Bridging clinical informatics and implementation science to improve cancer symptom management in ambulatory oncology practices: experiences from the IMPACT consortium.

Objectives: To report lessons from integrating the methods and perspectives of clinical informatics (CI) and implementation science (IS) in the context of Improving the Management of symPtoms during and following Cancer Treatment (IMPACT) Consortium pragmatic trials. Materials and Methods: IMPACT informaticists, trialists, and implementation scientists met to identify challenges and solutions by examining robust case examples from 3 Research Centers that are deploying systematic symptom assessment and management interventions via electronic health records (EHRs). Investigators discussed data collection and CI challenges, implementation strategies, and lessons learned. Results: CI implementation strategies and EHRs systems were utilized to collect and act upon symptoms and impairments in functioning via electronic patient-reported outcomes (ePRO) captured in ambulatory oncology settings. Limited EHR functionality and data collection capabilities constrained the ability to address IS questions. Collecting ePRO data required significant planning and organizational champions adept at navigating ambiguity. Discussion: Bringing together CI and IS perspectives offers critical opportunities for monitoring and managing cancer symptoms via ePROs. Discussions between CI and IS researchers identified and addressed gaps between applied informatics implementation and theory-based IS trial and evaluation methods. The use of common terminology may foster shared mental models between CI and IS communities to enhance EHR design to more effectively facilitate ePRO implementation and clinical responses. Conclusion: Implementation of ePROs in ambulatory oncology clinics benefits from common understanding of the concepts, lexicon, and incentives between CI implementers and IS researchers to facilitate and measure the results of implementation efforts.

Designing for data sharing: Considerations for advancing health equity in data management and dissemination.

Data sharing, the act of making scientific research data available to others, can accelerate innovation and discoveries, and ultimately enhance public health. The National Cancer Institute Implementation Science Centers in Cancer Control convened a diverse group of research scientists, practitioners, and community partners in three interactive workshops (May-June 2022) to identify and discuss factors that must be considered when designing research for equitable data sharing with a specific emphasis on implementation science and social, behavioral, and population health research. This group identified and operationalized a set of seven key considerations for equitable data sharing-conceptualized as an inclusive process that fairly includes the perspectives and priorities of all partners involved in and impacted by data sharing, with consideration of ethics, history, and benefits-that were integrated into a framework. Key data-sharing components particularly important for health equity included: elevating data sharing into a core research activity, incorporating diverse perspectives, and meaningfully engaging partners in data-sharing decisions throughout the project lifecycle. As the process of data sharing grows in research, it is critical to continue considering the potential positive and adverse impact of data sharing on diverse beneficiaries of health data and research.

Data sharing is a key strategy for advancing our understanding of human health and healthcare. Three interactive workshops that included researcher scientists, physicians, and community members were held by the National Cancer Institute Implementation Science Centers in Cancer Control. The group discussed ways to incorporate health equity and equitable data sharing into implementation science and social, behavioral, and population health research. Equitable data sharing is an inclusive process that considers the points of view and priorities of all partners involved with data sharing and considers ethics, history, and benefits. Seven key components emerged from these discussions and were included in a framework. The components included elevating data sharing into a core research activity, incorporating diverse perspectives, and meaningfully engaging partners in data-sharing decisions throughout the project lifecycle. As the process of data sharing grows in research, it is critical to continue considering the potential positive and negative impacts of data sharing on diverse beneficiaries of health data and research.

A mixed methods evaluation of patient perspectives on the implementation of an electronic health record-integrated patient-reported symptom and needs monitoring program in cancer care.

