Telehealth-guided provider-to-provider communication to improve rural health: A systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Telehealth may address healthcare disparities for rural populations. This systematic review assesses the use, effectiveness, and implementation of telehealth-supported provider-to-provider collaboration to improve rural healthcare. METHODS: We searched Ovid MEDLINE®, CINAHL®, EMBASE, and Cochrane CENTRAL from 1 January 2010 to 12 October 2021 for trials and observational studies of rural provider-to-provider telehealth. Abstracts and full text were dual-reviewed. We assessed the risk of bias for individual studies and strength of evidence for studies with similar outcomes. RESULTS: Seven studies of rural uptake of provider-to-provider telehealth documented increases over time but variability across geographic regions. In 97 effectiveness studies, outcomes were similar with rural provider-to-provider telehealth versus without for inpatient consultations, neonatal care, outpatient depression and diabetes, and emergency care. Better or similar results were reported for changes in rural clinician behavior, knowledge, confidence, and self-efficacy. Evidence was insufficient for other clinical uses and outcomes. Sixty-seven (67) evaluation and qualitative studies identified barriers and facilitators to implementing rural provider-to-provider telehealth. Success was linked to well-functioning technology, sufficient resources, and adequate payment. Barriers included lack of understanding of rural context and resources. Methodologic weaknesses of studies included less rigorous study designs and small samples. DISCUSSION: Rural provider-to-provider telehealth produces similar or better results versus care without telehealth. Barriers to rural provider-to-provider telehealth implementation are common to practice change but include some specific to rural adaptation and adoption. Evidence gaps are partially due to studies that do not address differences in the groups compared or do not include sufficient sample sizes.

A Community-based Assessment of Skin Care, Allergies, and Eczema (CASCADE): an atopic dermatitis primary prevention study using emollients-protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a common, chronic skin disorder often beginning in infancy. Skin barrier dysfunction early in life serves as a central event in the pathogenesis of AD. In infants at high risk of developing AD, preventative application of lipid-rich emollients may reduce the risk of developing AD. This study aims to measure the effectiveness of this intervention in a population not selected for risk via a pragmatic, randomized, physician-blinded trial in the primary care setting. METHODS: Infant-parent dyads are recruited from a primary care practice participating through one of four practice-based research networks in Oregon, Colorado, Wisconsin, and North Carolina. Eligible dyads are randomized to the intervention (daily use of lipid-rich emollient) or the control (no emollient) group (n = 625 infants in each) and are followed for 24 months. The primary outcome is the cumulative incidence of physician-diagnosed AD and secondary outcomes include caregiver-reported measures of AD and development of other atopic diseases. Data collection occurs via chart review and surveys, with no study visits required. Data will be analyzed utilizing intention-to-treat principles. DISCUSSION: AD is a common skin condition in infants that affects quality of life and is associated with the development of other atopic diseases. If a safe intervention, such as application of lipid-rich emollients, in the general population effectively decreases AD prevalence, this could alter the guidance given by providers regarding routine skin care of infants. Because of the pragmatic design, we anticipate that this trial will yield generalizable results. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03409367. Registered on 11 February 2018.

Provision of Recommended Chronic Pain Assessment and Management in Primary Care: Does Patient-Centered Medical Home (PCMH) Recognition Make a Difference?

BACKGROUND: Chronic pain (CP) care in the patient-centered medical home (PCMH) model has not been well studied. We assessed whether PCMH recognition is associated with increased provision of key practice recommendations for CP assessment and management. METHODS: Chart reviews were completed for 12 primary care practices affiliated with one health system in the Cincinnati Area Research and Improvement Group (CARInG). Recommendations were abstracted and compared based on PCMH status: 3 practices had received prior PCMH level 3 recognition, 5 were in an ongoing process of applying, and 4 had no recognition and were not applying. RESULTS: A total of 485 charts were reviewed from 65 PCPs. Eight of 10 key recommendations were documented more often in the prior and ongoing PCMH cohorts, including assessing pain severity, function, psychosocial distress, and substance abuse, and using structured instruments for these assessments. There were fewer differences between the cohorts in the management of chronic opioids, with only the ongoing PCMH cohort having higher documentation for 5 of the 7 recommendations, including performing urine drug screens and using a structured instrument to assess for misuse. CONCLUSIONS: These findings support the usefulness of the PCMH model in managing patients with CP, but patient outcomes need to be addressed in future studies.

Urban Health Project: A Sustainable and Successful Community Internship Program for Medical Students.

BACKGROUND: Urban Health Project (UHP) is a mission and vision-driven summer internship at the University of Cincinnati College of Medicine that places first-year medical students at local community agencies that work with underserved populations. At the completion of their internship, students write Final Intern Reflections (FIRs). METHODS: Final Intern Reflections written from 1987 to 2012 were read and coded to both predetermined categories derived from the UHP mission and vision statements and new categories created from the data themselves. RESULTS: Comments relating to UHP's mission and vision were found in 47% and 36% of FIRs, respectively. Positive experiences outweighed negative by a factor of eight. Interns reported the following benefits: educational (53%), valuable (25%), rewarding (25%), new (10%), unique (6%), and life-changing (5%). CONCLUSIONS: Urban Health Project is successful in providing medical students with enriching experiences with underserved populations that have the potential to change their understanding of vulnerable populations.

