Enhancing availability of services to control hypertension through a team-based care approach that includes pharmacists.

BACKGROUND: Primary care physician (PCP) shortages are expected to increase. The Michigan Medicine Hypertension Pharmacists' Program uses a team-based care (TBC) approach to redistribute some patient care responsibilities from PCPs to pharmacists for patients with diagnosed hypertension. OBJECTIVE: This evaluation analyzed whether the Michigan Medicine Hypertension Pharmacists' Program increased the availability of hypertension management services and described facilitators that addressed barriers to program sustainability and replicability. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective observational study that used a mixed methods approach. We examined the availability of hypertension management services using the number of pharmacists' referrals of patients to other services and the number of PCP appointments. We analyzed qualitative interviews with program staff and site-level quantitative data to examine the program's impact on the availability of services, the impact of TBC that engaged pharmacists, and program barriers and facilitators. RESULTS: Patients who visited a pharmacist had fewer PCP visits over 3- and 6-month periods compared to a matched comparison group that did not see a pharmacist and were 1.35 times more likely to receive a referral to a specialist within a 3-month period. Support from leaders and physicians, shared electronic health record access, and financial backing emerged as leading factors for program sustainability and replicability. CONCLUSION: Adding pharmacists to the care team reduced the number of PCP appointments per patient while increasing the availability of hypertension management services; this may in turn improve PCPs' availability. Similar models may be sustainable and replicable by relying on organizational buy-in, accessible infrastructure, and financing.

Factors That Support Sustainability of Health Systems Change to Increase Colorectal Cancer Screening in Primary Care Clinics: A Longitudinal Qualitative Study.

BACKGROUND: From 2015 to 2020, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Colorectal Cancer Control Program (CRCCP) supported 30 awardees in partnering with primary care clinics to implement evidence-based interventions (EBIs) and supporting activities (SAs) to increase colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. This study identified factors that facilitated early implementation and sustainability within partner clinics. METHODS: We conducted longitudinal qualitative case studies of four CRCCP awardees and four of their partner clinics. We used the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to frame understanding of factors related to implementation and sustainability. A total of 41 semi-structured interviews were conducted with key staff and stakeholders exploring implementation practices and facilitators to sustainability. Qualitative thematic analysis of interview transcripts identified emerging themes across awardees and clinics. RESULTS: Qualitative themes related to six CFIR inner setting constructs-structural characteristics, readiness for implementation, networks and communication, culture, and implementation climate-were identified. Themes related to early implementation included conducting readiness assessments to tailor implementation, providing moderate funding to clinics, identifying clinic champions, and coordinating EBIs and SAs with existing clinic practices. Themes related to sustainability included the importance of ongoing electronic health record (EHR) support, clinic leadership support, team-based care, and EBI and SA integration with clinic policies, workflows, and procedures. IMPLICATIONS: Findings help to inform future scale-up of and decision-making within CRC screening programs and other chronic disease prevention programs implementing EBIs and SAs within primary care clinics and also highlight factors that maximize sustainability within these programs.

Modifications in Primary Care Clinics to Continue Colorectal Cancer Screening Promotion During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

COVID-19 caused significant declines in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. Health systems and clinics, faced with a new rapidly spreading infectious disease, adapted to maintain patient safety and address the effects of the pandemic on healthcare delivery. This study aimed to understand how CDC-funded Colorectal Cancer Control Program recipients and their partner health systems and clinics may have modified evidence-based intervention (EBI) implementation to promote CRC screening during the COVID-19 pandemic; to identify barriers and facilitators to implementing modifications; and to extract lessons that can be applied to support CRC screening, chronic disease management, and clinic resilience in the face of future public health crises. Nine recipients were selected to reflect the diversity inherent among all CRCCP recipients. Recipient and clinic partner staff answered unique sets of pre-interview questions to inform tailoring of interview guides that were developed using constructs from the Framework for Reporting Adaptations and Modifications to Evidence-based Implementation Strategies (FRAME-IS) and Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). The study team then interviewed recipient, health system, and clinic partner staff incorporating pre-interview responses to focus each conversation. We employed a rapid qualitative analysis approach then conducted virtual focus groups with recipient representatives to validate emergent themes. Three modifications that emerged from thematic analysis include: (1) offering mailed fecal immunochemical test (FIT) kits for CRC screening with mail or drop off return; (2) increasing the use of patient education and engagement strategies; and (3) increasing the use of or improving automated patient messaging systems. With improved tracking and automated reminder systems, mailed FIT kits paired with tailored patient education and clear instructions for completing the test could help primary care clinics catch up on the backlog of missed screenings during COVID-19. Future research can assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of offering mailed FIT kits on maintaining or improving CRC screening, especially among people who are medically underserved.

Factors that support readiness to implement integrated evidence-based practice to increase cancer screening.

