Electronic Coding for Abnormal Fecal Immunochemical Test Is Associated With Increased Colonoscopy Completion.

INTRODUCTION: We examined the utility of the International Classification of Disease, Tenth Revision (ICD-10) code, R19.5, for a positive or abnormal fecal immunochemical test (FIT) and its association with colonoscopy completion. METHODS: We identified all patients in a safety-net health system who underwent FITs from January 1, 2020, to August 31, 2021, and extracted the FIT date, FIT result, and ICD-10 code (R19.5) and colonoscopy procedures for each patient. RESULTS: FIT-positive patients who had an R19.5 designation within 90 days (n = 383) were significantly more likely than all other FIT-positive patients (n = 273) to complete a colonoscopy within 6 months (40.9% vs 16.8%, P <0.001). DISCUSSION: We found that less than two-thirds of patients had an ICD-10 code designated in their chart within 30 days of an abnormal FIT. When coding occurred in a timely manner, patients were more likely to complete their colonoscopy within 6 months.

"Good Care Is Slow Enough to Be Able to Pay Attention": Primary Care Time Scarcity and Patient Safety.

BACKGROUND: There is growing, widespread recognition that expectations of US primary care vastly exceed the time and resources allocated to it. Little research has directly examined how time scarcity contributes to harm or patient safety incidents not readily capturable by population-based quality metrics. OBJECTIVE: To examine near-miss events identified by primary care physicians in which taking additional time improved patient care or prevented harm. DESIGN: Qualitative study based on semi-structured interviews. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-five primary care physicians practicing in the USA. APPROACH: Participants completed a survey that included demographic questions, the Ballard Organizational Temporality Scale and the Mini-Z scale, followed by a one hour qualitative interview over video-conference (Zoom). Iterative thematic qualitative data analysis was conducted. KEY RESULTS: Primary care physicians identified several types of near-miss events in which taking extra time during visits changed their clinical management. These were evident in five types of patient care episodes: high-risk social situations, high-risk medication regimens requiring patient education, high acuity conditions requiring immediate workup or treatment, interactions of physical and mental health, and investigating more subtle clinical suspicions. These near-miss events highlight the ways in which unreasonably large patient panels and packed schedules impede adequate responses to patient care episodes that are time sensitive and intensive or require flexibility. CONCLUSIONS: Primary care physicians identify and address patient safety issues and high-risk situations by spending more time than allotted for a given patient encounter. Current quality metrics do not account for this critical aspect of primary care work. Current healthcare policy and organization create time scarcity. Interventions to address time scarcity and to measure its prevalence and implications for care quality and safety are urgently needed.

Multilevel Determinants of Digital Health Equity: A Literature Synthesis to Advance the Field.

Current digital health approaches have not engaged diverse end users or reduced health or health care inequities, despite their promise to deliver more tailored and personalized support to individuals at the right time and the right place. To achieve digital health equity, we must refocus our attention on the current state of digital health uptake and use across the policy, system, community, individual, and intervention levels. We focus here on (a) outlining a multilevel framework underlying digital health equity; (b) summarizingfive types of interventions/programs (with example studies) that hold promise for advancing digital health equity; and (c) recommending future steps for improving policy, practice, and research in this space.

Language-Specific Challenges and Solutions for Equitable Telemedicine Implementation in the Primary Care Safety Net During COVID-19.

PURPOSE: Telemedicine care dramatically expanded during the COVID-19 pandemic. We characterized facilitators and barriers to telemedicine implementation among safety-net primary care clinics serving patients with limited English proficiency (LEP). METHODS: We collected data on telemedicine volume and patient demographics among safety-net clinics participating in a telemedicine learning collaborative. Data on various metrics were reported to the collaborative from February 2019 through August 2021. We conducted semi-structured interviews with clinical and quality leaders, purposively sampling clinics serving high proportions of patients with LEP. We analyzed interviews with a mixed inductive-deductive approach applying the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. RESULTS: By September 2020, the 23 sites served 121,589 unique patients with in-person and 120,338 with telephone visits; 47% of these patients had LEP. Of 10,897 unique patients served by video visits, 38% had LEP. As a proportion of total visits, telemedicine (telephone and video) visits increased from 0-17% in October 2019-March 2020 to 10-98% in March-August 2020. We conducted 14 interviews at 11 sites. Themes included (1) existing telemedicine platforms and interpreter services were not optimized to support patients with LEP; (2) clinics invested significant labor iterating workflows; (3) sites with technological infrastructure and language-concordant staff were best suited to serve patients; (4) patients speaking less-represented languages or experiencing intersecting literacy barriers were underserved with telemedicine. Interviewees recommended innovations in telemedicine platforms and community-based access. CONCLUSIONS: Safety-net sites relied on existing resources to accommodate patients with LEP, but struggled providing access for the most marginalized. Proactive, data-driven strategies to address patient and community barriers as well as optimize clinical workflows with high-quality, certified medical interpreters are needed to ensure equitable access.

