Implementing a case management intervention for frequent users of the emergency department (I-CaM): an effectiveness-implementation hybrid trial study protocol.

BACKGROUND: ED overcrowding represents a significant public health problem in developed countries. Frequent users of the emergency departments (FUEDs; reporting 5 or more ED visits in the past year) are often affected by medical, psychological, social, and substance use problems and account for a disproportionately high number of ED visits. Past research indicates that case management (CM) interventions are a promising way to reduce ED overcrowding and improve FUEDs' quality of life. There is, however, very limited knowledge about how to disseminate and implement this intervention on a large scale to diverse clinical settings, including community hospitals and non-academic centers. This paper describes the protocol of a research project aiming to implement a CM intervention tailored to FUEDs in the public hospitals with ED in the French-speaking region of Switzerland and evaluate both the implementation process and effectiveness of the CM intervention. METHODS: This research project uses a hybrid study design assessing both implementation and clinical outcomes. The implementation part of the study uses mixed methods a) to describe quantitatively and qualitatively factors that influence the implementation process, and b) to examine implementation effectiveness. The clinical part of the study uses a within-subject design (pre-post intervention) to evaluate participants' trajectories on clinical variables (e.g., quality of life, ED use) after receiving the CM intervention. We designed the study based on two implementation science frameworks. The Generic Implementation Framework guided the overall research protocol design, whereas the RE-AIM (reach, efficacy, adoption, implementation and maintenance) framework guided the implementation and effectiveness evaluations. DISCUSSION: This research project will contribute to implementation science by providing key insights into the processes of implementing CM into broader practice. This research project is also likely to have both clinical and public health implications. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03641274 , Registered 20 August 2018.

Telemedicine increases access to buprenorphine initiation during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Federal regulatory changes during the COVID-19 pandemic allow buprenorphine to be prescribed without an initial in-person evaluation. Prior to COVID-19, numerous barriers limited broad uptake of buprenorphine among people who use drugs at the system, provider, and patient levels, including lack of available DATA 2000 waivered clinicians to prescribe, stigma, and competing livelihood priorities. As two harm reduction primary care programs in New York State that care for people who use drugs and offer buprenorphine, one rural (Ithaca) and one urban (Manhattan), we have rapidly adopted telemedicine to initiate buprenorphine treatment. Our collective experience suggests that telemedicine for buprenorphine initiation is eliminating many traditional barriers to treatment, in particular for individuals leaving incarceration, and people who use drugs and access syringe service programs. Future models of buprenorphine treatment should incorporate telemedicine for buprenorphine initiation, which can be done in collaboration with community-based outreach and peer networks to engage people who use drugs. This regulatory change must be sustained beyond COVID-19, and is vital to increasing access to buprenorphine, closing the opioid use disorder treatment gap, and achieving greater health equity for people who use drugs.

Standard External Doppler Fetal Heart Tracings versus External Fetal Electrocardiogram in Very Preterm Gestation: A Pilot Study.

Introduction Very preterm babies can be difficult to monitor using standard external Doppler fetal heart tracings (eFHR). External fetal electrocardiogram (fECG) is a potential alternative. Methods This was a prospective observational pilot study of hospitalized patients at 24 to 28 weeks' gestation. A total of 30 women were traced for up to 2 hours using eFHR followed by up to 2 hours using fECG. The percentage of time the fetal heart rate was traced during the 2-hour window for each modality was calculated. Differences of ≥ 60, ≥ 80, and ≥ 90% total time traced were compared between modalities using McNemar's test. Differences were also assessed for each method between nonobese (body mass index [BMI] < 30 kg/m2) and obese (BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2) women using chi-square and Fisher's exact tests. Results Superior performance was found with eFHR at ≥ 60% (93.3 vs. 46.7%, p < 0.001), ≥ 80% (80.0 vs. 30.0%, p < 0.001), and ≥ 90% (60.0 vs. 23.3%, p < 0.01) total time traced. There was a statistically significant finding favoring nonobese women at ≥ 80% total time traced using fECG (7.1 vs. 50.0%, p = 0.017). Conclusion With current technology fECG performance in very preterm gestation was worse than conventional eFHR, although fECG may have a role in nonobese patients.