BACKGROUND: As cancer centers have increased focus on patient-centered, evidenced-based care, implementing efficient programs that facilitate effective patient-clinician communication remains critical. We implemented an electronic health record-integrated patient-reported symptom and needs monitoring program ('cPRO' for cancer patient-reported outcomes). To aid evaluation of cPRO implementation, we asked patients receiving care in one of three geographical regions of an academic healthcare system about their experiences. METHODS: Using a sequential mixed-methods approach, we collected feedback in two waves. Wave 1 included virtual focus groups and interviews with patients who had completed cPRO. In Wave 2, we administered a structured survey to systematically examine Wave 1 themes. All participants had a diagnosed malignancy and received at least 2 invitations to complete cPRO. We used rapid and traditional qualitative methods to analyze Wave 1 data and focused on identifying facilitators and barriers to cPRO implementation. Wave 2 data were analyzed descriptively. RESULTS: Participants (n = 180) were on average 62.9 years old; were majority female, White, non-Hispanic, and married; and represented various cancer types and phases of treatment. Wave 1 participants (n = 37) identified facilitators, including cPRO's perceived value and favorable usability, and barriers, including confusion about cPRO's purpose and various considerations for responding. High levels of clinician engagement with, and patient education on, cPRO were described as facilitators while low levels were described as barriers. Wave 2 (n = 143) data demonstrated high endorsement rates of cPRO's usability on domains such as navigability (91.6%), comprehensibility (98.7%), and relevance (82.4%). Wave 2 data also indicated low rates of understanding cPRO's purpose (56.7%), education from care teams about cPRO (22.5%), and discussing results of cPRO with care teams (16.3%). CONCLUSIONS: While patients reported high value and ease of use when completing cPRO, they also reported areas of confusion, emphasizing the importance of patient education on the purpose and use of cPRO and clinician engagement to sustain participation. These results guided successful implementation changes and will inform future improvements.

Statistical analysis plan for the NU IMPACT stepped-wedge cluster randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: As part of the IMPACT Consortium of three effectiveness-implementation trials, the NU IMPACT trial was designed to evaluate implementation and effectiveness outcomes for an electronic health record (EHR)-embedded symptom monitoring and management program for outpatient cancer care. NU IMPACT uses a unique stepped-wedge cluster randomized design, involving six clusters of 26 clinics, for evaluation of implementation outcomes with an embedded patient-level randomized trial to evaluate effectiveness outcomes. Collaborative, consortium-wide efforts to ensure use of the most robust and recent analytic methodologies for stepped-wedge trials motivated updates to the statistical analysis plan for implementation outcomes in the NU IMPACT trial. METHODS: In the updated statistical analysis plan for NU IMPACT, the primary implementation outcome patient adoption, as measured by clinic-level monthly proportions of patient engagement with the EHR-based cancer symptom monitoring system, will be analyzed using generalized least squares linear regression with auto-regressive errors and adjustment for cluster and time effects (underlying secular trends). A similar strategy will be used for secondary patient and provider implementation outcomes. DISCUSSION: The analytic updates described here resulted from highly iterative, collaborative efforts among statisticians, implementation scientists, and trial leads in the IMPACT Consortium. This updated statistical analysis plan will serve as the a priori specified approach for analyzing implementation outcomes for the NU IMPACT trial.

Making it "EASI" for pediatricians to determine when toddler tantrums are "more than the terrible twos": Proof-of-concept for primary care screening with the Multidimensional Assessment Profiles-Early Assessment Screener for Irritability (MAPS-EASI).

BACKGROUND: Up to 20% of youth have impairing mental health problems as early as age 3. Early identification and intervention of mental health risks in pediatric primary care could mitigate this crisis via prevention prior to disease onset. The purpose of this study was to establish the feasibility and acceptability of implementing a brief transdiagnostic screening instrument in pediatric primary care for irritability and corollary impairment. METHOD: Five pediatric clinicians in a Midwest clinic implemented the Multidimensional Assessment Profiles-Early Assessment Screener of Irritability (MAPS-EASI) for toddlers (24-30 months) and their families. MAPS-EASI (psychometrically derived from the well-validated MAPS-Scales) includes six items (scored 0-5) about symptoms (e.g., tantrums, grumpy mood), context, and frequency and two items (scored 0-3) assessed impairment. Positive screens (MAPS-EASI ≥ 5 plus impairment ≥ 2) were referred to an evidence-based parenting intervention. We assessed reach and outcomes of MAPS-EASI screening. Follow-up interviews with clinicians assessed perspectives on irritability screening and MAPS-EASI implementation. RESULTS: Of 201 eligible families, 100 (49.8%) completed the screener for a 24- or 30-month well-child visit. Mean MAPS-EASI scores were 5.8 (SD = 3.2), mean impairment scores were 0.9 (SD = 0.9), and 24 (24.0%) screened positive. Clinicians indicated that irritability screening for toddlers was aligned with their prevention-oriented, developmentally based practice. MAPS-EASI had face validity and increased clinician decision-making confidence. Finally, clinicians identified barriers and facilitators to large-scale implementation. CONCLUSIONS: MAPS-EASI proved to be feasible and acceptable in pediatric primary care. Further tailoring will be needed as the MAPS-EASI processes are scaled out to new contexts and populations. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Health Status in Heart Failure and Cancer: Analysis of the Medicare Health Outcomes Survey 2016-2020.