Extent of Follow-Up on Abnormal Cancer Screening in Multiple California Public Hospital Systems: A Retrospective Review.

BACKGROUND: Inequitable follow-up of abnormal cancer screening tests may contribute to racial/ethnic disparities in colon and breast cancer outcomes. However, few multi-site studies have examined follow-up of abnormal cancer screening tests and it is unknown if racial/ethnic disparities exist. OBJECTIVE: This report describes patterns of performance on follow-up of abnormal colon and breast cancer screening tests and explores the extent to which racial/ethnic disparities exist in public hospital systems. DESIGN: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using data from five California public hospital systems. We used multivariable robust Poisson regression analyses to examine whether patient-level factors or site predicted receipt of follow-up test. MAIN MEASURES: Using data from five public hospital systems between July 2015 and June 2017, we assessed follow-up of two screening results: (1) colonoscopy after positive fecal immunochemical tests (FIT) and (2) tissue biopsy within 21 days after a BIRADS 4/5 mammogram. KEY RESULTS: Of 4132 abnormal FITs, 1736 (42%) received a follow-up colonoscopy. Older age, Medicaid insurance, lack of insurance, English language, and site were negatively associated with follow-up colonoscopy, while Hispanic ethnicity and Asian race were positively associated with follow-up colonoscopy. Of 1702 BIRADS 4/5 mammograms, 1082 (64%) received a timely biopsy; only site was associated with timely follow-up biopsy. CONCLUSION: Despite the vulnerabilities of public-hospital-system patients, follow-up of abnormal cancer screening tests occurs at rates similar to that of patients in other healthcare settings, with colon cancer screening test follow-up occurring at lower rates than follow-up of breast cancer screening tests. Site-level factors have larger, more consistent impact on follow-up rates than patient sociodemographic traits. Resources are needed to identify health system-level factors, such as test follow-up processes or data infrastructure, that improve abnormal cancer screening test follow-up so that effective health system-level interventions can be evaluated and disseminated.

Virtual Reality for Chronic Pain Management Among Historically Marginalized Populations: Systematic Review of Usability Studies.

BACKGROUND: Virtual reality (VR) has potential to improve chronic pain management outcomes. However, the majority of studies assessing VR are conducted in predominantly White populations in well-resourced settings, thus leaving a gap in knowledge of VR use among diverse populations who experience a significant chronic pain burden. OBJECTIVE: This review aims to examine the extent to which usability of VR for chronic pain management has been studied within historically marginalized patient groups. METHODS: We conducted a systematic search to identify studies with usability outcomes located in high-income countries that included a historically marginalized population, defined by a mean age greater than or equal to 65 years, lower educational attainment (greater than or equal to 60% having attained high school education or less), and being a racial or ethnic minority (less than or equal to 50% non-Hispanic White people for studies based in the United States). RESULTS: Our analysis included 5 papers, which we used to conduct a narrative analysis. Three studies examined VR usability as a primary outcome. All studies assessed VR usability using different measures, of which 4 found VR to be usable by their respective study population. Only 1 study found a significant improvement in pain levels post-VR intervention. CONCLUSIONS: The use of VR shows promise for chronic pain management, but few studies include populations that are older, have limited educational attainment, or have racial or ethnic diversity. Additional studies with these populations are needed to further develop VR systems that work best for diverse patients with chronic pain.

Identifying the Needs of Primary Care Providers Caring for Breast and Colon Cancer Survivors in the Safety-Net: a Qualitative Study.

