Identifying factors and causal chains associated with optimal implementation of Lynch syndrome tumor screening: An application of coincidence analysis.

PURPOSE: This study compared Lynch syndrome universal tumor screening (UTS) across multiple health systems (some of which had 2 or more distinct UTS programs) to understand multilevel factors that may affect the successful implementation of complex programs. METHODS: Data from 66 stakeholder interviews were used to conduct multivalue coincidence analysis and identify key factors that consistently make a difference in whether UTS programs were implemented and optimized at the system level. RESULTS: The selected coincidence analysis model revealed combinations of conditions that distinguish 4 optimized UTS programs, 10 nonoptimized programs, and 4 systems with no program. Fully optimized UTS programs had both a maintenance champion and a positive inner setting. Two independent paths were unique to nonoptimized programs: (1) positive attitudes and a mixed inner setting or (2) limited planning and engaging among stakeholders. Negative views about UTS evidence or lack of knowledge about UTS led to a lack of planning and engaging, which subsequently prevented program implementation. CONCLUSION: The model improved our understanding of program implementation in health care systems and informed the creation of a toolkit to guide UTS implementation, optimization, and changes. Our findings and toolkit may serve as a use case to increase the successful implementation of other complex precision health programs.

Development, evaluation, and user testing of a decision-making toolkit to promote organizations to implement universal tumor screening for Lynch Syndrome.

INTRODUCTION: The Implementing Universal Lynch Syndrome Screening (IMPULSS) study explained institutional variation in universal tumor screening (UTS) with the goal of identifying ways to aid organizational decision makers in implementing and optimizing Lynch syndrome UTS programs. METHODS: After applying the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR 1.0) to analyze interviews with 66 stakeholders across 9 health care systems to develop a toolkit for implementation, we adapted the International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS) to assess toolkit potential to aid decision making consistent with organizational values. We then conducted user testing with two experienced and four non-experienced implementers of UTS to improve the content and functionality of the toolkit and assess its acceptability and appropriateness. RESULTS: Toolkit components were organized to address findings related to CFIR 1.0 constructs of evidence strength & quality, relative advantage, cost, engaging, planning, executing, and reflecting & evaluating. A home page was added to direct users to different sections based on whether they are deciding to implement UTS, planning for implementation, improving an existing UTS program, or considering a different approach to identify patients with Lynch syndrome. Upon initial evaluation, 31 of 64 IPDAS criteria were met by the original toolkit. All users rated the toolkit as acceptable and appropriate for assisting organizational decision making and identified multiple areas for improvement. Numerous iterative changes were made to the toolkit, resulting in meeting 17 of the previously unmet IPDAS criteria. CONCLUSION: We demonstrate the rigorous development of a toolkit guided by the CFIR and show how user testing helped improve the toolkit to ensure it is acceptable, appropriate, and meets most IPDAS criteria relevant to organizational values-based decision making.

Adaptations to a patient navigation program for follow-up colonoscopy in rural primary care practices.

PURPOSE: Patient navigation is a recommended practice to improve cancer screenings among underserved populations including those residing in rural areas with care access barriers. We report on patient navigation programme adaptations to increase follow-up colonoscopy rates after abnormal fecal testing in rural primary care practices. METHODS: Participating clinics delivered a patient navigation programme to eligible patients from 28 affiliated clinics serving rural communities in Oregon clustered within 3 Medicaid health plans. Patient navigation adaptations were tracked using data sources including patient navigation training programme reflections, qualitative interviews, clinic meetings, and periodic reflections with practice facilitators. FINDINGS: Initial, planned (proactive) adaptations were made to address the rural context; later, unplanned (reactive) adaptations were implemented to address the impact of the COVID-19 global pandemic. Initial planned adaptations to the patient navigation programme were made before the main trial to address the needs of the rural context, including provider shortages and geographic dispersion limiting both patient access to care and training opportunities for providers. Later unplanned adaptations were made primarily in response to COVID-19 care suspension and staff redeployments and shortages that occurred during implementation. CONCLUSION: While unplanned adaptations were implemented to address the contextual impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on care access patterns and staffing, the changes to training content and context were beneficial to the rural setting overall and should be sustained. Our findings can guide future efforts to optimise the success of such programmes in other rural settings and highlight the important role of adaptations in implementation projects.

Patient Perspectives on Mental Health and Pain Management Support Needed Versus Received During Opioid Deprescribing.