BACKGROUND: People with heart failure (HF) and cancer experience impaired physical and mental health status. However, health-related quality of life (HRQOL) has not been directly compared between these conditions in a contemporary population of older people. OBJECTIVES: The authors sought to compare HRQOL in people with HF vs those with lung, colorectal, breast, and prostate cancers. METHODS: The authors performed a pooled analysis of Medicare Health Outcomes Survey data from 2016 to 2020 in participants ≥65 years of age with a self-reported history of HF or active treatment for lung, colon, breast, or prostate cancer. They used the Veterans RAND-12 physical component score (PCS) and mental component score (MCS), which range from 0-100 with a mean score of 50 (based on the U.S. general population) and an SD of 10. The authors used pairwise Student's t-tests to evaluate for differences in PCS and MCS between groups. RESULTS: Among participants with HF (n = 71,025; 54% female, 16% Black), mean PCS was 29.5 and mean MCS 47.9. Mean PCS was lower in people with HF compared with lung (31.2; n = 4,165), colorectal (35.6; n = 4,270), breast (37.7; n = 14,542), and prostate (39.6; n = 17,670) cancer (all P < 0.001). Participants with HF had a significantly lower mean MCS than those with lung (31.2), colon (50.0), breast (52.0), and prostate (53.0) cancer (all P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: People with HF experience worse HRQOL than those with cancer actively receiving treatment. The pervasiveness of low HRQOL in HF underscores the need to implement evidence-based interventions that target physical and mental health status and scale multidisciplinary clinics.

Systematic symptom management in the IMPACT Consortium: rationale and design for 3 effectiveness-implementation trials.

Cancer and its treatment produce deleterious symptoms across the phases of care. Poorly controlled symptoms negatively affect quality of life and result in increased health-care needs and hospitalization. The Improving the Management of symPtoms during And following Cancer Treatment (IMPACT) Consortium was created to develop 3 large-scale, systematic symptom management systems, deployed through electronic health record platforms, and to test them in pragmatic, randomized, hybrid effectiveness and implementation trials. Here, we describe the IMPACT Consortium's conceptual framework, its organizational components, and plans for evaluation. The study designs and lessons learned are highlighted in the context of disruptions related to the COVID-19 pandemic.

The Longitudinal Implementation Strategy Tracking System (LISTS): feasibility, usability, and pilot testing of a novel method.

BACKGROUND: Systematic approaches are needed to accurately characterize the dynamic use of implementation strategies and how they change over time. We describe the development and preliminary evaluation of the Longitudinal Implementation Strategy Tracking System (LISTS), a novel methodology to document and characterize implementation strategies use over time. METHODS: The development and initial evaluation of the LISTS method was conducted within the Improving the Management of SymPtoms during And following Cancer Treatment (IMPACT) Research Consortium (supported by funding provided through the NCI Cancer MoonshotSM). The IMPACT Consortium includes a coordinating center and three hybrid effectiveness-implementation studies testing routine symptom surveillance and integration of symptom management interventions in ambulatory oncology care settings. LISTS was created to increase the precision and reliability of dynamic changes in implementation strategy use over time. It includes three components: (1) a strategy assessment, (2) a data capture platform, and (3) a User's Guide. An iterative process between implementation researchers and practitioners was used to develop, pilot test, and refine the LISTS method prior to evaluating its use in three stepped-wedge trials within the IMPACT Consortium. The LISTS method was used with research and practice teams for approximately 12 months and subsequently we evaluated its feasibility, acceptability, and usability using established instruments and novel questions developed specifically for this study. RESULTS: Initial evaluation of LISTS indicates that it is a feasible and acceptable method, with content validity, for characterizing and tracking the use of implementation strategies over time. Users of LISTS highlighted several opportunities for improving the method for use in future and more diverse implementation studies. CONCLUSIONS: The LISTS method was developed collaboratively between researchers and practitioners to fill a research gap in systematically tracking implementation strategy use and modifications in research studies and other implementation efforts. Preliminary feedback from LISTS users indicate it is feasible and usable. Potential future developments include additional features, fewer data elements, and interoperability with alternative data entry platforms. LISTS offers a systematic method that encourages the use of common data elements to support data analysis across sites and synthesis across studies. Future research is needed to further adapt, refine, and evaluate the LISTS method in studies with employ diverse study designs and address varying delivery settings, health conditions, and intervention types.

