has been associated with an increase in hepatitis C virus (HCV) infections. Federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) have a high burden of hepatitis C disease and could serve as venues to enhance testing and treatment. METHODS: We estimated clinical outcomes and the cost-effectiveness of hepatitis C testing and treatment at US FQHCs using individual-based simulation modeling. We used individual-level data from 57 FQHCs to model 9 strategies, including permutations of HCV antibody testing modality, person initiating testing, and testing approach. Outcomes included life expectancy, quality-adjusted life-years (QALY), hepatitis C cases identified, treated and cured; and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. RESULTS: Compared with current practice (risk-based with laboratory-based testing), routine rapid point-of-care testing initiated and performed by a counselor identified 68% more cases after (nonreflex) RNA testing in the first month of the intervention and led to a 17% reduction in cirrhosis cases and a 22% reduction in liver deaths among those with cirrhosis over a lifetime. Routine rapid testing initiated by a counselor or a clinician provided better outcomes at either lower total cost or at lower cost per QALY gained, when compared with all other strategies. Findings were most influenced by the proportion of patients informed of their anti-HCV test results. CONCLUSIONS: Routine anti-HCV testing followed by prompt RNA testing for positives is recommended at FQHCs to identify infections. If using dedicated staff or point-of-care testing is not feasible, then measures to improve immediate patient knowledge of antibody status should be considered.

Trends in smoking documentation rates in safety net clinics.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of provider incentive policy on smoking status documentation. DATA SOURCES: Primary data were extracted from structured electronic medical records (EMRs) from 15 community health centers (CHCs). STUDY DESIGN: This was an observational study of data from 2006 to 2013, assessing changes in documentation of smoking status over time. DATA EXTRACTION METHODS: We extracted structured EMR data for patients age 18 and older with at least one primary care visit. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Rates of documented smoking status rose from 30 percent in 2006 to 90 percent in 2013; the largest increase occurred from 2011 to 2012 following policy changes (21.3% [95% CI, 8.2%, 34.4%] from the overall trend). Rates varied by clinic and across patient subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: Documentation of smoking status improved markedly after introduction of new federal standards. Further improvement in documentation is still needed, especially for males, nonwhite patients, those using opioids, and HIV + patients. More research is needed to study whether changes in documentation lead to improvements in counseling, cessation, and patient outcomes.

Disparities in Smoking Cessation Assistance in US Primary Care Clinics.

OBJECTIVES: To examine associations between patient factors and smoking cessation assistance in US safety-net clinics. METHODS: Using electronic health record data from the OCHIN network, we identified adults with at least 1 primary care visit to a study clinic (n = 143 clinics in 12 states) with at least 1 documented "current smoker" status during 2014 to 2016 (n = 136 314; 29.8%). We estimated odds ratios (ORs) of smoking cessation assistance receipt (none [reference], counseling, medication, or both) by patient covariates. RESULTS: For all cessation assistance categories, odds of assistance were higher among women, those with more visits, those assessed and ready to quit, and patients with asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and hyperlipidemia. Odds of receiving both counseling and medication were lower among uninsured patients (OR = 0.56; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.48, 0.64), those of a race/ethnicity other than non-Hispanic White (OR range = 0.65-0.82), and those with diabetes (OR = 0.85; 95% CI = 0.79, 0.92), and higher among older patients and those with a comorbidity, with few exceptions. CONCLUSIONS: Disparities in smoking cessation assistance receipt exist in safety-net settings, in particular by health insurance coverage and across race/ethnicity, even after control for other socioeconomic and demographic factors.

Long-Term Outcomes From Repeated Smoking Cessation Assistance in Routine Primary Care.

