Social, Structural, Behavioral, and Clinical Barriers Influencing Pre-exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) Use Among Young Black Men Who Have Sex with Men in the South: A Qualitative Update to a 2016 Study.

Antiretroviral pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is highly effective in preventing HIV. Despite its promise, PrEP use is low, especially among young Black men who have sex with men (YBMSM). The prevalence of HIV in Mississippi (MS) is among the highest in the United States, with the bulk of new infections occurring amongst YBMSM living in Jackson, MS. We recruited 20 PrEP-eligible YBMSM and 10 clinic staff from MS health clinics between October 2021 and April 2022. Data were collected remotely using in-depth interviews and a brief survey, which lasted approximately 45-60 min. Interview content included PrEP knowledge/experiences, HIV risk perception, and PrEP use barriers and facilitators. Qualitative data were coded then organized using NVivo. Using thematic analysis methodology, data were assessed for current barriers to PrEP use. An array of barriers were identified by participants. Barriers included structural factors (cost of PrEP, lack of discreet clinics, time commitment, competing interests); social factors (unaware of HIV risk, stigma and homophobia, fear that partners would find out about PrEP use, not knowing anyone on PrEP); behavioral factors (sexual risk factors, denial, less priority for prevention vs treatment); and clinical factors (misunderstood side effects, fear PrEP won't work). Significant barriers to PrEP use among YBMSM stem from structural, social, behavioral, and clinical factors. These results will inform intervention efforts tailored to mitigate barriers and improve PrEP uptake among YBMSM in the southern United States.

Costs of Implementing Electronic Context Factor Assessments and Patient-reported Outcomes in Pain Clinic Settings.

BACKGROUND: The Healing Encounters and Attitudes Lists (HEALs) patient-reported measures, consisting of 6 separate context factor questionnaires, predict patients' pain improvements. Our Patient-centered Outcomes Research Initiative-funded implementation project demonstrated success in using HEAL data during clinic consultations to enhance patient engagement, improve patient outcomes, and reduce opioid prescribing. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to determine the resources needed for additional sites to implement HEAL to improve pain care treatment. RESEARCH DESIGN: An observational study from March 1 to November 30, 2021, assessing implementation cost data from invoices, time and salary requirements for clinic personnel training, estimates of non-site-based costs, and one-time resource development costs. SUBJECTS: Unique patients eligible to complete a HEAL survey (N=24,018) and 74 clinic personnel. MEASURES: The Stages of Implementation Completion guided documentation of preimplementation, implementation, and sustainment activities of HEAL pain clinic operations. These informed the calculations of the costs of implementation. RESULTS: The total time for HEAL implementation is 7 months: preimplementation and implementation phases (4 mo) and sustainment (3 mo). One hour of HEAL implementation involving a future clinical site consisting of 2 attending physicians, 1 midlevel provider, 1 nurse manager, 1 nurse, 1 radiology technician, 2 medical assistants, and 1 front desk staff will cost $572. A 10-minute time increment for all clinic staff is $95. Total implementation costs based on hourly rates over 7 months, including non-site-based costs of consultations, materials, and technology development costs, is $28,287. CONCLUSIONS: Documenting our implementation costs clarifies the resources needed for additional new sites to implement HEAL to measure pain care quality and to engage patients and clinic personnel.

Health disparities in orthopedic trauma: a qualitative study examining providers' perspectives on barriers to care and recovery outcomes.