BACKGROUND: In 2015, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) funded the Colorectal Cancer Control Program (CRCCP), which partners with health care systems and primary care clinics to increase colorectal cancer (CRC) screening uptake. We interviewed CRCCP stakeholders to explore the factors that support readiness for integrated implementation of evidence-based interventions (EBIs) and supporting activities to promote CRC screening with other screening and chronic disease management activities in primary care clinics. METHODS: Using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), we conducted a literature review and identified constructs to guide data collection and analysis. We purposively selected four CRCCP awardees that demonstrated ongoing engagement with clinic partner sites, willingness to collaborate with CDC and other stakeholders, and availability of high-quality data. We gathered background information on the selected program sites and conducted primary data collection interviews with program site staff and partners. We used NVivo QSR 11.0 to systematically pilot-code interview data, achieving a kappa coefficient of 0.8 or higher, then implemented a step-wise process to identify site-specific and cross-cutting emergent themes. We also included screening outcome data in our analysis to examine the impact of integrated cancer screening efforts on screening uptake. RESULTS: We identified four overarching factors that contribute to clinic readiness to implement integrated EBIs and supporting activities: the funding environment, clinic governance structure, information sharing within clinics, and clinic leadership support. Sites reported supporting clinic partners' readiness for integrated implementation by providing coordinated funding application processes and braided funding streams and by funding partner organizations to provide technical assistance to support efficient incorporation of EBIs and supporting activities into existing clinic workflows. These actions, in turn, support clinic readiness to integrate the implementation of EBIs and supporting activities that promote CRC screening along with other screening and chronic disease management activities. DISCUSSION: The selected CRCCP program sites supported clinics' readiness to integrate CRC EBIs and supporting activities with other screening and chronic disease management activities increasing uptake of CRC screening and improving coordination of patient care. CONCLUSIONS: We identified the factors that support clinic readiness to implement integrated EBIs and supporting activities including flexible funding mechanisms, effective data sharing systems, coordination across clinical staff, and supportive leadership. The findings provide insights into how public health programs and their clinic partners can collectively support integrated implementation to promote efficient, coordinated patient-centered care.

Development of a Patient Preference Survey for Wearable Kidney Replacement Therapy Devices.

Background: Recent innovations have the potential to disrupt the current paradigm for kidney failure treatment. The US Food and Drug Administration is committed to incorporating valid scientific evidence about how patients weigh the benefits and risks of new devices into their decision making, but to date, premarket submission of patient preference information (PPI) has been limited for kidney devices. With input from stakeholders, we developed a survey intended to yield valid PPI, capturing how patients trade off the potential benefits and risks of wearable dialysis devices and in-center hemodialysis. Methods: We conducted concept elicitation interviews with individuals receiving dialysis to inform instrument content. After instrument drafting, we conducted two rounds of pretest interviews to evaluate survey face validity, comprehensibility, and perceived relevance. We pilot tested the survey with in-center hemodialysis patients to assess comprehensibility and usability further. Throughout, we used participant input to guide survey refinements. Results: Thirty-six individuals receiving in-center or home dialysis participated in concept elicitation (N=20) and pretest (N=16) interviews. Participants identified reduced fatigue, lower treatment burden, and enhanced freedom as important benefits of a wearable device, and many expressed concerns about risks related to device disconnection-specifically bleeding and infection. We drafted a survey that included descriptions of the risks of serious bleeding and serious infection and an assessment of respondent willingness to wait for a safer device. Input from pretest interviewees led to various instrument modifications, including treatment descriptions, item wording, and risk-level explanations. Pilot testing of the updated survey among 24 in-center hemodialysis patients demonstrated acceptable survey comprehensibility and usability, although 50% of patients required some assistance. Conclusions: The final survey is a 54-item web-based instrument that will yield estimates of the maximal acceptable risk for the described wearable device and willingness to wait for wearable devices with lower risk.

Evaluation of a Pharmacists' Patient Care Process Approach for Hypertension.

INTRODUCTION: An estimated 116 million American adults (47.3%) have hypertension. Most adults with hypertension do not have it controlled-3 in 4 (92.1 million) U.S. adults with hypertension have a blood pressure ≥130/80 mmHg. The Pharmacists' Patient Care Process is a standardized patient-centered approach to the provision of pharmacist care that is done in collaboration with other healthcare providers. Through the Michigan Medicine Hypertension Pharmacists' Program, pharmacists use the Pharmacists' Patient Care Process to provide hypertension management services in collaboration with physicians in primary care and community pharmacy settings. In 2019, the impact of Michigan Medicine Hypertension Pharmacists' Program patient participation on blood pressure control was evaluated. METHODS: Propensity scoring was used to match patients in the intervention group with patients in the comparison group and regression analyses were then conducted to compare the 2 groups on key patient outcomes. Negative binomial regression was used to examine the number of days with blood pressure under control. The findings presented in this brief are part of a larger multimethod evaluation. RESULTS: More patients in the intervention group than in the comparison group achieved blood pressure control at 3 months (66.3% vs 42.4%) and 6 months (69.1% vs 56.5%). The intervention group experienced more days with blood pressure under control within a 3-month (18.6 vs 9.5 days) and 6-month period (57.0 vs 37.4 days) than the comparison group did. CONCLUSIONS: Findings support the effectiveness of the Michigan Medicine Hypertension Pharmacists' Program approach to implementing the Pharmacists' Patient Care Process to improve blood pressure control.