PURPOSE: To test the association between repeated clinical smoking cessation support and long-term cessation. DESIGN: Retrospective, observational cohort study using structured and free-text data from electronic health records. SETTING: Six diverse health systems in the United States. PARTICIPANTS: Patients aged ≥18 years who were smokers in 2007 and had ≥1 primary care visit in each of the following 4 years (N = 33 691). MEASURES: Primary exposure was a composite categorical variable (comprised of documentation of smoking cessation medication, counseling, or referral) classifying the proportions of visits for which patients received any cessation assistance (<25% (reference), 25%-49%, 50%-74%, and ≥75% of visits). The dependent variable was long-term quit (LTQ; yes/no), defined as no indication of being a current smoker for ≥365 days following a visit where nonsmoker or former smoker was indicated. ANALYSIS: Mixed effects logistic regression analysis adjusted for age, sex, race, and comorbidities, with robust standard error estimation to account for within site correlation. RESULTS: Overall, 20% of the cohort achieved LTQ status. Patients with ≥75% of visits with any assistance had almost 3 times the odds of achieving LTQ status compared to those with <25% visits with assistance (odds ratio = 2.84; 95% confidence interval: 1.50-5.37). Results were similar for specific assistance types. CONCLUSIONS: These findings provide support for the importance of repeated assistance at primary care visits to increase long-term smoking cessation.

Smoking-Cessation Assistance: Before and After Stage 1 Meaningful Use Implementation.

INTRODUCTION: Brief smoking-cessation interventions in primary care settings are effective, but delivery of these services remains low. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services' Meaningful Use (MU) of Electronic Health Record (EHR) Incentive Program could increase rates of smoking assessment and cessation assistance among vulnerable populations. This study examined whether smoking status assessment, cessation assistance, and odds of being a current smoker changed after Stage 1 MU implementation. METHODS: EHR data were extracted from 26 community health centers with an EHR in place by June 15, 2009. AORs were computed for each binary outcome (smoking status assessment, counseling given, smoking-cessation medications ordered/discussed, current smoking status), comparing 2010 (pre-MU), 2012 (MU preparation), and 2014 (MU fully implemented) for pregnant and non-pregnant patients. RESULTS: Non-pregnant patients had decreased odds of current smoking over time; odds for all other outcomes increased except for medication orders from 2010 to 2012. Among pregnant patients, odds of assessment and counseling increased across all years. Odds of discussing or ordering of cessation medications increased from 2010 compared with the other 2 study years; however, medication orders alone did not change over time, and current smoking only decreased from 2010 to 2012. Compared with non-pregnant patients, a lower percentage of pregnant patients were provided counseling. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that incentives for MU of EHRs increase the odds of smoking assessment and cessation assistance, which could lead to decreased smoking rates among vulnerable populations. Continued efforts for provision of cessation assistance among pregnant patients is warranted.

Assessing Trends in Tobacco Cessation in Diverse Patient Populations.

INTRODUCTION: This study examined change in tobacco use over 4 years among the general population of patients in six diverse health care organizations using electronic medical record data. METHODS: The study cohort (N = 34 393) included all patients age 18 years or older who were identified as smokers in 2007, and who then had at least one primary care visit in each of the following 4 years. RESULTS: In the 4 years following 2007, this patient cohort had a median of 13 primary care visits, and 38.6% of the patients quit smoking at least once. At the end of the fourth follow-up year, 15.4% had stopped smoking for 1 year or more. Smokers were more likely to become long-term quitters if they were 65 or older (OR = 1.32, 95% CI = [1.16, 1.49]), or had a diagnoses of cancer (1.26 [1.12, 1.41]), cardiovascular disease (1.22 [1.09, 1.37]), asthma (1.15 [1.06, 1.25]), or diabetes (1.17 [1.09, 1.27]). Characteristics associated with lower likelihood of becoming a long-term quitter were female gender (0.90 [0.84, 0.95]), black race (0.84 [0.75, 0.94]) and those identified as non-Hispanic (0.50 [0.43, 0.59]). CONCLUSIONS: Among smokers who regularly used these care systems, one in seven had achieved long-term cessation after 4 years. This study shows the practicality of using electronic medical records for monitoring patient smoking status over time. Similar methods could be used to assess tobacco use in any health care organization to evaluate the impact of environmental and organizational programs.

CER Hub: An informatics platform for conducting comparative effectiveness research using multi-institutional, heterogeneous, electronic clinical data.