As the number of cancer survivors continues to increase and given the shortage of oncology clinicians in safety net health care settings, primary care providers (PCPs) in these settings will increasingly provide cancer survivorship care. In order to ensure equitable care for low-income and underserved breast and colon cancer survivors, it is essential to understand the safety-net PCPs' perspective. We conducted semi-structured, in-depth qualitative interviews with 11 PCPs working in a safety-net health care system to identify their needs in caring for cancer survivors. Interviews were audio-recorded and professionally transcribed. Two coders independently coded the interviews and conducted regular meetings until we reached consensus on the results. Analysis was based in grounded theory and performed using the constant comparative method. Thematic analysis identified six themes as follows: (1) Cancer survivorship care can be integrated with the whole person and chronic disease care management that occurs in primary care; (2) PCPs' perceptions regarding patients' survivorship care needs and their confidence in meeting those needs; (3) preference for a shared care model; (4) coordination of care; (5) PCPs' need for survivorship care education and training; and (6) unique issues involved in the care of older cancer survivors. PCPs in the safety-net believe that providing comprehensive survivorship care requires coordination of care through the cancer continuum. Tools like checklists, electronic health records-based communication, and convenient electronic consultations with cancer specialists would enhance the quality of survivorship care. Respondents advocate the inclusion of survivorship care education in medical education. The continuity of care with PCPs means that they play a particularly important role in the care of older cancer survivors.

The Abrupt Expansion of Ambulatory Telemedicine: Implications for Patient Safety.

The exponential growth of telemedicine in ambulatory care triggered by the COVID-19 public health emergency has undoubtedly impacted the quality of care and patient safety. In particular, the increased adoption of remote care has impacted communication, care teams, and patient engagement, which are key factors that impact patient safety in ambulatory care. In this perspective, we draw on a scoping review of the literature, our own clinical experiences, and conversations with patient safety experts to describe how changes in communication, care teams, and patient engagement have impacted two high priority areas in ambulatory safety: diagnostic errors and medication safety. We then provide recommendations for research funders, researchers, healthcare systems, policy makers, and healthcare payors for how to improve patient safety in telemedicine based on what is currently known as well as next steps for how to advance understanding of the safety implications of telemedicine utilization.

Warfarin Monitoring in Safety-Net Health Systems: Analysis by Race/Ethnicity and Language Preference.

BACKGROUND: Racial/ethnic disparities in anticoagulation management are well established. Differences in warfarin monitoring can contribute to these disparities and should be measured. OBJECTIVE: We assessed for differences in international normalized ratio (INR) monitoring by race/ethnicity and language preference across safety-net care systems serving predominantly low-income, ethnically diverse populations. DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis of process and safety data shared from the Safety Promotion Action Research and Knowledge Network (SPARK-Net) initiative, a consortium of five California safety-net hospital systems. PARTICIPANTS: Eligible patients were at least 18 years old, received warfarin for at least 56 days during the measurement period from July 2015 to June 2017, and had INR testing in an ambulatory care setting at a participating healthcare system. MAIN MEASURES: We conducted a scaled Poisson regression for adjusted rate ratio of having at least one INR checked per 56-day time period for which a patient had a warfarin prescription. Adjusting for age, sex, healthcare system, and insurance status/type, we assessed for racial/ethnic and language disparities in INR monitoring. KEY RESULTS: Of 8129 patients, 3615 (44%) were female; 1470 (18%), Black/African American; 3354 (41%), Hispanic/Latinx; 1210 (15%), Asian; 1643 (20%), White; and 452 (6%), other. Three thousand five hundred forty-nine (45%) were non-English preferring. We did not observe statistically significant disparities in the rate of appropriate INR monitoring by race/ethnicity or language; the primary source of variation was by healthcare network. Older age, female gender, and uninsured patients had a slightly higher rate of appropriate INR monitoring, but differences were not clinically significant. CONCLUSIONS: We did not find a race/ethnicity nor language disparity in INR monitoring; safety-net site was the main source of variation.

Centering Health Equity in Telemedicine.