Social workers involved in interdisciplinary orthopedic trauma care can benefit from the knowledge of providers' perspectives on healthcare disparities in this field. Using qualitative data from focus groups conducted on 79 orthopedic care providers at three Level 1 trauma centers, we assessed their perspectives on orthopedic trauma healthcare disparities and discussed potential solutions. Focus groups originally aimed to detect barriers and facilitators of the implementation of a trial of a live video mind-body intervention to aid in recovery in orthopedic trauma care settings (Toolkit for Optimal Recovery-TOR). We used the Socio-Ecological Model to analyze an emerging code of "health disparities" during data analysis to determine at which levels of care these disparities occurred. We identified factors related to health disparities in orthopedic trauma care and outcomes at the Individual (Education- comprehension, health-literacy; Language Barriers; Psychological Health- emotional distress, alcohol/drug use, learned helplessness; Physical Health- obesity, smoking; and Access to Technology), Relationship (Social Support Network), Community (Transportation and Employment Security), and Societal level (Access- safe/clean housing, insurance, mental health resources; Culture). We discuss the implications of the findings and provide recommendations to address these issues, with a specific focus on their relevance to the field of social work in health care.

A Perspective on Implementation Outcomes and Strategies to Promote the Uptake of COVID-19 Vaccines.

Recent articles have highlighted the importance of incorporating implementation science concepts into pandemic-related research. However, limited research has been documented to date regarding implementation outcomes that may be unique to COVID-19 vaccinations and how to utilize implementation strategies to address vaccine program-related implementation challenges. To address these gaps, we formed a global COVID-19 implementation workgroup of implementation scientists who met weekly for over a year to review the available literature and learn about ongoing research during the pandemic. We developed a hierarchy to prioritize the applicability of "lessons learned" from the vaccination-related implementation literature. We identified applications of existing implementation outcomes as well as identified additional implementation outcomes. We also mapped implementation strategies to those outcomes. Our efforts provide rationale for the utility of using implementation outcomes in pandemic-related research. Furthermore, we identified three additional implementation outcomes: availability, health equity, and scale-up. Results include a list of COVID-19 relevant implementation strategies mapped to the implementation outcomes.

Adaptation of a social risk screening and referral initiative across clinical populations, settings, and contexts in the Department of Veterans Affairs Health System.

Identifying and addressing social risks and social needs in healthcare settings is an important step towards achieving health equity. Assessing Circumstances and Offering Resources for Needs (ACORN) is a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) social risk screening and referral model that aims to systematically identify and address social needs. Since initial piloting in 2018, our team has collaborated with clinical and operations partners to implement ACORN across multiple VA clinical settings while adapting and tailoring the initiative to meet the needs of different populations, specialties, and individuals administering screening. Given ACORN's complexity as a growing initiative with multiple partners and frequent real-time modifications within a large national healthcare system, we recognized a need to systematically document the rationale and process of adaptations over time. We looked to three implementation frameworks-RE-AIM, the Adaptome, and FRAME-to describe the rationale for adaptations, the nature of and context within which adaptations were made, and the details of each adaptation. In this manuscript, we uniquely interweave these three frameworks to document adaptations to ACORN across diverse VA clinical settings, with a focus on how adaptations support the promotion of heath equity in the Veteran population.

You have an effective brief intervention (BI) for young adults, now what? Concrete strategies to advance BI implementation in usual care settings.

Objective: Risky drinking remains high among young adults and is associated with negative health-related consequences. Brief interventions (BIs) are an evidence-based practice for risky drinking that are particularly well suited for young adults. However, the widespread implementation of BIs remains challenging. This article highlights guiding principles for researchers and clinicians seeking to implement BI for young adults. Method: Five guiding principles for the implementation of BIs for young adults with risky drinking are introduced as follows: (a) selecting an implementation model; (b) considering contextual factors; (c) specifying an implementation strategy; (d) assessing implementation outcomes; and (e) embracing hybrid effectiveness-implementation designs. Advancing health equity is considered a key crosscutting theme. Results: Multiple implementation models are discussed including process models, determinant frameworks, classic theories, implementation theories, and evaluation frameworks. Contextual factors impacting BI implementation are then considered across multiple levels within an organization. Next, we present methods for selecting implementation strategies and discuss implementation outcomes that can be measured during preimplementation, implementation, and sustainability phases. Finally, we encourage employing hybrid effectiveness-implementation designs to reduce the BI science-practice gap. Guiding principles are illustrated with examples from two National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism-funded studies exploring BI implementation domestically and internationally. Conclusions: This article introduces foundational principles and emerging strategies to nonspecialist researchers, clinicians, and policymakers seeking to enhance the dissemination and implementation of BIs. Advancing the dissemination and implementation of BIs is essential to ensure that investments in BI research are fully realized to equitably improve public health. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

The Role of Implementation Science in Reducing Sexual and Gender Minority Mental Health Disparities.

