Network Engagement in Action: Stakeholder Engagement Activities to Enhance Patient-centeredness of Research.

BACKGROUND: Stakeholders (ie, patients, policymakers, clinicians, advocacy groups, health system leaders, payers, and others) offer critical input at various stages in the research continuum, and their contributions are increasingly recognized as an important component of effective translational research. Natural experiments, in particular, may benefit from stakeholder feedback in addressing real-world issues and providing insight into future policy decisions, though best practices for the engagement of stakeholders in observational studies are limited in the literature. METHODS: The Natural Experiments for Translation in Diabetes 2.0 (NEXT-D2) network utilizes rigorous methods to evaluate natural experiments in health policy and program delivery with a focus on diabetes-related outcomes. Each of the 8 partnering institutions incorporates stakeholder engagement throughout multiple study phases to enhance the patient-centeredness of results. NEXT-D2 dedicates a committee to Engagement for resource sharing, enhancing engagement approaches, and advancing network-wide engagement activities. Key stakeholder engagement activities include Study Meetings, Proposal Development, Trainings & Educational Opportunities, Data Analysis, and Results Dissemination. Network-wide patient-centered resources and multimedia have also been developed through the broad expertise of each site's stakeholder group. CONCLUSIONS: This collaboration has created a continuous feedback loop wherein site-level engagement approaches are informed via the network and network-level engagement efforts are shaped by individual sites. Emerging best practices include: incorporating stakeholders in multiple ways throughout the research, building on previous relationships with stakeholders, enhancing capacity through stakeholder and investigator training, involving stakeholders in refining outcome choices and understanding the meaning of variables, and recognizing the power of stakeholders in maximizing dissemination.

Tobacco Cessation in Economically Disadvantaged Dominican Republic Communities: Who are the Ex-Users?

INTRODUCTION: Tobacco use and harm continue to increase in low- and middle income countries (LMICs) globally. Smoking cessation is the most effective means of reducing morbidity and mortality from tobacco use. Increasing the prevalence of ex-users is an indicator of population cessation. AIMS: This study provides the first examination of factors associated with ex-tobacco use status in the Dominican Republic (DR), a LMIC in the Latin America and Caribbean region. METHODS: Baseline surveillance was conducted for 1177 randomly selected households in 7 economically disadvantaged DR communities (total N=2680 adult household members). RESULTS: Ex-user prevalence was 10.6% (1.0%-18.5% across communities), 14.8% were current users (9.1-20.4), and quit ratios were 41.7% (9.7%-52.7%). Among ever-users, females (OR 2.02, 95% CI 1.41, 2.90), older adults (45-64: OR 1.75, 95% CI 1.12, 2.74; 65+: OR 2.09, 95% CI 1.29, 3.39), and those who could read/write (OR 1.64, 95% CI 1.08, 2.50), had health conditions (OR 1.63, 95% CI 1.11, 2.41), and lived with ex-users (OR 1.70, 95% CI 1.12, 2.58) were over 60% to two times as likely to be ex-users. Those from remote communities (OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.36, 0.74), using chewed tobacco (OR 0.14, 95% CI 0.04, 0.48) and living with tobacco users (OR 0.55, 95% CI 0.37, 0.81) were less likely to be ex-users. CONCLUSIONS: Ex-user prevalence and quit ratios were lower than for high income countries. Implementing broad tobacco control measures, combined with clinically targeting vulnerable groups, may increase tobacco cessation to most effectively reduce this public health crisis.

Lessons Learned from Twelve Years of Partnered Tobacco Cessation Research in the Dominican Republic.

Engaging partners for tobacco control within low and middle income countries (LMICs) at early stages of tobacco control presents both challenges and opportunities in the global effort to avert the one billion premature tobacco caused deaths projected for this century. The Dominican Republic (DR) is one such early stage country. The current paper reports on lessons learned from 12 years of partnered United States (US)-DR tobacco cessation research conducted through two NIH trials (Proyecto Doble T, PDT1 and 2). The projects began with a grassroots approach of working with interested communities to develop and test interventions for cessation and secondhand smoke reduction that could benefit the communities, while concurrently building local capacity and providing resources, data, and models of implementation that could be used to ripple upward to expand partnerships and tobacco intervention efforts nationally. Lessons learned are discussed in four key areas: partnering for research, logistical issues in setting up the research project, disseminating and national networking, and mentoring. Effectively addressing the global tobacco epidemic will require sustained focus on supporting LMIC infrastructures for tobacco control, drawing on lessons learned across partnered trials such as those reported here, to provide feasible and innovative approaches for addressing this modifiable public health crisis.

Health care workers' knowledge, attitudes and practices on tobacco use in economically disadvantaged dominican republic communities.

Tobacco use is increasing globally, particularly in low and middle-income countries like the Dominican Republic (DR) where data have been lacking. Health care worker (HCW) interventions improve quit rates; asking patients about tobacco use at each visit is an evidence-based first step. This study provides the first quantitative examination of knowledge, attitudes and practices of DR HCWs regarding tobacco use. All HCWs (N = 153) in 7 economically disadvantaged DR communities were targeted with anonymous surveys. Approximately 70% (N = 107) completed the primary outcome item, asking about tobacco use at each encounter. Despite >85% strongly agreeing that they should ask about tobacco use at each encounter, only 48.6% reported doing so. While most (94.39%) strongly agreed that smoking is harmful, knowledge of specific health consequences varied from 98.13% for lung cancer to 41.12% for otitis media. Few received training in tobacco intervention (38.32%). Exploratory analyses revealed that always asking even if patients are healthy, strongly agreeing that tobacco causes cardiac disease, and always advising smoke-free homes were associated with always asking. Overall, results demonstrate a disconnect between HCW belief and practice. Though most agreed that always asking about tobacco was important, fewer than half did so. Gaps in HCW knowledge and practices suggest a need for education and policy/infrastructure support. To our knowledge, this is the first reported survey of DR HCWs regarding tobacco, and provides a foundation for future tobacco control in the DR.