In the wake of the racial injustices laid bare in 2020, on top of centuries of systemic racism, it is clear we need actionable strategies to fundamentally restructure health care systems to achieve racial/ethnic health equity. This paper outlines the pillars of a health equity framework from the Institute for Healthcare Improvement, overlaying a concrete example of telemedicine equity. Telemedicine is a particularly relevant and important topic, given the growing evidence of disparities in uptake by racial/ethnic, linguistic, and socioeconomic groups in the United States during the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as the new standard of care that telemedicine represents post-pandemic. We present approaches for telemedicine equity across the domains of: (1) strategic priorities of a health care organization, (2) structures and processes to advance equity, (3) strategies to address multiple determinants of health, (4) elimination of institutional racism and oppression, and (5) meaningful partnerships with patients and communities.

Exploring factors associated with hepatitis B screening in a multilingual and diverse population.

BACKGROUND: Racial/ethnic minorities bear a disproportionate burden of hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection and disease. Disparities in HBV screening contribute to worse outcomes for communities of color. We examined the impact of race/ethnicity, language preference, and having a usual place of care on HBV screening in a multilingual, urban cohort. METHODS: We used questions from the Health Information National Trends Survey and added validated questions about healthcare access and health literacy. We administered this survey in English, Spanish, and Chinese to a selected convenience sample of San Francisco city/county residents in 2017, with pre-specified targets for populations with known cancer disparities: 25% Spanish-speaking, 25% Chinese-speaking, and 25% Black Americans. Using weighted multivariable logistic regression analyses, we assessed how race/ethnicity, language preference, and having a usual place of care impacts self-report of HBV screening. RESULTS: Overall, 1027 participants completed the survey (50% of surveys administered in English, 25% in Spanish, and 25% in Chinese). Only 50% of participants reported HBV screening. In multivariable analysis, Black (OR = 0.20, 95% CI 0.08-0.49), Latinx (OR = 0.33, 95% CI 0.13-0.85), Asian (OR = 0.31, 95% CI 0.10, 0.94), and 'Other' race/ethnicity (OR = 0.17, 95% CI 0.05-0.53) respondents had lower odds of HBV screening compared to non-Hispanic White respondents. Participants who had insurance had increased odds of HBV screening (OR = 2.70, 95% CI 1.48-4.93). CONCLUSIONS: HBV screening disparities persist for Black Americans, Asian Americans, Latinx, and the uninsured. Future studies should explore reasons why current strategies have not been implemented or are not successful, particularly in addressing racial/ethnic and insurance disparities.

Conceptualizing the effective mechanisms of a social needs case management program shown to reduce hospital use: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Social needs case management programs are a strategy to coordinate social and medical care for high-risk patients. Despite widespread interest in social needs case management, not all interventions have shown effectiveness. A lack of evidence about the mechanisms through which these complex interventions benefit patients inhibits effective translation to new settings. The CommunityConnect social needs case management program in Contra Costa County, California recently demonstrated an ability to reduce inpatient hospital admissions by 11% in a randomized study. We sought to characterize the mechanisms through which the Community Connect social needs case management program was effective in helping patients access needed medical and social services and avoid hospitalization. An in-depth understanding of how this intervention worked can support effective replication elsewhere. METHODS: Using a case study design, we conducted semi-structured, qualitative interviews with case managers (n = 30) and patients enrolled in social needs case management (n = 31), along with field observations of patient visits (n = 31). Two researchers coded all interview transcripts and observation fieldnotes. Analysis focused on program elements identified by patients and staff as important to effectiveness. RESULTS: Our analyses uncovered three primary mechanisms through which case management impacted patient access to needed medical and social services: [1] Psychosocial work, defined as interpersonal and emotional support provided through the case manager-patient relationship, [2] System mediation work to navigate systems, coordinate resources, and communicate information and [3] Addressing social needs, or working to directly mitigate the impact of social conditions on patient health. CONCLUSIONS: These findings highlight that the system mediation tasks which are the focus of many social needs assistance interventions offered by health care systems may be necessary but insufficient. Psychosocial support and direct assistance with social needs, enabled by a relationship-focused program, may also be necessary for effectiveness.