Rationale and design for Healthy Hearts for Michigan (HH4M): A pragmatic single-arm hybrid effectiveness-implementation study.

Background: The burden of cardiovascular disease (CVD) is particularly high in several US states, which include the state of Michigan. Hypertension and smoking are two major risk factors for mortality due to CVD. Rural Michigan is disproportionally affected by CVD and by primary care shortages. The Healthy Hearts for Michigan (HH4M) study aims to promote hypertension management and smoking cessation through practice facilitation and quality improvement efforts and is part of the multi-state EvidenceNOW: Building State Capacity initiative to provide external support to primary care practices to improve care delivery. Methods: Primary care practices in rural and underserved areas of Michigan were recruited to join HH4M, a pragmatic, single-arm hybrid Type 2 effectiveness-implementation study during which practice facilitation was delivered at the practice level for 12 months, followed by a 3-month maintenance period. Results: Fifty-four practices were enrolled over a 12-month recruitment period. At baseline, the mean proportion (standard deviation) of patients at the practice level meeting the clinical quality measures were: blood pressure, 0.72 (0.12); tobacco screening, 0.80 (0.30); tobacco cessation intervention, 0.57 (0.28); tobacco screening and cessation intervention: 0.78 (0.26). Conclusion: This three-year research program will evaluate the ability of rural and medically underserved primary care practices to implement the quality improvement model by identifying drivers of and barriers to sustainable implementation, and test whether the model improves (a) blood pressure control and (b) tobacco use screening and cessation.

Change in cardiovascular health among adults with current or past major depressive disorder enrolled in intensive smoking cessation treatment.

BACKGROUND: Elevated depressive symptoms and cigarette smoking are independently associated with poorer cardiovascular health (CVH), but it is unknown whether their treatment can synergistically improve CVH. We sought to characterize CVH of adults with comorbid depression and smoking and examine changes in CVH associated with changes in smoking and depression. METHODS: Participants (N = 300, 55 % women) were adult smokers (≥ 1 cigarette/day) with lifetime major depressive disorder enrolled in a 12-week intervention trial targeting depression and smoking. Multiple linear regression examined prospective associations between changes in depression (Beck Depression Inventory-II), smoking (past 24-hour cigarettes or smoking abstinence), and modified CVH score (per American Heart Association, excluding smoking: diet, physical activity, body mass index, blood glucose, cholesterol, blood pressure). RESULTS: Baseline mean CVH score was 5.87/12 points (SD = 2.13). No participants met "ideal" on all CVH components (blood glucose: 48 %, cholesterol: 46 %, physical activity: 38 %, body mass index: 24 %, blood pressure: 22 %, diet: 3 %). CVH scores did not change from baseline to end-of-treatment (M = 0.18 points, SD = 1.36, p = .177), nor did change in depression × smoking predict change in CVH (p = .978). However, greater reductions in depression were significantly associated with greater improvements in CVH (ß = -0.04, SE = 0.01, p = .015). LIMITATIONS: This study was limited by a short follow-up period, missing blood glucose and cholesterol data, and treatment-seeking smokers. CONCLUSIONS: Adults with comorbid depression and smoking had poor CVH. Although integrated treatment for depression and smoking improved both conditions, only reductions in depression were associated with improvements in CVH. These findings have implications for integrating psychosocial treatment into CVH promotion efforts. REGISTRATION: NCT02378714 (clinicaltrials.gov).

