A public health hazard mitigation planning process.

INTRODUCTION: The Texas A&M Health Science Center School of Rural Public Health, a member of the Training and Education Collaborative System Preparedness and Emergency Response Learning Center (TECS-PERLC), has long-standing partnerships with 2 Health Service Regions (Regions) in Texas. TECS-PERLC was contracted by these Regions to address 2 challenges identified in meeting requirements outlined by the Risk-Based Funding Project. First, within Metropolitan Statistical Areas, there is not a formal authoritative structure. Second, preexisting tools and processes did not adequately satisfy requirements to assess public health, medical, and mental health needs and link mitigation strategies to the Public Health Preparedness Capabilities, which provide guidance to prepare for, respond to, and recover from public health incidents. METHODS: TECS-PERLC, with its partners, developed a framework to interpret and apply results from the Texas Public Health Risk Assessment Tool (TxPHRAT). The 3-phase community engagement-based TxPHRAT Mitigation Planning Process (Mitigation Planning Process) and associated tools facilitated the development of mitigation plans. Tools included (1) profiles interpreting TxPHRAT results and identifying, ranking, and prioritizing hazards and capability gaps; (2) a catalog of intervention strategies and activities linked to hazards and capabilities; and (3) a template to plan, evaluate, and report mitigation planning efforts. OUTCOMES: The Mitigation Planning Process provided a framework for Regions to successfully address all funding requirements. TECS-PERLC developed more than 60 profiles, cataloged and linked 195 intervention strategies, and developed a template resulting in 20 submitted mitigation plans. DISCUSSION: A public health-focused, community engagement-based mitigation planning process was developed by TECS-PERLC and successfully implemented by the Regions. The outcomes met all requirements and reinforce the effectiveness of academic practice partnerships and importance of community engagement in mitigation planning. NEXT STEPS: Additional funding has been approved to expand the Mitigation Planning Process to all counties in Texas with local health departments.

Two controlled trials to determine the effectiveness of a mailed intervention to increase colon cancer screening.

OBJECTIVE: Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is underutilized. Effective and efficient interventions are needed to increase its utilization in primary care. METHODS: We used UNC Internal Medicine electronic medical records to perform 2 effectiveness trials. Eligible patients had no documentation of recent CRC screening and were aged 50-75 years. The mailed intervention contained a letter documenting the need for screening signed by the attending physician in wave A and the practice director in wave B, a postcard to request a decision aid about CRC screening options, and information about how to obtain screening. RESULT: Three-hundred and forty patients of attending physicians in wave A, 944 patients of resident physicians in wave B, and 214 patients of attending physicians in wave B were included. The intervention increased screening compared with controls for attending physicians' patients in wave A (13.1% vs. 4.1%, 95% CI, 3.1%-14.9%) but not for resident physicians' patients in wave B (1.3% vs. 1.9%, 95% CI, -2.2% to 1.0%). A small increase in screening with the intervention was seen in attending physicians' patients in wave B (6.9% vs. 2.4%, 95% CI, -1.4% to 10.5%). Requests for decision aids were uncommon in both waves (12.5% wave A and 7.8% wave B). LIMITATIONS: The group assignments were not individually randomized, and covariate information to explain the differences in effect was limited. CONCLUSIONS: The intervention increased CRC screening in attending physicians' patients who received a letter from their physicians, but not resident physicians' patients who received a letter signed by the practice director.

A targeted decision aid for the elderly to decide whether to undergo colorectal cancer screening: development and results of an uncontrolled trial.

BACKGROUND: Competing causes of mortality in the elderly decrease the potential net benefit from colorectal cancer screening and increase the likelihood of potential harms. Individualized decision making has been recommended, so that the elderly can decide whether or not to undergo colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. The objective is to develop and test a decision aid designed to promote individualized colorectal cancer screening decision making for adults age 75 and over. METHODS: We used formative research and cognitive testing to develop and refine the decision aid. We then tested the decision aid in an uncontrolled trial. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients who were prepared to make an individualized decision, defined a priori as having adequate knowledge (10/15 questions correct) and clear values (25 or less on values clarity subscale of decisional conflict scale). Secondary outcomes included overall score on the decisional conflict scale, and preferences for undergoing screening. RESULTS: We enrolled 46 adults in the trial. The decision aid increased the proportion of participants with adequate knowledge from 4% to 52% (p < 0.01) and the proportion prepared to make an individualized decision from 4% to 41% (p < 0.01). The proportion that preferred to undergo CRC screening decreased from 67% to 61% (p = 0. 76); 7 participants (15%) changed screening preference (5 against screening, 2 in favor of screening) CONCLUSION: In an uncontrolled trial, the elderly participants appeared better prepared to make an individualized decision about whether or not to undergo CRC screening after using the decision aid.