Satisfaction can co-exist with hesitation: qualitative analysis of acceptability of telemedicine among multi-lingual patients in a safety-net healthcare system during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic triggered unprecedented expansion of outpatient telemedicine in the United States in all types of health systems, including safety-net health systems. These systems generally serve low-income, racially/ethnically/linguistically diverse patients, many of whom face barriers to digital health access. These patients' perspectives are vital to inform ongoing, equitable implementation efforts. METHODS: Twenty-five semi-structured interviews exploring a theoretical framework of technology acceptability were conducted from March through July 2020. Participants had preferred languages of English, Spanish, or Cantonese and were recruited from three clinics (general medicine, obstetrics, and pulmonary) within the San Francisco Health Network. Both deductive and inductive coding were performed. In a secondary analysis, qualitative data were merged with survey data to relate perspectives to demographic factors and technology access/use. RESULTS: Participants were diverse with respect to language (52% non-English-speaking), age (range 23-71), race/ethnicity (24% Asian, 20% Black, 44% Hispanic/Latinx, 12% White), & smartphone use (80% daily, 20% weekly or less). All but 2 had a recent telemedicine visit (83% telephone). Qualitative results revealed that most participants felt telemedicine visits fulfilled their medical needs, were convenient, and were satisfied with their telemedicine care. However, most still preferred in-person visits, expressing concern that tele-visits relied on patients' abilities to access telemedicine, as well as monitor and manage their own health without in-person physical evaluation. CONCLUSIONS: High satisfaction with telemedicine can co-exist with patient-expressed hesitations surrounding the perceived effectiveness, self-efficacy, and digital access barriers associated with a new model of care. More research is needed to guide how healthcare systems and clinicians make decisions and communicate about visit modalities to support high-quality care that responds to patients' needs and circumstances.

Socioeconomic status and colorectal cancer screening behaviors in a vulnerable multiethnic population.

OBJECTIVE: Despite some progress in recent years, colorectal cancer (CRC) screening adherence in the United States is still suboptimal, particularly among disadvantaged groups. In this study, we assessed the association between socioeconomic status (SES) and self-reported screening non-adherence (SNA) in a sample of racial/ethnic minorities living in San Francisco, California. DESIGN/METHODS: A total of 376 participants of the San Francisco version of the Health Information National Trends Survey (SF-HINTS) with ages 50-75 years were included in this cross-sectional study. SNA was defined as not reporting blood stool test within the past year and not reporting sigmoidoscopy/colonoscopy within the past 10 years. Poisson regression models with robust variance estimators were used to evaluate the relation of SES with SNA, adjusting for measured confounders. Results are reported as prevalence ratios (PR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). RESULTS: Overall SNA was 40%. In multivariable models including all respondents, retired participants had significantly lower SNA prevalence than employed participants (PR = 0.46, 95% CI = 0.26 0.83). In stratified analyses by race/ethnicity, Black respondents with less than high school (PR = 1.93, 95% CI = 1.09, 3.43) and those with high school or equivalent (PR = 1.88, 95% CI = 1.16, 3.04) had significantly higher SNA prevalence than those with at least some college. Among non-Hispanic Asian/Pacific Islanders, those disabled had significantly higher prevalence of SNA as compared to employed people (PR = 4.26, 95% CI = 2.11, 8.60). None of the SES indicators were significantly associated to SNA among Hispanics. CONCLUSIONS: Participants with lower SES characteristics were less likely to adhere to CRC screening guidelines and being retired was a predictor of compliance. There was evidence of heterogeneity in associations between SES and CRC screening by race/ethnicity. Life circumstances of retired people could provide insights for designing interventions aimed to improve CRC screening uptake in these priority groups. Future efforts should consider mechanisms underlying differences by race/ethnicity.