Implementation and evaluation of an expanded electronic health record-integrated bilingual electronic symptom management program across a multi-site Comprehensive Cancer Center: The NU IMPACT protocol.

BACKGROUND: People with cancer experience symptoms that adversely affect quality of life. Despite existing interventions and clinical guidelines, timely symptom management remains uneven in oncology care. We describe a study to implement and evaluate an electronic health record (EHR)-integrated symptom monitoring and management program in adult outpatient cancer care. METHODS: Our cancer patient-reported outcomes (cPRO) symptom monitoring and management program is a customized EHR-integrated installation. We will implement cPRO across all Northwestern Memorial HealthCare (NMHC) hematology/oncology clinics. We will conduct a cluster randomized modified stepped-wedge trial to evaluate patient and clinician engagement with cPRO. Further, we will embed a patient-level randomized clinical trial to evaluate the impact of an additional enhanced care (EC; cPRO plus web-based symptom self-management intervention) relative to usual care (UC; cPRO alone). The project uses a Type 2 hybrid effectiveness-implementation approach. The intervention will be implemented across seven regional clusters within the healthcare system comprising 32 clinic sites. A 6-month prospective pre-implementation enrollment period will be followed by a post-implementation enrollment period, during which newly enrolled, consenting patients will be randomly assigned (1:1) to EC or UC. We will follow patients for 12 months post-enrollment. Patients randomized to EC will receive evidence-based symptom-management content on cancer-related concerns and approaches to enhance quality of life, using a web-based tool ("MyNM Care Corner"). This design allows for within- and between-site evaluation of implementation plus a group-based comparison to demonstrate effectiveness on patient-level outcomes. DISCUSSION: The project has potential to guide implementation of future healthcare system-level cancer symptom management programs. http://ClinicalTrials.gov # NCT03988543.

An Approach to Evaluating Multisector Partnerships to Support Evidence-Based Quality Improvement in Primary Care.

BACKGROUND: Quality improvement (QI) interventions in primary care are increasingly designed and implemented by multisector partnerships, yet little guidance exists on how to best monitor or evaluate these partnerships. The goal of this project was to describe an approach for evaluating the development and effectiveness of a multisector partnership using data from the first year of the Healthy Hearts for Michigan (HH4M) Cooperative, a multisector partnership of nine organizations tasked with designing and implementing evidence-based QI strategies for hypertension management and tobacco cessation in 50 rural primary care practices. METHODS: The researchers developed a 49-item online survey focused on factors that facilitate or hinder multisector partnerships, drawing on implementation science and partnership, engagement, and collaboration research. The team surveyed all 44 members of the HH4M Cooperative (79.5% response rate) and conducted interviews with 14 members. The interviews focused on implementation phase-specific goals, accomplishments, and challenges. Descriptive analysis was used for the survey results, and thematic analysis for the interview data. RESULTS: Respondents reported strong overall performance by the Cooperative during its first year, which facilitated the successful completion of several intervention design tasks. Strengths included having a clear purpose and trust and respect among members. Areas for improvement included a need for common terminology, clarification of roles and functions, and improvement in communication across workgroups. Lack of engagement from physician practices due to capacity constraints, exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic, was the Cooperative's biggest challenge. CONCLUSION: This multimethod approach to evaluating the development and effectiveness of a multisector partnership yielded practical, actionable feedback to program leaders.

Comparison of treatment strategies for neonates with tetralogy of Fallot and pulmonary atresia.