The Effectiveness of mHealth and eHealth Tools in Improving Provider Knowledge, Confidence, and Behaviors Related to Cancer Detection, Treatment, and Survivorship Care: a Systematic Review.

Mobile health (mHealth) and eHealth interventions have demonstrated potential to improve cancer care delivery and disease management by increasing access to health information and health management skills. However, there is a need to better understand the overall impact of these interventions in improving cancer care and to identify best practices to support intervention adoption. Overall, this review intended to systematically catalogue the recent body of cancer-based mHealth and eHealth education and training interventions and assess the effectiveness of these interventions in increasing health care professionals' knowledge, confidence, and behaviors related to the delivery of care along the cancer continuum. Our initial search yielded 135 articles, and our full review included 23 articles. We abstracted descriptive data for each of the 23 studies, including an overview of interventions (i.e., intended intervention recipients, location of delivery, topic of focus), study methods (i.e., design, sampling approach, sample size), and outcome measures. Almost all the studies reported knowledge gain as an outcome of the education interventions, whereas only half assessed provider confidence or behavior change. We conclude that there is some evidence that mHealth and eHealth interventions lead to improvements in cancer care delivery, but this is not a consistent finding across the studies reviewed. Our findings also identify gaps that should be addressed in future research, offer guidance on the utility of mHealth and eHealth interventions, and provide a roadmap for addressing these gaps.

Translating medical evidence to promote informed health care decisions.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the effects of a community-based intervention on decisions about prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening using multiple measures of informed decision making (IDM). DATA SOURCES/STUDY SETTING: Nonequivalent control group time series design collecting primary data in late 2004 and 2005. STUDY DESIGN: We developed a multimodal intervention designed to convey the medical uncertainty about the benefits of PSA screening and early treatment and the limited predictive ability of both the PSA test and pathological specimens collected from prostate biopsy. We examined (1) patients' recognition that there is a decision to be made about PSA screening, (2) prostate cancer knowledge levels, (3) their preferred and actual levels of participation in decision making about screening at three points in time, and (4) screening decision. DATA COLLECTION: Baseline data collection occurred in community-based organizations. These organizations served as recruiting sources and as sites for the intervention. We collected follow-up data by mail with telephone reminders. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Our intervention was associated with greater recognition of the PSA test as a decision to be made, levels of knowledge, both preferred and actual levels of involvement in decision making, but did not have an impact on the screening decision. CONCLUSIONS: Community-based interventions can influence key measures of IDM about PSA screening.

A qualitative analysis of lung cancer screening practices by primary care physicians.

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death in the United States, but no scientific organization currently recommends screening because of limited evidence for its effectiveness. Despite this, physicians often order screening tests such as chest X-rays and computerized tomography scans for their patients. Limited information is available about how physicians decide when to order these tests. To identify factors that affect whether physicians' screen patients for lung cancer, we conducted five 75-min telephone-based focus groups with 28 US primary care physicians and used inductive qualitative research methods to analyze their responses. We identified seven factors that influenced these physicians' decisions about screening patients for lung cancer: (1) their perception of a screening test's effectiveness, (2) their attitude toward recommended screening guidelines, (3) their practice experience, (4) their perception of a patient's risk for lung cancer, (5) reimbursement and payment for screening, (6) their concern about litigation, and (7) whether a patient requested screening. Because these factors may have conflicting effects on physicians' decisions to order screening tests, physicians may struggle in determining when screening for lung cancer is appropriate. We recommend (1) more clinician education, beginning in medical school, about the existing evidence related to lung cancer screening, with emphasis on the benefit of and training in tobacco use prevention and cessation, (2) more patient education about the benefits and limitations of screening, (3) further studies about the effect of patients' requests to be screened on physicians' decisions to order screening tests, and (4) larger, quantitative studies to follow up on our formative data.

Evolving information priorities of hematologic cancer survivors, caregivers, and other relatives.

Little is known about information priorities of people touched by hematologic cancers. We interviewed and surveyed 29 survivors/patients, 13 caregivers, and 19 non-caregiver relatives. Qualitative interviews indicated limited information describing topics other than specific cancer subtypes and treatment options. The survey exercise revealed the following priorities: at diagnosis, cancer types and treatment options; during initial treatment, treatment options and coping with side effects; after treatment, follow-up tests and long-term side effects; at remission/during maintenance treatment at relapse, treatment options and follow-up tests; for patients, cancer types and treatment options; for caregivers, future outlook and support; for non-caregivers, finances. Information priorities vary by role and over time.

Communication message strategies for increasing knowledge about prostate cancer screening.

BACKGROUND: This community-based intervention study examined the effects of 2 different message strategies for presenting information about the prostate specific antigen (PSA) test. METHODS: A quasi-experimental longitudinal design with 2 intervention and 1 control group. RESULTS: Knowledge increased significantly among participants who received either version of the intervention message and remained elevated at 12 months. Presenting information in the context of other men's health issues was associated with greater increases in knowledge relative to PSA only. CONCLUSIONS: Community-based interventions can increase knowledge about prostate cancer screening. Clinicians need to take careful account of what their patients understand and correct misperceptions.