Owing to multiple and multilevel ecological factors, sexual and gender minority (SGM) populations exhibit persistent mental health disparities. SGM populations are also at increased risk for never being reached by evidence-based mental health care in real-world settings, which is essential for reducing these disparities. To be maximally effective in reducing these disparities, we must strive to bring our research findings into routine clinical care quickly. Implementation science can help SGM health researchers achieve this goal. This perspective outlines how researchers can use implementation science theories and methods to reduce SGM mental health disparities more efficiently and more durably.

Care coordination for veterans with COPD: a positive deviance study.

OBJECTIVES: Improving chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) care and reducing hospital readmissions is an urgent healthcare system priority. However, little is known about the organizational factors that underlie intersite variation in readmission rates. Evidence from other chronic diseases points to care coordination as one such factor. STUDY DESIGN: To understand whether intersite differences in care coordination may be one of the organizational factors contributing to the variation in readmission rates, we examined provider perspectives on COPD care at Veterans Affairs (VA) sites. METHODS: In this mixed-methods positive deviance study, we selected 3 VA sites in the lowest quartile and 3 in the highest quartile for 2016 risk-adjusted COPD readmission rates. During June to October 2017, we conducted semistructured interviews with primary and specialty care providers involved in COPD care at VA sites with low (n = 14) and high (n = 11) readmission rates. RESULTS: Although providers at all sites referenced ongoing readmission reduction initiatives, only providers at low-readmission sites described practice environments characterized by high relational coordination (ie, high-quality work relationships and high-quality communication). They also reported fewer significant structural barriers to collaboration in areas like patient volume. CONCLUSIONS: The most notable differences between high- and low-readmission sites were related to the quality of relational coordination and the presence of structural barriers to coordination, rather than specific readmission reduction initiatives. Implementing organizational reforms aimed at enhancing relational coordination and removing structural barriers would enhance care for COPD and may improve quality of care for other chronic conditions.

Recommendations for the Evaluation of Cross-System Care Coordination from the VA State-of-the-art Working Group on VA/Non-VA Care.

In response to widespread concerns regarding Veterans' access to VA care, Congress enacted the Veterans Access, Choice and Accountability Act of 2014, which required VA to establish the Veterans Choice Program (VCP). Since the inception of VCP, more than two million Veterans have received care from community providers, representing approximately 25% of Veterans enrolled in VA care. However, expanded access to non-VA care has created challenges in care coordination between VA and community health systems. In March 2018, the VA Health Services Research & Development Service hosted a VA State of the Art conference (SOTA) focused on care coordination. The SOTA convened VA researchers, program directors, clinicians, and policy makers to identify knowledge gaps regarding care coordination within the VA and between VA and community systems of care. This article provides a summary and synthesis of relevant literature and provides recommendations generated from the SOTA about how to evaluate cross-system care coordination. Care coordination is typically evaluated using health outcomes including hospital readmissions and death; however, in cross-system evaluations of care coordination, measures such as access, cost, Veteran/patient and provider satisfaction (including with cross-system communication), comparable quality metrics, context (urban vs. rural), and patient complexity (medical and mental health conditions) need to be included to fully evaluate care coordination effectiveness. Future research should examine the role of multiple individuals coordinating VA and non-VA care, and how these coordinators work together to optimize coordination.