The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Internet Use and the Use of Digital Health Tools: Secondary Analysis of the 2020 Health Information National Trends Survey.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic increased the use of digital tools in health care (eg, patient portal, telemedicine, and web-based scheduling). Studies have shown that older individuals, racial/ethnic minority groups, or populations with lower educational attainment or income have lower rates of using digital health tools. Digitalization of health care may exacerbate already existing access barriers in these populations. OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated how use of digital tools to asynchronously communicate with clinicians, schedule appointments, and view medical records changed near the beginning of the pandemic. METHODS: Using 2020 Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS) data, we examined internet use and 7 digital health technology use outcomes (electronic communication with a provider, electronic appointment scheduling, electronic test result viewing, patient portal access, portal use to download health records, portal use for patient-provider communication, and portal use to view test results). The HINTS surveyors designated surveys received after March 11, 2020, as postpandemic responses. Using weighted logistic regression, we investigated the impact of the pandemic after adjusting for sociodemographic traits (age, race/ethnicity, income, education, and gender), digital access (having ever used the internet and smartphone/tablet ownership), and health-related factors (insurance coverage, caregiver status, having a regular provider, and chronic diseases). To explore differences in changes in outcomes among key sociodemographic groups, we tested for significant interaction terms between the pandemic variable and race/ethnicity, age, income, and educational attainment. RESULTS: There were 3865 respondents (1437 prepandemic and 2428 postpandemic). Of the 8 outcomes investigated, the pandemic was only significantly associated with higher odds (adjusted odds ratio 1.99, 95% CI 1.18-3.35) of using electronic communication with a provider. There were significant interactions between the pandemic variable and 2 key sociodemographic traits. Relative to the lowest income group (

Catalyzing Navigation for Breast Cancer Survivorship (CaNBCS) in Safety-Net Settings: A Mixed Methods Study.

PURPOSE: The current number of breast cancer survivors (BCS) in the United States is approximately 3.8 million, and this number is further expected to increase with improvement in treatments. Survivorship care plans (SCPs) are patient-centered tools that are designed to meet cancer survivors' informational needs about their treatment history, recommended health care, and health maintenance. However, the data on SCP benefits remain uncertain, especially in low-income and racial and ethnic minority cancer survivors. Patient navigation is an effective intervention to improve patient adherence and experience of interdisciplinary breast cancer treatment. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to understand the role of lay patient navigators (LPN) in survivorship care planning for BCS in safety-net settings. METHODS: This study is a mixed methods pilot randomized clinical trial to understand the role of patient navigation in cancer survivorship care planning in a public hospital. We invited BCS who had completed active breast cancer treatment within 5 years. LPNs discussed survivorship care planning and survivorship care-related issues with BCS in the intervention arm over a 6-month intervention period and accompanied patients to their primary care appointment. LPNs also encouraged survivors to discuss health care issues with oncology and primary care providers. The primary objective was to assess BCS' health-related quality of life (HRQOL). The secondary objectives were self-efficacy and implementation. We assessed implementation with 45-60-min semi-structured interviews with 15 BCS recruited from the intervention arm and 60-min focus groups with the oncologists and separately with LPNs. RESULTS: We enrolled 40 patients, 20 randomized to usual care and 20 randomized to LPN navigation. We did not find a statistically significant difference between the two arms in HRQOL. There was also no difference in self-efficacy between the two arms. Qualitative analysis identified implementation barriers to intervention that may have contributed to less effective intervention. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Future survivorship care planning interventions need to consider: Cancer survivors' needs and preferences, the need for dedicated resources, and the role of electronic health records in survivorship care plan delivery.

Cancer patient perspectives on survivorship goals from the Smart Patients online community.

BACKGROUND: Cancer impacts individuals' life goals. Recent cancer care guidelines recommend discussing life goals as part of patient-provider communication. The goal of this study was to understand patients' attitudes toward goal sharing with their cancer care providers. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Semi-structured questionnaires were conducted via email with cancer patients and survivors (n = 39) on an online social network called Smart Patients. Participants answered open-ended questions about their life goals. They then completed a survey regarding their attitudes toward goal sharing with healthcare providers. The study team used an integrated inductive-deductive qualitative analysis to identify conceptual themes. RESULTS: Participants listed goals related to improving physical activity, control, enjoyment/leisure, and inner strength while reducing pain, anxiety, fear of recurrence, and uncertainty. Most of these goals were life goals rather than goals specifically related to medical care. Across all goals, there was a focus on returning to normality. Our findings show that 87% of participants expect their cancer specialist to discuss their treatment preferences and goals regularly with them. However, participants were reluctant to share their goals with their providers. Respondents felt that their providers did not have an interest in their life goals or time to address them in addition to their medical treatment. CONCLUSION: Even though cancer patient-provider communication guidelines advocate for discussions around life goals, participants in this study expressed reluctance to share life goals with providers. Further efforts to align expectations of patients and providers may facilitate adherence to cancer communication guidelines about life goals. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Cancer survivors should be aware that discussing life goals is part of recommended communication with their cancer care teams.

