Awareness of Racial and Ethnic Bias and Potential Solutions to Address Bias With Use of Health Care Algorithms.

Importance: Algorithms are commonly incorporated into health care decision tools used by health systems and payers and thus affect quality of care, access, and health outcomes. Some algorithms include a patient's race or ethnicity among their inputs and can lead clinicians and decision-makers to make choices that vary by race and potentially affect inequities. Objective: To inform an evidence review on the use of race- and ethnicity-based algorithms in health care by gathering public and stakeholder perspectives about the repercussions of and efforts to address algorithm-related bias. Design, Setting, and Participants: Qualitative methods were used to analyze responses. Responses were initially open coded and then consolidated to create a codebook, with themes and subthemes identified and finalized by consensus. This qualitative study was conducted from May 4, 2021, through December 7, 2022. Forty-two organization representatives (eg, clinical professional societies, universities, government agencies, payers, and health technology organizations) and individuals responded to the request for information. Main Outcomes and Measures: Identification of algorithms with the potential for race- and ethnicity-based biases and qualitative themes. Results: Forty-two respondents identified 18 algorithms currently in use with the potential for bias, including, for example, the Simple Calculated Osteoporosis Risk Estimation risk prediction tool and the risk calculator for vaginal birth after cesarean section. The 7 qualitative themes, with 31 subthemes, included the following: (1) algorithms are in widespread use and have significant repercussions, (2) bias can result from algorithms whether or not they explicitly include race, (3) clinicians and patients are often unaware of the use of algorithms and potential for bias, (4) race is a social construct used as a proxy for clinical variables, (5) there is a lack of standardization in how race and social determinants of health are collected and defined, (6) bias can be introduced at all stages of algorithm development, and (7) algorithms should be discussed as part of shared decision-making between the patient and clinician. Conclusions and Relevance: This qualitative study found that participants perceived widespread and increasing use of algorithms in health care and lack of oversight, potentially exacerbating racial and ethnic inequities. Increasing awareness for clinicians and patients and standardized, transparent approaches for algorithm development and implementation may be needed to address racial and ethnic biases related to algorithms.

From precision medicine to precision care: Choosing and using precision medicine in the context of multimorbidity.

Rapid advances in precision medicine promise dramatic reductions in morbidity and mortality for a growing array of conditions. To realize the benefits of precision medicine and minimize harm, it is necessary to address real-world challenges encountered in translating this research into practice. Foremost among these is how to choose and use precision medicine modalities in real-world practice by addressing issues related to caring for the sizable proportion of people living with multimorbidity. Precision medicine needs to be delivered in the broader context of precision care to account for factors that influence outcomes for specific therapeutics. Precision care integrates a person-centered approach with precision medicine to inform decision making and care planning by taking multimorbidity, functional status, values, goals, preferences, social and societal context into account. Designing dissemination and implementation of precision medicine around precision care would improve person-centered quality and outcomes of care, target interventions to those most likely to benefit thereby improving access to new therapeutics, minimize the risk of withdrawal from the market from unanticipated harms of therapy, and advance health equity by tailoring interventions and care to meet the needs of diverse individuals and populations. Precision medicine delivered in the context of precision care would foster respectful care aligned with preferences, values, and goals, engendering trust, and providing needed information to make informed decisions. Accelerating adoption requires attention to the full continuum of translational research: developing new approaches, demonstrating their usefulness, disseminating and implementing findings, while engaging patients throughout the process. This encompasses basic science, preclinical and clinical research and implementation into practice, ultimately improving health. This article examines challenges to the adoption of precision medicine in the context of multimorbidity. Although the potential of precision medicine is enormous, proactive efforts are needed to avoid unintended consequences and foster its equitable and effective adoption.

Respiratory Protection Perceptions among Malian Health Workers: Insights from the Health Belief Model.

Reusable respiratory protective devices called elastomeric respirators have demonstrated their effectiveness and acceptability in well-resourced healthcare settings. Using standard qualitative research methods, we explored the feasibility of elastomeric respirator use in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). We conducted interviews and focus groups with a convenience sample of health workers at one clinical center in Mali. Participants were users of elastomeric and/or traditional N95 respirators, their supervisors, and program leaders. Interview transcripts of participants were analyzed using a priori constructs from the Health Belief Model (HBM) and a previous study about healthcare respirator use. In addition to HBM constructs, the team identified two additional constructs impacting uptake of respirator use (system-level factors and cultural factors). Together, these framed the perceptions of Malian health workers and highlighted both facilitators of and barriers to respirator use uptake. As needs for respiratory protection from airborne infectious hazards become more commonly recognized, elastomeric respirators may be a sustainable and economic solution for health worker protection in LMIC.

The Prevalence of Dissemination and Implementation Research and Training Grants at National Cancer Institute-Designated Cancer Centers.

