See One, Do One, Improve One's Wellness: Resident Autonomy in US General Surgery Programs, A Mixed-methods Study.

OBJECTIVE: We sought to examine the factors associated with resident perceptions of autonomy and to characterize the relationship between resident autonomy and wellness. BACKGROUND: Concerns exist that resident autonomy is decreasing, impacting competence. METHODS: Quantitative data were collected through a cross-sectional survey administered after the 2020 ABSITE. Qualitative data were collected through interviews and focus groups with residents and faculty at 15 programs. RESULTS: Seven thousand two hundred thirty-three residents (85.5% response rate) from 324 programs completed the survey. Of 5139 residents with complete data, 4424 (82.2%) reported appropriate autonomy, and these residents were less likely to experience burnout [odds ratio (OR) 0.69; 95% CI 0.58-0.83], suicidality (OR 0.69; 95% CI 0.54-0.89), and thoughts of leaving their programs (OR 0.45; 95% CI 0.37-0.54). Women were less likely to report appropriate autonomy (OR 0.81; 95% CI 0.68-0.97). Residents were more likely to report appropriate autonomy if they also reported satisfaction with their workload (OR 1.65; 95% CI 1.28-2.11), work-life balance (OR 2.01; 95% CI 1.57-2.58), faculty engagement (OR 3.55; 95% CI 2.86-4.35), resident camaraderie (OR 2.23; 95% CI, 1.78-2.79), and efficiency and resources (OR 2.37; 95% CI 1.95-2.88). Qualitative data revealed that (1) autonomy gives meaning to the clinical experience of residency, (2) multiple factors create barriers to autonomy, and (3) autonomy is not inherent to the training paradigm, requiring residents to learn behaviors to "earn" it. CONCLUSION: Autonomy is not considered an inherent part of the training paradigm such that residents can assume that they will achieve it. Resources to function autonomously should be allocated equitably to support all residents' educational growth and wellness.

Declining Participation in Primary Care Quality Improvement Research: A Qualitative Study.

PURPOSE: There are numerous supportive quality improvement (QI) projects to facilitate the implementation of evidence-based practices in primary care, but recruiting physician practices to join these projects is challenging, costly, and time consuming. We aimed to identify factors leading primary care practices to decline participation in QI projects, and strategies to improve the feasibility and attractiveness of QI projects in the future. METHODS: For this qualitative study, we contacted 109 representatives of practices that had declined participation in 1 of 4 Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality-funded EvidenceNOW projects. The representatives were invited to participate in a 15-minute interview or complete a 5-question questionnaire. Thematic analysis was used to organize and characterize findings. RESULTS: Representatives from 31 practices (28.4% of those contacted) responded. Overwhelmingly, respondents indicated that staff turnover, staffing shortages, and general time constraints, exacerbated by the pandemic, prevented participation in the QI projects. Challenges with electronic health records, an expectation of greater financial compensation for participation, and confidence in the practices' current care practices were secondary reasons for declining participation. Tying participation to value-based programs and offering greater compensation were identified as strategies to facilitate recruitment. None of the respondents' recommendations, however, addressed the primary issues of staffing challenges and time constraints. CONCLUSIONS: Staffing challenges and general time constraints, exacerbated by the pandemic, are compromising primary care practices' ability to engage in QI research projects. To encourage participation, policy makers should consider direct supports for primary care, which may also help to alleviate burnout.

Cost, Quality, and Utilization After Hospital-Physician and Hospital-Post Acute Care Vertical Integration: A Systematic Review.

Vertical integration of health systems-the common ownership of different aspects of the health care system-continues to occur at increasing rates in the United States. This systematic review synthesizes recent evidence examining the association between two types of vertical integration-hospital-physician (n = 43 studies) and hospital-post-acute care (PAC; n = 10 studies)-and cost, quality, and health services utilization. Hospital-physician integration is associated with higher health care costs, but the effect on quality and health services utilization remains unclear. The effect of hospital-PAC integration on these three outcomes is ambiguous, particularly when focusing on hospital-SNF integration. These findings should raise some concern among policymakers about the trajectory of affordable, high-quality health care in the presence of increasing hospital-physician vertical integration but perhaps not hospital-PAC integration.

Qualitative Evaluation Informs the Implementation of a Telehealth Program to Manage Chronic Pain.

In response to the opioid epidemic and high rates of chronic pain among the veteran population, the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs implemented the TelePain-Empower Veterans Program (EVP), a nonpharmacological pain management program for veterans. Delivered virtually, TelePain-EVP incorporates integrated health components (Whole Health, Acceptance and Commitment Therapy, and Mindful Movement) through interdisciplinary personalized coaching. The objective of this quality improvement project was to evaluate the implementation of TelePain-EVP to identify determinants to implementation, benefits and challenges to participation, and recommendations for future direction. We used a qualitative descriptive design to conduct semistructured telephone interviews with TelePain-EVP leaders (n = 3), staff (n = 10), and veterans (n = 22). The interview guides aligned with the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Thematic content analysis organized and characterized findings. Several CFIR domains emerged as determinants relevant to program implementation, including innovation (eg, design); individuals (eg, deliverers, recipients); inner (eg, communications) and outer settings (eg, local conditions); and implementation process (eg, reflecting and evaluating). Identified determinants included facilitators (eg, virtual delivery) and barriers (eg, staff shortages). Participants reported improvements in pain management coping skills, interpersonal relationships, and sense of community, but no self-reported reductions in pain or medication use. Program improvement recommendations included using centralized staff to address vacancies, collecting electronic data, offering structured training, and providing course materials to veteran participants. Qualitative data can inform the sustained implementation of TelePain-EVP and other similar telehealth pain management programs. These descriptive data should be triangulated with quantitative data to objectively assess participant TelePain-EVP outcomes and associated participant characteristics. PERSPECTIVE: A qualitative evaluation of a telehealth program to manage chronic pain, guided by the CFIR framework, identified determinants of program implementation. Additionally, participants reported improvements in pain management coping skills, interpersonal relationships, and sense of community, but no self-reported reductions in pain or medication use.