Using Electronic Health Record Portals to Improve Patient Engagement: Research Priorities and Best Practices.

Ninety percent of health care systems now offer patient portals to access electronic health records (EHRs) in the United States, but only 15% to 30% of patients use these platforms. Using PubMed, the authors identified 53 studies published from September 2013 to June 2019 that informed best practices and priorities for future research on patient engagement with EHR data through patient portals, These studies mostly involved outpatient settings and fell into 3 major categories: interventions to increase use of patient portals, usability testing of portal interfaces, and documentation of patient and clinician barriers to portal use. Interventions that used one-on-one patient training were associated with the highest portal use. Patients with limited health or digital literacy faced challenges to portal use. Clinicians reported a lack of workflows to support patient use of portals in routine practice. These studies suggest that achieving higher rates of patient engagement through EHR portals will require paying more attention to the needs of diverse patients and systematically measuring usability as well as scope of content. Future work should incorporate implementation science approaches and directly address the key role of clinicians and staff in promoting portal use.

Barriers and Facilitators to the Implementation of Virtual Reality as a Pain Management Modality in Academic, Community, and Safety-Net Settings: Qualitative Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Prior studies have shown that virtual reality (VR) is an efficacious treatment modality for opioid-sparing pain management. However, the majority of these studies were conducted among primarily White, relatively advantaged populations and in well-resourced settings. OBJECTIVE: We conducted a qualitative, theory-informed implementation science study to assess the readiness for VR in safety-net settings. METHODS: Using the theoretical lens of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) framework, we conducted semistructured interviews with current VR users and nonusers based in safety-net health systems (n=15). We investigated barriers and facilitators to a commercially available, previously validated VR technology platform AppliedVR (Los Angeles, CA, USA). We used deductive qualitative analysis using the overarching domains of the CFIR framework and performed open, inductive coding to identify specific themes within each domain. RESULTS: Interviewees deemed the VR intervention to be useful, scalable, and an appealing alternative to existing pain management approaches. Both users and nonusers identified a lack of reimbursement for VR as a significant challenge for adoption. Current users cited positive patient feedback, but safety-net stakeholders voiced concern that existing VR content may not be relevant or appealing to diverse patients. All respondents acknowledged the challenge of integrating and maintaining VR in current pain management workflows across a range of clinical settings, and this adoption challenge was particularly acute, given resource and staffing constraints in safety-net settings. CONCLUSIONS: VR for pain management holds interest for frontline pain management clinicians and leadership in safety-net health settings but will require significant tailoring and adaption to address the needs of diverse populations. Integration into complex workflows for pain management is a significant barrier to adoption, and participants cited structural cost and reimbursement concerns as impediments to initial implementation and scaling of VR use.

Alignment of Key Stakeholders' Priorities for Patient-Facing Tools in Digital Health: Mixed Methods Study.

BACKGROUND: There is widespread agreement on the promise of patient-facing digital health tools to transform health care. Yet, few tools are in widespread use or have documented clinical effectiveness. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to gain insight into the gap between the potential of patient-facing digital health tools and real-world uptake. METHODS: We interviewed and surveyed experts (in total, n=24) across key digital health stakeholder groups-venture capitalists, digital health companies, payers, and health care system providers or leaders-guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. RESULTS: Our findings revealed that external policy, regulatory demands, internal organizational workflow, and integration needs often take priority over patient needs and patient preferences for digital health tools, which lowers patient acceptance rates. We discovered alignment, across all 4 stakeholder groups, in the desire to engage both patients and frontline health care providers in broader dissemination and evaluation of digital health tools. However, major areas of misalignment between stakeholder groups have stymied the progress of digital health tool uptake-venture capitalists and companies focused on external policy and regulatory demands, while payers and providers focused on internal organizational workflow and integration needs. CONCLUSIONS: Misalignment of the priorities of digital health companies and their funders with those of providers and payers requires direct attention to improve uptake of patient-facing digital health tools and platforms.