Studer unplugged: identifying underlying managerial concepts.

There is evidence that the application of Quint Studer's Hardwiring Excellence approach to organizational change is associated with significant accomplishments in hospitals. The authors' review finds the Studer approach to be closely aligned with management-related concepts of motivation and feedback, social networks, human capital, social capital, management by objectives, evidence based management, and organizational learning. The article is intended to familiarize more managers and management researchers with the content of the Studer approach, demonstrate its grounding in management concepts and principles, and stimulate additional discussion around the utility of such human resources-focused interventions in significant organizational change.

Randomized trial of presenting absolute v. relative risk reduction in the elicitation of patient values for heart disease prevention with conjoint analysis.

BACKGROUND: The authors performed a randomized controlled trial to test the effect of 2 different formats of risk reduction information when using conjoint analysis to elicit values about heart disease prevention. METHODS: Participants ages 30 to 75 were enrolled and presented the same hypothetical scenario: a person with a 13% ten-year risk of heart disease. Participants then worked through a values elicitation exercise using conjoint analysis, making pairwise comparisons of hypothetical treatments that differed on 5 attributes. For the attribute "ability to reduce heart attacks," participants were randomized to receive either absolute risk reduction (ARR) or relative risk reduction (RRR) information. Participants selected which attribute they felt was most important. Participants' responses to the pairwise comparisons were then used to generate their most important attribute using ordinary least squares regression. Outcomes included differences between groups in the proportion choosing and generating ability to reduce heart attacks as the most important attribute. RESULTS: In total, 113 participants completed the study: mean age was 51, 29% were male, 52% were white, and 42% were African American. The proportion who selected the ability to reduce heart attacks as the most important treatment attribute did not differ significantly (64% RRR; 53% ARR, Fisher's P=0.26). For the conjoint-generated most important attribute, those receiving the RRR version were significantly more likely to generate ability to reduce heart attacks as the most important attribute (59% RRR; 35% ARR, Fisher's P=0.01). DISCUSSION: Risk presentation format appears to affect the perceived value of different treatment attributes generated from conjoint analysis.

The effect of offering different numbers of colorectal cancer screening test options in a decision aid: a pilot randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Decision aids can improve decision making processes, but the amount and type of information that they should attempt to communicate is controversial. We sought to compare, in a pilot randomized trial, two colorectal cancer (CRC) screening decision aids that differed in the number of screening options presented. METHODS: Adults ages 48-75 not currently up to date with screening were recruited from the community and randomized to view one of two versions of our previously tested CRC screening decision aid. The first version included five screening options: fecal occult blood test (FOBT), sigmoidoscopy, a combination of FOBT and sigmoidoscopy, colonoscopy, and barium enema. The second discussed only the two most frequently selected screening options, FOBT and colonoscopy. Main outcomes were differences in screening interest and test preferences between groups after decision aid viewing. Patient test preference was elicited first without any associated out-of-pocket costs (OPC), and then with the following costs: FOBT-$10, sigmoidoscopy-$50, barium enema-$50, and colonoscopy-$200. RESULTS: 62 adults participated: 25 viewed the 5-option decision aid, and 37 viewed the 2-option version. Mean age was 54 (range 48-72), 58% were women, 71% were White, 24% African-American; 58% had completed at least a 4-year college degree. Comparing participants that viewed the 5-option version with participants who viewed the 2-option version, there were no differences in screening interest after viewing (1.8 vs. 1.9, t-test p = 0.76). Those viewing the 2-option version were somewhat more likely to choose colonoscopy than those viewing the 5-option version when no out of pocket costs were assumed (68% vs. 46%, p = 0.11), but not when such costs were imposed (41% vs. 42%, p = 1.00). CONCLUSION: The number of screening options available does not appear to have a large effect on interest in colorectal cancer screening. The effect of offering differing numbers of options may affect test choice when out-of-pocket costs are not considered.

Should a colon cancer screening decision aid include the option of no testing? A comparative trial of two decision aids.