OBJECTIVE: Neonates with tetralogy of Fallot and pulmonary atresia (TOF/PA) but no major aorta-pulmonary collaterals are dependent on the arterial duct for pulmonary blood flow and require early intervention, either by primary (PR) or staged repair (SR) with initial palliation (IP) followed by complete repair (CR). The optimal approach has not been established. METHODS: Neonates with TOF/PA who underwent PR or SR were retrospectively reviewed from the Congenital Cardiac Research Collaborative. Outcomes were compared between PR and SR (IP + CR) strategies. Propensity scoring was used to adjust for baseline differences. The primary outcome was mortality. Secondary outcomes included complications, length of stay, cardiopulmonary bypass and anesthesia times, reintervention (RI), and pulmonary artery (PA) growth. RESULTS: Of 282 neonates, 106 underwent PR and 176 underwent SR (IP: 144 surgical, 32 transcatheter). Patients who underwent SR were more likely to have DiGeorge syndrome and greater rates of mechanical ventilation before the initial intervention. Mortality was not significantly different. Duration of mechanical ventilation, inotrope use, and complication rates were similar. Cumulative length of stay, cardiopulmonary bypass, and anesthesia times favored PR (P ≤ .001). Early RI was more common in patients who underwent SR (rate ratio, 1.42; P = .003) but was similar after CR (P = .837). Conduit size at the time of CR was larger with SR. Right PA growth was greater with PR. CONCLUSIONS: In neonates with TOF/PA, SR is more common in greater-risk patients. Accounting for this, SR and PR strategies have similar mortality. Perioperative morbidities, RI, and right PA growth generally favor PR, whereas SR allows for larger initial conduit implantation.

Effectiveness and implementation of an electronic health record-integrated digital health intervention for managing depressive symptoms in ambulatory oncology: The My Well-Being Guide study rationale and protocol.

BACKGROUND: Rates of clinically elevated depressive symptoms among ambulatory oncology patients are higher than in the general population and are associated with poorer health-related quality of life. Furthermore, a reduction in depressive symptoms may be associated with improved cancer survival. Several interventions have demonstrated efficacy in reducing oncologic depressive symptoms, including cognitive-behavioral stress management (CBSM). However, more work is needed to understand how to best implement CBSM into practice, such as through stepped-care approaches and digital health interventions linked to electronic health records (EHR). This manuscript presents the protocol of the My Well-Being Guide study, a pragmatic type 1 effectiveness-implementation hybrid study. This trial will test the effectiveness of My Well-Being Guide, a seven-week structured, CBSM-based digital health intervention designed to reduce depressive symptoms. This trial will also evaluate My Well-Being Guide's implementation across two health systems. METHODS: The final sample (N = 4561) will be oncology patients at Northwestern Medicine or University of Miami Health System who are ≥18 years of age; have a cancer diagnosis; elevated depressive symptoms on the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Depression; and primary language is English or Spanish. Data collection will occur at baseline, and 2-, 6-, and 12-months post baseline. Outcome domains include depressive symptoms and implementation evaluation. DISCUSSION: This study may provide valuable data on the effectiveness of our depressive symptom management digital health intervention linked to the EHR and the scalability of digital health interventions in general.

Protocol for a type 2 hybrid effectiveness-implementation study expanding, implementing and evaluating electronic health record-integrated patient-reported symptom monitoring in a multisite cancer centre.

INTRODUCTION: Cancer symptom monitoring and management interventions can address concerns that may otherwise go undertreated. However, such programmes and their evaluations remain largely limited to trials versus healthcare systemwide applications. We previously developed and piloted an electronic patient-reported symptom and need assessment ('cPRO' for cancer patient-reported outcomes) within the electronic health record (EHR). This study will expand cPRO implementation to medical oncology clinics across a large healthcare system. We will conduct a formal evaluation via a stepped wedge trial with a type 2 hybrid effectiveness-implementation design. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Aim 1 comprises a mixed method evaluation of cPRO implementation. Adult outpatients will complete cPRO assessments (pain, fatigue, physical function, depression, anxiety and supportive care needs) before medical oncology visits. Results are available in the EHR; severe symptoms and endorsed needs trigger clinician notifications. We will track implementation strategies using the Longitudinal Implementation Strategy Tracking System. Aim 2 will evaluate cPRO's impact on patient and system outcomes over 12 months via (a) a quality improvement study (n=4000 cases) and (b) a human subjects substudy (n=1000 patients). Aim 2a will evaluate EHR-documented healthcare usage and patient satisfaction. In aim 2b, participating patients will complete patient-reported healthcare utilisation and quality, symptoms and health-related quality of life measures at baseline, 6 and 12 months. We will analyse data using generalised linear mixed models and estimate individual trajectories of patient-reported symptom scores at baseline, 6 and 12 months. Using growth mixture modelling, we will characterise the overall trajectories of each symptom. Aim 3 will identify cPRO implementation facilitators and barriers via mixed methods research gathering feedback from stakeholders. Patients (n=50) will participate in focus groups or interviews. Clinicians and administrators (n=40) will complete surveys to evaluate implementation. We will graphically depict longitudinal implementation survey results and code qualitative data using directed content analysis. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study was approved by the Northwestern University Institutional Review Board (STU00207807). Findings will be disseminated via local and conference presentations and peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04014751; ClinicalTrials.gov.