Reporting and Using Near-miss Events to Improve Patient Safety in Diverse Primary Care Practices: A Collaborative Approach to Learning from Our Mistakes.

PURPOSE: Near-miss events represent an opportunity to identify and correct errors that jeopardize patient safety. This study was undertaken to assess the feasibility of a near-miss reporting system in primary care practices and to describe initial reports and practice responses to them. METHODS: We implemented a web-based, anonymous near-miss reporting system into 7 diverse practices, collecting and categorizing all reports. At the end of the study period, we interviewed practice leaders to determine how the near-miss reports were used for quality improvement (QI) in each practice. RESULTS: All 7 practices successfully implemented the system, reporting 632 near-miss events in 9 months and initiating 32 QI projects based on the reports. The most frequent events reported were breakdowns in office processes (47.3%); of these, filing errors were most common, with 38% of these errors judged by external coders to be high risk for an adverse event. Electronic medical records were the primary or secondary cause of the error in 7.8% and 14.4% of reported cases, respectively. The pattern of near-miss events across these diverse practices was similar. CONCLUSIONS: Anonymous near-miss reporting can be successfully implemented in primary care practices. Near-miss events occur frequently in office practice, primarily involve administrative and communication problems, and can pose a serious threat to patient safety; they can, however, be used by practice leaders to implement QI changes.

Diabetes in homeless persons: barriers and enablers to health as perceived by patients, medical, and social service providers.

The ways homelessness and diabetes affect each other is not well known. The authors sought to understand barriers and enablers to health for homeless people with diabetes as perceived by homeless persons and providers. The authors performed semistructured interviews with a sample of participants (seven homeless persons, six social service providers, and five medical providers) in an urban Midwest community. Data analysis was performed with the qualitative editing method. Participants described external factors (chaotic lifestyle, diet/food availability, access to care, and medications) and internal factors (competing demands, substance abuse, stress) that directly affect health. Social service providers were seen as peripheral to diabetes care, although all saw their primary functions as valuable. These factors and relationships are appropriately modeled in a complex adaptive chronic care model, where the framework is bottom up and stresses adaptability, self-organization, and empowerment. Adapting the care of homeless persons with diabetes to include involvement of patients and medical and social service providers must be emergent and responsive to changing needs.

"But what does it mean for me?" Primary care patients' communication preferences for test results notification.

BACKGROUND: The best ways to communicate test results in primary care to achieve patient satisfaction and assist patients to incorporate results into their personal health decision making are unknown. A study was conducted to determine the factors that patients believe are important in achieving those goals. METHODS: Semistructured interviews were conducted with a convenience sample of 12 adults, at least half with a chronic disease requiring regular testing, who shared experiences about receiving test results from physicians' offices and how they used them in their health decision making. In addition, "think aloud" interviewing techniques were used to assess participants' satisfaction and stated understanding with six different formats for receiving a hypothetical test result (a mildly elevated lipid profile). The interviews were analyzed using the editing technique to determine important factors in test results notification. FINDINGS: Three themes were found to be important in satisfaction with and stated understanding and use of test results: (1) the information shared (test result, clinician interpretation and guidance), (2) significance of the results (testing purpose, abnormal or normal result) and (3) personal preferences for communication (timeliness, interpersonal connection, and hard copy). Participants' stated understanding was highest, among several potential formats, for actual values with desired/normal values, a low-literacy description of the test's purpose, and a simple graph. CONCLUSIONS: A results notification algorithm includes (1) communication elements (the purpose of the test, the actual results with desired values, clinician guidance, and a graphical representation) and (2) appropriate choice of notification technique (phone/visit for diagnostic tests and all significantly abnormal results and mail/e-mail/Web for all others).

Development of an instrument to measure seniors' patient safety health beliefs: the Seniors Empowerment and Advocacy in Patient Safety (SEAPS) survey.

OBJECTIVE: To develop a survey to measure seniors' embracement of ambulatory patient safety self-advocacy behaviors, the Senior Empowerment and Advocacy in Patient Safety (SEAPS) survey. METHODS: Content was developed by review of published recommendations combined with interviews and focus groups with community members; items were generated for subscales based on the health belief model (HBM). Psychometric characteristics were assessed by cluster and correlation analyses on a pilot test of 143 community dwelling seniors; the ability of the subscales and demographic variables to predict reported behavior was investigated by multiple regression. RESULTS: The four subscales of the SEAPS were outcome efficacy (OE), attitudes (ATT), self-efficacy (SE) and behaviors (BEH). Cronbach alphas were 0.74 for ATT, 0.79 for BEH, and 0.91 for OE and SE. Analysis of variance showed that there were no differences in any subscale score by race, education level or frequency of doctor visits, but women were noted to have significantly higher scores (p<.01) on the ATT and SE subscales and for the total of all the scales. Multiple regressions showed that SE significantly predicted self-reported behavior (p<.001). OE was a significant predictor for whites (p<.001) but not for African-Americans (p=.24). CONCLUSIONS: We have developed a short, 21-item self-administered survey to assess seniors' views about their participation in safety tasks. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: We believe the SEAPS shows promise to be a tool for evaluating interventions and training programs aimed at improving seniors' self-advocacy skills. Effective interventions may improve the involvement of patients in their own safety in the clinical setting.