Prescription opioid tapering has increased significantly over the last decade. Evidence suggests that tapering too quickly or without appropriate support may unintentionally harm patients. The aim of this analysis was to understand patients' experiences with opioid tapering, including support received or not received for pain control or mental health. Patients with evidence of opioid tapering from 6 health care systems participated in semi-structured, in-depth interviews; family members of suicide decedents with evidence of opioid tapering were also interviewed. Interviews were analyzed using thematic analysis. Participants included 176 patients and 16 family members. Results showed that 24% of the participants felt their clinicians checked in with them about their taper experiences while 41% reported their clinicians did not. A majority (68%) of individuals who experienced suicide behavior during tapering reported that clinicians did check in about mood and mental health changes specifically; however, 27% of that group reported no such check-in. More individuals reported negative experiences (than positive) with pain management clinics-where patients are often referred for tapering and pain management support. Patients reporting successful tapering experiences named shared decision-making and ability to adjust taper speed or pause tapering as helpful components of care. Fifty-six percent of patients reported needing more support during tapering, including more empathy and compassion (48%) and an individualized approach to tapering (41%). Patient-centered approaches to tapering include reaching out to monitor how patients are doing, involving patients in decision-making, supporting mental health changes, and allowing for flexibility in the tapering pace. PERSPECTIVE: Patients tapering prescription opioids desire more provider-initiated communication including checking in about pain, setting expectations for withdrawal and mental health-related changes, and providing support for mental health. Patients preferred opportunities to share decisions about taper speed and to have flexibility with pausing the taper as needed.

A qualitative assessment of the acceptability of human papillomavirus self-sampling and informational materials among diverse populations.

BACKGROUND: Disparities in cervical cancer screening rates among marginalized groups is a driver of inequalities in cervical cancer. Self-sampling for human papillomavirus (HPV) testing is a newly emerging alternative to clinician-performed testing to screen for cervical cancer, and has high potential to reduce screening barriers in under-screened and marginalized groups. We study the acceptability in of HPV self-sampling and informational materials among Black/African American, Hispanic/Spanish speaking, American Indian/Alaska Native and transgender/nonbinary populations. METHODS: We conducted qualitative interviews with patients, ages 30-65, who were Black/African American, Hispanic, American Indian, and/or transgender/nonbinary individuals assigned female at birth. Telephone interviews were conducted in English or Spanish. Patients did not complete the test, rather were asked about the attractiveness, comprehensibility, and acceptability of the HPV self-test, instructions, and messaging. RESULTS: Among 23 completed interviews (5 American Indian/Alaska Native, 7 Hispanic [2 bilingual, 5 Spanish-speaking], 5 Black/African American, and 6 transgender/nonbinary), patients from all groups thought the test was straightforward and convenient, and they would complete the test at home or in clinic. The transgender/nonbinary patients preferred at-home testing. American Indian and transgender/nonbinary patients liked that the test might avoid pain, discomfort, and invasiveness. All patients liked the letter and instructions. All groups had specific suggestions for making the materials more culturally acceptable. CONCLUSIONS: The HPV self-test and the instructions and materials for use were acceptable for a diverse group of patients. Tailored outreach and messaging should be considered to reduce screening disparities among groups that have been historically underserved by the medical system.

"I was screaming hallelujah": Patient and provider perceptions of blood-based testing for colorectal cancer screening.

BACKGROUND: Blood-based tests for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening can offer many advantages over stool-based tests such as FIT. Yet, we know little about patients' and providers' perceptions of this type of test. We report findings from a qualitative study comparing patient and provider perceptions of blood-based testing for CRC screening. METHODS: Patient participants were aged 45-75 years and members of a large, integrated health system. Participants were mailed, but did not complete, a FIT through an organized FIT-screening program and were scheduled for a health-care encounter at any of nine clinical sites. Participants were consented to complete a blood draw. We used purposive sampling to select and recruit patients (who did and did not complete the blood test) and providers/specialists who would be involved in offering the blood test to patients or explaining results. We administered telephone interviews using a semi-structured interview guide and recorded and transcribed all interviews, then coded and analyzed content. RESULTS: We interviewed 15 patients (11 completed and 4 did not complete the blood test) and 5 providers (3 primary care providers, one gastroenterologist (GI), and one GI medical assistant). Patients were enthusiastic about completing a blood test, citing the simplicity, ease, convenience, and high perceived accuracy of the test. Providers were also receptive to a blood-based option, if adequate test performance could be achieved and if they have information that informs patients about the pros and cons of blood-based screening versus other screening tests. CONCLUSIONS: Patients and providers were willing and enthusiastic about blood-based CRC screening tests. Future research focusing on performance and communication is needed.