The National Heart Lung and Blood Institute Disparities Elimination through Coordinated Interventions to Prevent and Control Heart and Lung Disease Alliance.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the National Heart Lung and Blood Institute (NHLBI) sponsored Disparities Elimination through Coordinated Interventions to Prevent and Control Heart and Lung Disease (DECIPHeR) Alliance to support late-stage implementation research aimed at reducing disparities in communities with high burdens of cardiovascular and/or pulmonary disease. STUDY SETTING: NHBLI funded seven DECIPHeR studies and a Coordinating Center. Projects target high-risk diverse populations including racial and ethnic minorities, urban, rural, and low-income communities, disadvantaged children, and persons with serious mental illness. Two projects address multiple cardiovascular risk factors, three focus on hypertension, one on tobacco use, and one on pediatric asthma. STUDY DESIGN: The initial phase supports planning activities for sustainable uptake of evidence-based interventions in targeted communities. The second phase tests late-stage evidence-based implementation strategies. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: Not applicable. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We provide an overview of the DECIPHeR Alliance and individual study designs, populations, and settings, implementation strategies, interventions, and outcomes. We describe the Alliance's organizational structure, designed to promote cross-center partnership and collaboration. CONCLUSIONS: The DECIPHeR Alliance represents an ambitious national effort to develop sustainable implementation of interventions to achieve cardiovascular and pulmonary health equity.

Tracking dynamic changes in implementation strategies over time within a hybrid type 2 trial of an electronic patient-reported oncology symptom and needs monitoring program.

Background: Longitudinal tracking of implementation strategies is critical in accurately reporting when and why they are used, for promoting rigor and reproducibility in implementation research, and could facilitate generalizable knowledge if similar methods are used across research projects. This article focuses on tracking dynamic changes in the use of implementation strategies over time within a hybrid type 2 effectiveness-implementation trial of an evidence-based electronic patient-reported oncology symptom assessment for cancer patient-reported outcomes in a single large healthcare system. Methods: The Longitudinal Implementation Strategies Tracking System (LISTS), a timeline follow-back procedure for documenting strategy use and modifications, was applied to the multiyear study. The research team used observation, study records, and reports from implementers to complete LISTS in an electronic data entry system. Types of modifications and reasons were categorized. Determinants associated with each strategy were collected as a justification for strategy use and a potential explanation for strategy modifications. Results: Thirty-four discrete implementation strategies were used and at least one strategy was used from each of the nine strategy categories from the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) taxonomy. Most of the strategies were introduced, used, and continued or discontinued according to a prospective implementation plan. Relatedly, a small number of strategies were introduced, the majority unplanned, because of the changing healthcare landscape, or to address an emergent barrier. Despite changing implementation context, there were relatively few modifications to the way strategies were enacted, such as a change in the actor, action, or dose. Few differences were noted between the trial's three regional units under investigation. Conclusion: This study occurred within the ambulatory oncology clinics of a large, academic medical center and was supported by the Quality team of the health system to ensure greater uptake, uniformity, and implementation within established practice change processes. The centralized nature of the implementation likely contributed to the relatively low proportion of modified strategies and the high degree of uniformity across regions. These results demonstrate the potential of LISTS in gathering the level of data needed to understand the impact of the many implementation strategies used to support adoption and delivery of a multilevel innovation. Clinical trial registration: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04014751, identifier: NCT04014751.

Comparison of Management Strategies for Neonates With Symptomatic Tetralogy of Fallot.