BACKGROUND: An important question in the development of decision aids about colon cancer (CRC) screening is whether to include an explicit discussion of the option of not being screened. We examined the effect of including or not including an explicit discussion of the option of deciding not to be screened in a CRC screening decision aid on subjective measures of decision aid content; interest in screening; and knowledge. METHODS: Adults ages 50-85 were assigned to view one of two versions of the decision aid. The two versions differed only in the inclusion of video segments of two men, one of whom decided against being screened. Participants completed questionnaires before and after viewing the decision aid to compare subjective measures of content, screening interest and intent, and knowledge between groups. Likert response categories (5-point) were used for subjective measures of content (eg. clarity, balance in favor/against screening, and overall rating), and screening interest. Knowledge was measured with a three item index and individual questions. Higher scores indicated favorable responses for subjective measures, greater interest, and better knowledge. For the subjective balance, lower numbers were associated with the impression of the decision aid favoring CRC screening. RESULTS: 57 viewed the "with" version which included the two segments and 49 viewed the "without" version. After viewing, participants found the "without" version to have better subjective clarity about benefits of screening ("with" 3.4, "without" 4.1, p < 0.01), and to have greater clarity about downsides of screening ("with" 3.2, "without" 3.6, p = 0.03). The "with" version was considered to be less strongly balanced in favor of screening. ("with" 1.8, "without" 1.6, p = 0.05); but the "without" version received a better overall rating ("with" 3.5, "without" 3.8, p = 0.03). Groups did not differ in screening interest after viewing a decision aid or knowledge. CONCLUSION: A decision aid with the explicit discussion of the option of deciding not to be screened appears to increase the impression that the program was not as strongly in favor of screening, but decreases the impression of clarity and resulted in a lower overall rating. We did not observe clinically important or statistically significant differences in interest in screening or knowledge.

Development of an interactive computer-assisted instruction (ICAI) program for patient prenatal genetic screening and carrier testing for use in clinical settings.

Educating patients on prenatal genetic screening and carrier testing in a timely and effective manner is faced with barriers including, providers' limited knowledge, and little time available to spend discussing screening and testing during a visit. This paper describes the use of cognitive response interviews (CRI) and usability testing (UT) in the development of an interactive computer assisted instruction (ICAI) program for use by prenatal patients in clinical settings. Lessons learned during the program development process included simplification of content and adaptation of navigational features in response to observations and interviews of a sample of patients representing the intended population. The resulting program functions as a targeted patient education program that maintains the level of medical information needed, as specified by professional practices guidelines, in a patient friendly format. In addition, this ICAI program functions as a research tool that can collect data on program effectiveness. Researchers developing other patient education programs will benefit from the lessons learned during development of this ICAI program by considering rephrasing of content to fit patient understanding, and adding navigational features to help further facilitate effective program use.

Assessment of an interactive computer-based patient prenatal genetic screening and testing education tool.

The Enhancing Patient Prenatal Education study tested the feasibility and educational impact of an interactive program for patient prenatal genetic screening and testing education. Patients at two private practices and one public health clinic participated (N = 207). The program collected knowledge and measures of anxiety before and after use of the tool. Time in various prenatal visit activities was collected prior to and after the introduction of the education tool. Providers completed an assessment of their experiences with patients who had used the program. Results indicate that patient knowledge significantly increased from pre to post (p = .0001) with no increase in anxiety (p = .31). Time in clinic activities, including overall visit time, increased. A majority of providers indicated that the program disrupted clinic flow. This assessment suggests that the program increases patient knowledge and does not increase patient anxiety. However, challenges remain to using this program in a clinic setting.

Promoting decision aid use in primary care using a staff member for delivery.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the feasibility and effectiveness of in-clinic decision aid distribution using a care assistant. METHODS: We identified potentially eligible patients scheduled for upcoming appointments in our General Internal Medicine Clinic (n=1229). Patients were deemed eligible for two decision aids: prostate cancer screening and/or weight loss surgery. Patients were approached to view the decision aid in-clinic. Our primary measures were the proportion of decision aids distributed to eligible patients, and the proportion of decision aids viewed. RESULTS: Among 913 patients who attended their scheduled appointments, 58% (n=525) were approached and eligibility was assessed by the staff member. Among the 471 who remained eligible, 57% (n=268) viewed at least a portion of the target decision aid. The mean viewing time for patients who watched less than the complete decision aid was 13 min. CONCLUSIONS: In clinic viewing of decision aids may be a feasible and effective distribution method in primary care. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: In clinic distribution requires an electronic health information system to identify potentially eligible patients, and a staff member dedicated to DA distribution. Brief decision aids (less than 10 min) are needed so patients can complete their use prior to the visit to facilitate patient-physician decision making.