OBJECTIVES: Comparative effectiveness research (CER) requires the capture and analysis of data from disparate sources, often from a variety of institutions with diverse electronic health record (EHR) implementations. In this paper we describe the CER Hub, a web-based informatics platform for developing and conducting research studies that combine comprehensive electronic clinical data from multiple health care organizations. METHODS: The CER Hub platform implements a data processing pipeline that employs informatics standards for data representation and web-based tools for developing study-specific data processing applications, providing standardized access to the patient-centric electronic health record (EHR) across organizations. RESULTS: The CER Hub is being used to conduct two CER studies utilizing data from six geographically distributed and demographically diverse health systems. These foundational studies address the effectiveness of medications for controlling asthma and the effectiveness of smoking cessation services delivered in primary care. DISCUSSION: The CER Hub includes four key capabilities: the ability to process and analyze both free-text and coded clinical data in the EHR; a data processing environment supported by distributed data and study governance processes; a clinical data-interchange format for facilitating standardized extraction of clinical data from EHRs; and a library of shareable clinical data processing applications. CONCLUSION: CER requires coordinated and scalable methods for extracting, aggregating, and analyzing complex, multi-institutional clinical data. By offering a range of informatics tools integrated into a framework for conducting studies using EHR data, the CER Hub provides a solution to the challenges of multi-institutional research using electronic medical record data.

MyPreventiveCare: implementation and dissemination of an interactive preventive health record in three practice-based research networks serving disadvantaged patients--a randomized cluster trial.

BACKGROUND: Evidence-based preventive services for early detection of cancer and other health conditions offer profound health benefits, yet Americans receive only half of indicated services. Policy initiatives promote the adoption of information technologies to engage patients in care. We developed a theory-driven interactive preventive health record (IPHR) to engage patients in health promotion. The model defines five levels of functionality: (1) collecting patient information, (2) integrating with electronic health records (EHRs), (3) translating information into lay language, (4) providing individualized, guideline-based clinical recommendations, and (5) facilitating patient action. It is hypothesized that personal health records (PHRs) with these higher levels of functionality will inform and activate patients in ways that simpler PHRs cannot. However, realizing this vision requires both technological advances and effective implementation based upon clinician and practice engagement. METHODS/DESIGN: We are starting a two-phase, mixed-method trial to evaluate whether the IPHR is scalable across a large number of practices and how its uptake differs for minority and disadvantaged patients. In phase 1, 40 practices from three practice-based research networks will be randomized to add IPHR functionality to their PHR versus continue to use their existing PHR. Throughout the study, we will engage intervention practices to locally tailor IPHR content and learn how to integrate new functions into their practice workflow. In phase 2, the IPHR to all nonintervention practices to observe whether the IPHR can be implemented more broadly (Scalability). Phase 1 will feature an implementation assessment in intervention practices, based on the RE-AIM model, to measure Reach (creation of IPHR accounts by patients), Adoption (practice decision to use the IPHR), Implementation (consistency, fidelity, barriers, and facilitators of use), and Maintenance (sustained use). The incremental effect of the IPHR on receipt of cancer screening tests and shared decision-making compared to traditional PHRs will assess Effectiveness. In phase 2, we will assess similar outcomes as phase 1 except for effectiveness. DISCUSSION: This study will yield information about the effectiveness of new health information technologies designed to actively engage patients in their care as well as information about how to effectively implement and disseminate PHRs by engaging clinicians. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02138448.

Using the CER Hub to ensure data quality in a multi-institution smoking cessation study.

Comparative effectiveness research (CER) studies involving multiple institutions with diverse electronic health records (EHRs) depend on high quality data. To ensure uniformity of data derived from different EHR systems and implementations, the CER Hub informatics platform developed a quality assurance (QA) process using tools and data formats available through the CER Hub. The QA process, implemented here in a study of smoking cessation services in primary care, used the 'emrAdapter' tool programmed with a set of quality checks to query large samples of primary care encounter records extracted in accord with the CER Hub common data framework. The tool, deployed to each study site, generated error reports indicating data problems to be fixed locally and aggregate data sharable with the central site for quality review. Across the CER Hub network of six health systems, data completeness and correctness issues were prevalent in the first iteration and were considerably improved after three iterations of the QA process. A common issue encountered was incomplete mapping of local EHR data values to those defined by the common data framework. A highly automated and distributed QA process helped to ensure the correctness and completeness of patient care data extracted from EHRs for a multi-institution CER study in smoking cessation.