Effectiveness of Implementing a Collaborative Chronic Care Model for Clinician Teams on Patient Outcomes and Health Status in Mental Health: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Collaborative chronic care models (CCMs) have extensive randomized clinical trial evidence for effectiveness in serious mental illnesses, but little evidence exists regarding their feasibility or effect in typical practice conditions. Objective: To determine the effectiveness of implementation facilitation in establishing the CCM in mental health teams and the impact on health outcomes of team-treated individuals. Design, Setting, and Participants: This quasi-experimental, randomized stepped-wedge implementation trial was conducted from February 2016 through February 2018, in partnership with the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Office of Mental Health and Suicide Prevention. Nine facilities were enrolled from all VA facilities in the United States to receive CCM implementation support. All veterans (n = 5596) treated by designated outpatient general mental health teams were included for hospitalization analyses, and a randomly selected sample (n = 1050) was identified for health status interviews. Individuals with dementia were excluded. Clinicians (n = 62) at the facilities were surveyed, and site process summaries were rated for concordance with the CCM process. The CCM implementation start time was randomly assigned across 3 waves. Data analysis of this evaluable population was performed from June to September 2018. Interventions: Internal-external facilitation, combining a study-funded external facilitator and a facility-funded internal facilitator working with a designated team for 1 year. Main Outcomes and Measures: Facilitation was hypothesized to be associated with improvements in both implementation and intervention outcomes (hybrid type II trial). Implementation outcomes included the clinician Team Development Measure (TDM) and proportion of CCM-concordant team care processes. The study was powered for the primary health outcome, mental component score (MCS). Hospitalization rate was derived from administrative data. Results: The veteran population (n = 5596) included 881 women (15.7%), and the mean (SD) age was 52.2 (14.5) years. The interviewed sample (n = 1050) was similar but was oversampled for women (n = 210 [20.0%]). Facilitation was associated with improvements in TDM subscales for role clarity (53.4%-68.6%; δ = 15.3; 95% CI, 4.4-26.2; P = .01) and team primacy (50.0%-68.6%; δ = 18.6; 95% CI, 8.3-28.9; P = .001). The percentage of CCM-concordant processes achieved varied, ranging from 44% to 89%. No improvement was seen in veteran self-ratings, including the primary outcome. In post hoc analyses, MCS improved in veterans with 3 or more treated mental health diagnoses compared with others (ß = 5.03; 95% CI, 2.24-7.82; P < .001). Mental health hospitalizations demonstrated a robust decrease during facilitation (ß = -0.12; 95% CI, -0.16 to -0.07; P < .001); this finding withstood 4 internal validity tests. Conclusions and Relevance: Implementation facilitation that engages clinicians under typical practice conditions can enhance evidence-based team processes; its effect on self-reported overall population health status was negligible, although health status improved for individuals with complex conditions and hospitalization rate declined. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02543840.

Chinese, Vietnamese, and Asian Indian Parents' Perspectives About Well-Child Visits: A Qualitative Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Well-child visits are a critical component of pediatric health care; however, disparities in attendance and quality of care exist for Asian children. Limited research has explored Asian immigrant parents' perspectives about their well-child visit experience. METHODS: Qualitative interviews were conducted with Chinese, Vietnamese, and Asian Indian immigrant parents. Participants were recruited from community-based organizations in the Boston area. Interviews focused on parents' perceptions about well-child visits, including individual attitudes, social and cultural factors affecting their opinions, perceived behavioral control, and improving visits for Asian immigrant families. Data were coded and analyzed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Fifty-one parents participated. Although participants reported attending well-child visits, they thought language barriers and unfamiliarity with US preventive health care may limit attendance for other Asian immigrant families. Some reported high-quality visits, while others described them as "too simple," recollecting health care experiences from their countries of origin where more tests were completed. Participants described seeking advice about their children's preventive care from elder family members. Many expressed the importance of culturally concordant health care providers and culturally sensitive care, while others thought that culture was less relevant. Differences emerged among the 3 subgroups around culturally concordant care and traditional medicine. CONCLUSIONS: Querying parents about their past health care experiences and providing information about well-child visits may be useful when caring for immigrant families. Social influences on children's health outside of the parent-provider-child triad may also be important. Further work should explore how to deliver culturally sensitive care that considers not only a family's language preferences but also their unique cultural identity.