BACKGROUND: Neonates with tetralogy of Fallot and symptomatic cyanosis (sTOF) require early intervention. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to perform a balanced multicenter comparison of staged repair (SR) (initial palliation [IP] and subsequent complete repair [CR]) versus primary repair (PR) treatment strategies. METHODS: Consecutive neonates with sTOF who underwent IP or PR at ≤30 days of age from 2005 to 2017 were retrospectively reviewed from the Congenital Cardiac Research Collaborative. The primary outcome was death. Secondary outcomes included component (IP, CR, PR) and cumulative (SR): hospital and intensive care unit lengths of stay; durations of cardiopulmonary bypass, anesthesia, ventilation, and inotrope use; and complication and reintervention rates. Outcomes were compared using propensity score adjustment. RESULTS: The cohort consisted of 342 patients who underwent SR (IP: surgical, n = 256; transcatheter, n = 86) and 230 patients who underwent PR. Pre-procedural ventilation, prematurity, DiGeorge syndrome, and pulmonary atresia were more common in the SR group (p ≤0.01). The observed risk of death was not different between the groups (10.2% vs 7.4%; p = 0.25) at median 4.3 years. After adjustment, the hazard of death remained similar between groups (hazard ratio: 0.82; 95% confidence interval: 0.49 to 1.38; p = 0.456), but it favored SR during early follow-up (<4 months; p = 0.041). Secondary outcomes favored the SR group in component analysis, whereas they largely favored PR in cumulative analysis. Reintervention risk was higher in the SR group (p = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: In this multicenter comparison of SR or PR for management of neonates with sTOF, adjusted for patient-related factors, early mortality and neonatal morbidity were lower in the SR group, but cumulative morbidity and reinterventions favored the PR group, findings suggesting potential benefits to each strategy.

Parenting and social-ecological correlates with children's health behaviours: A latent profile analysis.

BACKGROUND: Paediatric obesity poses dangers to children's short and long-term health. Multi-level ecological models posit how children's health behaviours are influenced by interpersonal relationships. OBJECTIVES: To identify profiles of individual and interpersonal health behaviours and parenting skills among caregivers and their children with elevated BMI. METHODS: Participants were 240 children (63.7% Latino) ages 5 to 12 years with body mass index ≥85th percentile and their caregivers in a paediatric weight management intervention trial. A latent profile analysis was used to identify profiles among caregiver report of parenting skills; child physical activity, eating behaviours, and food and beverage choices; family mealtime, media and sleep routines; and parent health behaviours, and associations with food and housing insecurity. RESULTS: A three-class model was chosen based on conceptual interpretation and model fit. Profiles were differentiated by parenting skills, child food choices, child physical activity habits, family mealtime, media, and sleep routines, and parent health behaviours. Food and housing insecurity were associated with class membership while child and caregiver anthropometrics were not. CONCLUSIONS: Distinct profiles existed among this low-income, racially/ethnically diverse sample of children with elevated BMI. Such findings emphasize the importance of assessing individual and interpersonal influences and contextual factors on childhood obesity.

Production of foot-and-mouth disease virus capsid proteins by the TEV protease.

Protective immunity to viral pathogens often includes production of neutralizing antibodies to virus capsid proteins. Many viruses produce capsid proteins by expressing a precursor polyprotein and related protease from a single open reading frame. The foot-and-mouth disease virus (FMDV) expresses a 3C protease (3Cpro) that cleaves a P1 polyprotein intermediate into individual capsid proteins, but the FMDV 3Cpro also degrades many host cell proteins and reduces the viability of host cells, including subunit vaccine production cells. To overcome the limitations of using the a wild-type 3Cpro in FMDV subunit vaccine expression systems, we altered the protease restriction sequences within a FMDV P1 polyprotein to enable production of FMDV capsid proteins by the Tobacco Etch Virus NIa protease (TEVpro). Separate TEVpro and modified FMDV P1 proteins were produced from a single open reading frame by an intervening FMDV 2A sequence. The modified FMDV P1 polyprotein was successfully processed by the TEVpro in both mammalian and bacterial cells. More broadly, this method of polyprotein production and processing may be adapted to other recombinant expression systems, especially plant-based expression.