Documentation of the 5 as for smoking cessation by PCPs across distinct health systems.

OBJECTIVES: Physicians can help patients quit smoking using the 5 As of smoking cessation. This study aimed to (1) identify the proportion of known smokers that receive smoking cessation services in the course of routine clinical practice; (2) describe demographic and comorbidity characteristics of patients receiving the 5 As in these systems; and (3) evaluate differences in performance of the 5 As across health systems, gender, and age categories. STUDY DESIGN: Electronic medical records of 200 current smokers from 6 unique health systems (N = 1200) were randomly selected from 2006 to 2010. Primary care encounter progress notes were hand coded for occurrences of the 5 As. METHODS: Bivariate comparisons of delivery of the 3 smoking-cessation services by site, gender, and age category were analyzed using χ² tests. RESULTS: About 50% of smokers were advised to quit smoking, 39% were assessed for their readiness to quit, and 54% received some type of assistance to help them quit smoking. Only 2% had a documented plan for follow-up regarding their quitting efforts (arrange). Significant differences were found among sites for documentation of receiving the 5 As and between age groups receiving assistance with quitting. There was no statistically significant difference between genders in receipt of the 5 As. CONCLUSIONS: Documentation of adherence to the 5 As varied by site and some demographics. Adjustments to protocols for addressing cessation and readiness to quit may be warranted. Health systems could apply the methodology described in this paper to assess their own performance, and then use that as a basis to guide improvement initiatives.

Strategies and opportunities to STOP colon cancer in priority populations: pragmatic pilot study design and outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal-cancer is a leading cause of cancer death in the United States, and Latinos have particularly low rates of screening. Strategies and Opportunities to STOP Colon Cancer in Priority Populations (STOP CRC) is a partnership among two research institutions and a network of safety net clinics to promote colorectal cancer screening among populations served by these clinics. This paper reports on results of a pilot study conducted in a safety net organization that serves primarily Latinos. METHODS: The study assessed two clinic-based approaches to raise rates of colorectal-cancer screening among selected age-eligible patients not up-to-date with colorectal-cancer screening guidelines. One clinic each was assigned to: (1) an automated data-driven Electronic Health Record (EHR)-embedded program for mailing Fecal Immunochemical Test (FIT) kits (Auto Intervention); or (2) a higher-intensity program consisting of a mailed FIT kit plus linguistically and culturally tailored interventions delivered at the clinic level (Auto Plus Intervention). A third clinic within the safety-net organization was selected to serve as a passive control (Usual Care). Two simple measurements of feasibility were: 1) ability to use real-time EHR data to identify patients eligible for each intervention step, and 2) ability to offer affordable testing and follow-up care for uninsured patients. RESULTS: The study was successful at both measurements of feasibility. A total of 112 patients in the Auto clinic and 101 in the Auto Plus clinic met study inclusion criteria and were mailed an introductory letter. Reach was high for the mailed component (92.5% of kits were successfully mailed), and moderate for the telephone component (53% of calls were successful completed). After exclusions for invalid address and other factors, 206 (109 in the Auto clinic and 97 in the Auto Plus clinic) were mailed a FIT kit. At 6 months, fecal test completion rates were higher in the Auto (39.3%) and Auto Plus (36.6%) clinics compared to the usual-care clinic (1.1%). CONCLUSIONS: Findings showed that the trial interventions delivered in a safety-net setting were both feasible and raised rates of colorectal-cancer screening, compared to usual care. Findings from this pilot will inform a larger pragmatic study involving multiple clinics. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrial.gov: NCT01742065.