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.

Planning the Implementation of a Multilevel Blood Pressure Control Intervention in Chicago: Community and Clinical Perspectives.

Objectives: Hypertension is associated with high morbidity and mortality. The complications of hypertension disproportionately impact African American residents in Chicago's South Side neighborhood. To inform the implementation of an evidence-based multilevel hypertension management intervention, we sought to identify community member- and clinician-level barriers to diagnosing and treating hypertension, and strategies for addressing those barriers. Methods: We conducted 5 focus groups with members of faith-based organizations (FBOs) (n=40) and 8 focus groups with clinicians and administrators (n=26) employed by community health centers (CHCs) located in Chicago's South Side. Results: Participants across groups identified the physical environment, including lack of access to clinics and healthy food, as a risk factor for hypertension. Participants also identified inconsistent results from home blood pressure monitoring and medication side effects as barriers to seeking diagnosis and treatment. Potential strategies raised by participants to address these barriers included (1) addressing patients' unmet social needs, such as food security and transportation; (2) offering education that meaningfully engages patients in discussions about managing hypertension (eg, medication adherence, diet, follow-up care); (3) coordinating referrals via community-based organizations (including FBOs) to CHCs for hypertension management; and (4) establishing a setting where community members managing hypertension diagnosis can support one another. Conclusions: Clinic-level barriers to the diagnosis and treatment of hypertension, such as competing priorities and resource constraints, are exacerbated by community-level stressors. Community members and clinicians agreed that it is important to select implementation strategies that leverage and enhance both community- and clinic-based resources.

Process of Engaging Community and Scientific Partners in the Development of the CIRCL-Chicago Study Protocol.

Objectives: Hypertension affects 1 in 3 adults in the United States and disproportionately affects African Americans. Kaiser Permanente demonstrated that a "bundle" of evidence-based interventions significantly increased blood pressure control rates. This paper describes a multiyear process of developing the protocol for a trial of the Kaiser bundle for implementation in under-resourced urban communities experiencing cardiovascular health disparities during the planning phase of this biphasic award (UG3/UH3). Methods: The protocol was developed by a collaboration of faith-based community members, representatives from community health center practice-based research networks, and academic scientists with expertise in health disparities, implementation science, community-engaged research, social care interventions, and health informatics. Scientists from the National Institutes of Health and the other grantees of the Disparities Elimination through Coordinated Interventions to Prevent and Control Heart and Lung Disease Risk (DECIPHeR) Alliance also contributed to developing our protocol. Results: The protocol is a hybrid type 3 effectiveness-implementation study using a parallel cluster randomized trial to test the impact of practice facilitation on implementation of the Kaiser bundle in community health centers compared with implementation without facilitation. A central strategy to the Kaiser bundle is to coordinate implementation via faith-based and other community organizations for recruitment and navigation of resources for health-related social risks. Conclusions: The proposed research has the potential to improve identification, diagnosis, and control of blood pressure among under-resourced communities by connecting community entities and healthcare organizations in new ways. Faith-based organizations are a trusted voice in African American communities that could be instrumental for eliminating disparities.

An overview of the impact of rare disease characteristics on research methodology.

BACKGROUND: About 30 million individuals in the United States are living with a rare disease, which by definition have a prevalence of 200,000 or fewer cases in the United States ([National Organization for Rare Disorders], [About NORD], [2016]). Disease heterogeneity and geographic dispersion add to the difficulty of completing robust studies in small populations. Improving the ability to conduct research on rare diseases would have a significant impact on population health. The purpose of this paper is to raise awareness of methodological approaches that can address the challenges to conducting robust research on rare diseases. APPROACH: We conducted a landscape review of available methodological and analytic approaches to address the challenges of rare disease research. Our objectives were to: 1. identify algorithms for matching study design to rare disease attributes and the methodological approaches applicable to these algorithms; 2. draw inferences on how research communities and infrastructure can contribute to the efficiency of research on rare diseases; and 3. to describe methodological approaches in the rare disease portfolio of the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI), a funder promoting both rare disease research and research infrastructure. RESULTS: We identified three algorithms for matching study design to rare disease or intervention characteristics (Gagne, et.al, BMJ 349:g6802, 2014); (Gupta, et.al, J Clin Epidemiol 64:1085-1094, 2011); (Cornu, et. al, Orphet J Rare Dis 8:48,2012) and summarized the applicable methodological and analytic approaches. From this literature we were also able to draw inferences on how an effective research infrastructure can set an agenda, prioritize studies, accelerate accrual, catalyze patient engagement and terminate poorly performing studies. Of the 24 rare disease projects in the PCORI portfolio, 11 are randomized controlled trials (RCTs) using standard designs. Thirteen are observational studies using case-control, prospective cohort, or natural history designs. PCORI has supported the development of 9 Patient-Powered Research Networks (PPRNs) focused on rare diseases. CONCLUSION: Matching research design to attributes of rare diseases and interventions can facilitate the completion of RCTs that are adequately powered. An effective research infrastructure can improve efficiency and avoid waste in rare disease research. Our review of the PCORI research portfolio demonstrates that it is feasible to conduct RCTs in rare disease. However, most of these studies are using standard RCT designs. This suggests that use of a broader array of methodological approaches to RCTs --such as adaptive trials, cross-over trials, and early escape designs can improve the productivity of robust research in rare diseases.