Staff perceptions implementing interprofessional team-based behavioural healthcare.

The US Veterans Health Administration (VHA) in 2013 mandated a nationwide implementation of interprofessional team-based care in the general mental health setting and officially endorsed the collaborative care model in 2015 to guide the coordinated and anticipatory care to be delivered by these teams. Front-line clinic staff are major stakeholders whose practices are most directly affected by this implementation and may or may not view teams as useful or feasible for their practice. Our objective was to examine their perspectives on delivering team-to-patient care in order to understand what system-level efforts can best support the transition to such care from the more conventional provider-to-patient care. We conducted 14 semi-structured interviews with staff from general mental health clinics across three different VHA medical facilities. The interview questions focused on asking how care is organised and delivered at their clinic, their experiences in collaborating with other staff, and how the clinic handles changes. Four recurrent themes were identified: navigating workplace supervision, organisation, and role structures; continuing professional growth and relationships; delivering patient-focused care through education and connection to resources; and utilising information technology for communication and panel-based management. Quality improvement efforts were rarely discussed during the interviews. Our results indicate that staff's endorsement of the implementation of interprofessional care teams in general mental health settings may be strengthened through associated efforts targeted at enhancing their experiences aligned to these emergent themes.

Yoga versus education for Veterans with chronic low back pain: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Chronic low back pain is the most frequent pain condition in Veterans and causes substantial suffering, decreased functional capacity, and lower quality of life. Symptoms of post-traumatic stress, depression, and mild traumatic brain injury are highly prevalent in Veterans with back pain. Yoga for low back pain has been demonstrated to be effective for civilians in randomized controlled trials. However, it is unknown if results from previously published trials generalize to military populations. METHODS/DESIGN: This study is a parallel randomized controlled trial comparing yoga to education for 120 Veterans with chronic low back pain. Participants are Veterans ≥18 years old with low back pain present on at least half the days in the past six months and a self-reported average pain intensity in the previous week of ≥4 on a 0-10 scale. The 24-week study has an initial 12-week intervention period, where participants are randomized equally into (1) a standardized weekly group yoga class with home practice or (2) education delivered with a self-care book. Primary outcome measures are change at 12 weeks in low back pain intensity measured by the Defense and Veterans Pain Rating Scale (0-10) and back-related function using the 23-point Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire. In the subsequent 12-week follow-up period, yoga participants are encouraged to continue home yoga practice and education participants continue following recommendations from the book. Qualitative interviews with Veterans in the yoga group and their partners explore the impact of chronic low back pain and yoga on family relationships. We also assess cost-effectiveness from three perspectives: the Veteran, the Veterans Health Administration, and society using electronic medical records, self-reported cost data, and study records. DISCUSSION: This study will help determine if yoga can become an effective treatment for Veterans with chronic low back pain and psychological comorbidities. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02224183.

Enhancing self-report assessment of PTSD: development of an item bank.

The authors report results of work to enhance self-report posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) assessment by developing an item bank for use in a computer-adapted test. Computer-adapted tests have great potential to decrease the burden of PTSD assessment and outcomes monitoring. The authors conducted a systematic literature review of PTSD instruments, created a database of items, performed qualitative review and readability analysis, and conducted cognitive interviews with veterans diagnosed with PTSD. The systematic review yielded 480 studies in which 41 PTSD instruments comprising 993 items met inclusion criteria. The final PTSD item bank includes 104 items representing each of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition (DSM-IV; American Psychiatric Association [APA], 1994), PTSD symptom clusters (reexperiencing, avoidance, and hyperarousal), and 3 additional subdomains (depersonalization, guilt, and sexual problems) that expanded the assessment item pool.