Effect of adding a values clarification exercise to a decision aid on heart disease prevention: a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Experts have called for the inclusion of values clarification (VC) exercises in decision aids (DAs) as a means of improving their effectiveness, but little research has examined the effects of such exercises. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether adding a VC exercise to a DA on heart disease prevention improves decision-making outcomes. DESIGN: Randomized trial. SETTING: UNC Decision Support Laboratory. PATIENTS: Adults ages 40 to 80 with no history of cardiovascular disease. INTERVENTION: A Web-based heart disease prevention DA with or without a VC exercise. MEASUREMENTS: Pre- and postintervention decisional conflict and intent to reduce coronary heart disease (CHD) risk and postintervention self-efficacy and perceived values concordance. RESULTS: The authors enrolled 137 participants (62 in DA; 75 in DA + VC with moderate decisional conflict (DA 2.4; DA + VC 2.5) and no baseline differences among groups. After the interventions, they found no clinically or statistically significant differences between groups in decisional conflict (DA 1.8; DA + VC 1.9; absolute difference VC-DA 0.1, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.1 to 0.3), intent to reduce CHD risk (DA 98%; DA + VC 100%; absolute difference VC-DA: 2%, 95% CI: -0.02% to 5%), perceived values concordance (DA 95%; DA + VC 92%; absolute difference VC-DA -3%, 95% CI: -11% to +5%), or self-efficacy for risk reduction (DA 97%; DA + VC 92%; absolute difference VC-DA -5%, 95% CI: -13% to +3%). However, DA + VC tended to change some decisions about risk reduction strategies. LIMITATIONS: Use of a hypothetical scenario; ceiling effects for some outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Adding a VC intervention to a DA did not further improve decision-making outcomes in a population of highly educated and motivated adults responding to scenario-based questions. Work is needed to determine the effects of VC on more diverse populations and more distal outcomes.

Individuals' responses to global CHD risk: a focus group study.

OBJECTIVE: To explore how individuals respond to global coronary heart disease (CHD) risk and use it in combination with treatment information to make decisions to initiate and maintain risk reducing strategies. METHODS: We conducted four focus groups of individuals at risk for CHD (n=29), purposively sampling individuals with each of several risk factors. Two reviewers coded verbatim transcripts and arbitrated differences, using ATLAS.ti 5.2 to facilitate analysis. RESULTS: Participants generally regarded the concept of global CHD risk as useful and motivating, although had questions about its precision and comprehensiveness. They identified several additional influential factors in decision-making (e.g. achievable risk, the quickness and self-evidence of results) and generally preferred lifestyle changes to medications (although most would accept medications under certain circumstances). They also noted the importance of participating in decision-making. CONCLUSION: Our results underscore the motivating potential of global CHD risk and the importance of patient participation in decision-making. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Global CHD risk is a useful adjunct to CHD prevention and can be presented in ways, and with information, that might improve CHD outcomes.

The uptake and effect of a mailed multi-modal colon cancer screening intervention: a pilot controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: We sought to determine whether a multi-modal intervention, which included mailing a patient reminder with a colon cancer decision aid to patients and system changes allowing direct access to scheduling screening tests through standing orders, would be an effective and efficient means of promoting colon cancer screening in primary care practice. METHODS: We conducted a controlled trial comparing the proportion of intervention patients who received colon cancer screening with wait list controls at one practice site. The intervention was a mailed package that included a letter from their primary care physician, a colon cancer screening decision aid, and instructions for obtaining each screening test without an office visit so that patients could access screening tests directly. Major outcomes were screening test completion and cost per additional patient screened. RESULTS: In the intervention group, 15% (20/137) were screened versus 4% (4/100) in the control group (difference 11%; (95%; CI 3%;18% p = 0.01). The cost per additional patient screened was estimated to be $94. CONCLUSION: A multi-modal intervention, which included mailing a patient reminder with a colon cancer decision aid to patients and system changes allowing patients direct access to schedule screening tests, increased colon cancer screening test completion in a subset of patients within a single academic practice. Although the uptake of the decision aid was low, the cost was also modest, suggesting that this method could be a viable approach to colon cancer screening.