Partnerships for Blood Pressure Control in Washington State, December 2016-July 2017.

According to recent guidelines, 46% of U.S. adults have high blood pressure (i.e., hypertension). Traditionally addressed in clinical settings, only 54% of adults successfully manage their hypertension. Community-clinical partnerships that facilitate medication adherence and lifestyle changes are promising avenues to achieve population-level blood pressure control. We examined partnerships for blood pressure control in Washington State, their facilitators and barriers, and ways public health departments could foster partnerships. We conducted 41 semistructured interviews with clinic staff, community-based organization (CBO) staff, pharmacy staff, and community health workers (CHWs). The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention-adapted Himmelman Collaboration Continuum, which describes five levels of partnership intensity, guided our thematic analysis. We found variation across sectors in partnership frequency and intensity. Clinic and pharmacy staff reported fewer partnerships than CBO staff and CHWs, and mostly either low or very high intensity partnerships. CBO staff and CHWs described partnerships at each intensity level. Trust and having a shared mission facilitated partnerships. Competition, lack of time, limited awareness of resources, and lack of shared health records constituted barriers to partnership. Bringing potential partners together to discuss shared goals, increasing technological integration, and building awareness of resources may help bridge clinical and community silos and improve population-level blood pressure control.

Impact of leadership development workshops in facilitating team-based practice transformation.

The development of interprofessional collaborative practice (IPCP) environments requires a systematic, multi-pronged approach. Despite recognition of the need for IPCP, interventions that support its development are not well described in the literature. Leadership training is necessary for individuals and teams to build IPCP-supportive environments. This study describes the impact of a longitudinal series of leadership development workshops to strengthen IPCP and facilitate practice transformation. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 16 healthcare professionals who described ways in which the workshops influenced the team-based practice transformation. Thematic analysis indicated that the workshops were instrumental in providing structure and opportunity for participants to learn skills, expand perspectives, and change behavior to improve team outcomes. Findings highlight the importance of supporting individual and team development over time and suggest that intentional, targeted coaching focused on relationship building and meeting the evolving needs of the team is critical to the implementation and sustainment of practice change.

Interprofessional education and practice guide: interprofessional team writing to promote dissemination of interprofessional education scholarship and products.

Collaborations to develop, implement, evaluate, replicate, and write about interprofessional education (IPE) activities within and across institutions are wonderful opportunities to experience teamwork, team communication, ethics and values, and the roles and responsibilities of interprofessional team writing. Just as effective communication in interprofessional team-based care is essential for providing safe, high-quality health care, similar communication strategies are necessary to produce high-quality scholarship of IPE curricula and activities. Relationship and communication issues that affect health care teams' abilities to work together effectively (e.g., hierarchy, exclusion, assumptions, non-responsiveness, biases, stereotypes and poor hand-offs of information) can also occur in interprofessional team writing. Between 1970 and 2010, interprofessional practice research publications increased by 2293%. Although there has been tremendous growth in the IPE literature, especially of articles that require collaborative writing, there have not been any papers addressing the challenges of interprofessional team writing. As more teams collaborate to develop IPE, there is a need to establish principles and strategies for effective interprofessional team writing. In this education and practice guide, a cross-institutional team of faculty, staff, and graduate students who have collaborated on externally funded IPE grants, conferences, products, and workshops will share lessons learned for successfully collaborating in interprofessional team writing.

Integrating Medical Librarians Into Infectious Disease Rounding Teams: Survey Results From a Pilot Implementation Study.

Medical librarians participating as infectious disease rounding team members add value by facilitating knowledge acquisition and dissemination and by improving clinical decision making. This pilot study implementing medical librarians on infectious disease rounding teams was a well-received and beneficial intervention to study participants.

Introducing SoNHR-Reporting guidelines for Social Networks In Health Research.

OBJECTIVE: The overall goal of this work is to produce a set of recommendations (SoNHR-Social Networks in Health Research) that will improve the reporting and dissemination of social network concepts, methods, data, and analytic results within health sciences research. METHODS: This study used a modified-Delphi approach for recommendation development consistent with best practices suggested by the EQUATOR health sciences reporting guidelines network. An initial set of 28 reporting recommendations was developed by the author team. A group of 67 (of 147 surveyed) experienced network and health scientists participated in an online feedback survey. They rated the clarity and importance of the individual recommendations, and provided qualitative feedback on the coverage, usability, and dissemination opportunities of the full set of recommendations. After examining the feedback, a final set of 18 recommendations was produced. RESULTS: The final SoNHR reporting guidelines are comprised of 18 recommendations organized within five domains: conceptualization (how study research questions are linked to network conceptions or theories), operationalization (how network science portions of the study are defined and operationalized), data collection & management (how network data are collected and managed), analyses & results (how network results are analyzed, visualized, and reported), and ethics & equity (how network-specific human subjects, equity, and social justice concerns are reported). We also present a set of exemplar published network studies which can be helpful for seeing how to apply the SoNHR recommendations in research papers. Finally, we discuss how different audiences can use these reporting guidelines. CONCLUSIONS: These are the first set of formal reporting recommendations of network methods in the health sciences. Consistent with EQUATOR goals, these network reporting recommendations may in time improve the quality, consistency, and replicability of network science across a wide variety of important health research areas.

Implementation and evaluation of team science training for interdisciplinary teams in an engineering design program.

INTRODUCTION: Interdisciplinary academic teams perform better when competent in teamwork; however, there is a lack of best practices of how to introduce and facilitate the development of effective learning and functioning within these teams in academic environments. METHODS: To close this gap, we tailored, implemented, and evaluated team science training in the year-long Engineering Innovation in Health (EIH) program at the University of Washington (UW), a project-based course in which engineering students across several disciplines partner with health professionals to develop technical solutions to clinical and translational health challenges. EIH faculty from the UW College of Engineering and the Institute of Translational Health Sciences' (ITHS) Team Science Core codeveloped and delivered team science training sessions and evaluated their impact with biannual surveys. A student cohort was surveyed prior to the implementation of the team science trainings, which served as a baseline. RESULTS: Survey responses were compared within and between both cohorts (approximately 55 students each Fall Quarter and 30 students each Spring Quarter). Statistically significant improvements in measures of self-efficacy and interpersonal team climate (i.e., psychological safety) were observed within and between teams. CONCLUSIONS: Tailored team science training provided to student-professional teams resulted in measurable improvements in self-efficacy and interpersonal climate both of which are crucial for teamwork and intellectual risk taking. Future research is needed to determine long-term impacts of course participation on individual and team outcomes (e.g., patents, start-ups). Additionally, adaptability of this model to clinical and translational research teams in alternate formats and settings should be tested.

Terms and Measures of Cognitive Health Associated With Dementia and Alzheimer's Disease: A Scoping Review.

The Healthy Brain Initiative: National Public Health Road Map to Maintaining Cognitive Health (2007) called on the research community to disseminate its work on cognitive aging and cognitive health. The purpose of this scoping review was to (1) identify terminology that cognitive, social, and behavioral scientists use to describe cognitive aging and cognitive health, in association with dementia and Alzheimer's disease, among older adults; (2) demonstrate how such terms are defined; and (3) illustrate how these constructs are measured in research settings. Empirical studies published 2007-2018 were examined for terminology, definitions, disciplinary orientation, and measurement mechanisms. Analysis of the corpus and a detailed review of the terms "cognitive impairment" and "mild cognitive impairment" reveal that formal definitions are provided infrequently and measurement of constructs ranges widely. Overall, the variability in terminology, definitions, and measures reflects a need for greater specificity in research communication, such that cross-disciplinary collaboration can be facilitated.