Background: Dissemination and implementation (D&I) research is a key factor in the uptake and use of evidence-based cancer control interventions. National Cancer Institute (NCI)-designated cancer centers are ideal settings in which to further D&I knowledge. The purpose of this study was to summarize the characteristics of NCI-funded D&I science grants in the nation's cancer centers to understand the nature, extent, and opportunity for this key type of translational work. Methods: We used the National Institutes of Health Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tool to identify active NCI-funded grants in D&I science at NCI clinical cancer centers (n = 13) and comprehensive cancer centers (n = 51) as well as their academic affiliates. Active projects were eligible for inclusion if they 1) were awarded directly to an NCI cancer center or an academic or research affiliate, and 2) identified D&I content in the abstract. Portfolio data were collected in February 2021. Results: We identified 104 active NCI-funded D&I research or training grants across the 64 cancer centers; 57.8% of cancer centers had at least 1 NCI-funded D&I grant. Most awards (71.1%) were for research grants. Training grants constituted 29.1% of D&I-focused grants. Overall, 50.0% of grants (n = 52) concentrated on specific cancers. Almost two-thirds of grants (n = 68, 65.4%) had a stated health equity focus. Conclusions: More than one-half of NCI-designated cancer centers have active funding in D&I science, reflecting a substantial investment by NCI. There remains considerable room for further development, which would further support NCI's translational mission.

Colorectal cancer knowledge and perceptions among individuals below the age of 50.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer (CRC) rates are increasing in individuals below the age of 50 and this trend has been projected to continue for the foreseeable future. Health officials are calling for increased awareness of rising rates in affected populations to promote discussion and early detection. METHODS: In May 2018, we surveyed an online purposive sample of adults below the age of 50 (N = 624). We conducted an exploratory analysis examining knowledge of current CRC screening guidelines, knowledge of available CRC screening methods, perceived risk of CRC, and perceived importance of screening for CRC by gender, race, and previous CRC screening activity. RESULTS: The sample was 56% female, averaged 36 years of age, largely identified as Caucasian (84%), married (48%), and well educated (70% with some college or a college degree). 36% correctly identified the current age of recommended CRC screening initiation. Few (8%) correctly identified all CRC screening options presented. Genetics was thought to be the most relevant determinant of CRC. African American or black participants perceived themselves to be at lower risk of CRC, while women rated the importance of screening significantly lower than men. CONCLUSION: We identified a lack of CRC knowledge in individuals below the age of 50. Interventions should correct perceptions of risk of CRC and highlight the importance of screening. Complete knowledge of the range of screening options may reduce barriers to screening while a greater knowledge of modifiable risk factors of CRC can promote healthy behaviors.

Applying an Equity Lens to Characterizing the Process and Reasons for an Adaptation to an Evidenced-based Practice.

BACKGROUND: Adaptations to evidence-based practices (EBPs) are common but can impact implementation and patient outcomes. In our prior research, providers in routine care made a fidelity-inconsistent adaptation to an EBP that improved health outcomes in people with serious mental illness (SMI). The purpose of this study was to characterize the process and reasons for the adaptation using a framework for reporting adaptations and modifications to EBPs, with a focus on equity. METHODS: This study used qualitative data collected during a national implementation of the InSHAPE EBP addressing obesity in persons with SMI. We reviewed transcripts from five behavioral health organizations that made a successful fidelity-inconsistent adaptation to a core component of InSHAPE that was associated with cardiovascular risk reduction. We coded the data using the Framework for Reporting Adaptations and Modifications-Expanded (FRAME) with an emphasis on exploring whether the adaptation addressed inequities in using the EBP related to social determinants of health. RESULTS: Across the five agencies, the fidelity-inconsistent adaptation was characterized as unplanned and reactive in response to challenges InSHAPE teams experienced delivering the intervention in community fitness facilities as intended. In all cases, the goal of the adaptation was to improve intervention access, feasibility and fit. Social and economic disadvantage were noted obstacles to accessing fitness facilities or gyms among participants with SMI, which led agencies to adapt the program by offering sessions at the mental health center. CONCLUSIONS: Findings from this study show the advantages of applying a health equity lens to evaluate how obstacles such as poverty and discrimination influence EBP adaptations. Recommendations can also assist researchers and community partners in making proactive decisions about allowable adaptations to EBPs.

How can healthcare organizations implement patient-centered care? Examining a large-scale cultural transformation.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare organizations increasingly are focused on providing care which is patient-centered rather than disease-focused. Yet little is known about how best to transform the culture of care in these organizations. We sought to understand key organizational factors for implementing patient-centered care cultural transformation through an examination of efforts in the US Department of Veterans Affairs. METHODS: We conducted multi-day site visits at four US Department of Veterans Affairs medical centers designated as leaders in providing patient-centered care. We conducted qualitative semi-structured interviews with 108 employees (22 senior leaders, 42 middle managers, 37 front-line providers and 7 staff). Transcripts of audio recordings were analyzed using a priori codes based on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. We used constant comparison analysis to synthesize codes into meaningful domains. RESULTS: Sites described actions taken to foster patient-centered care in seven domains: 1) leadership; 2) patient and family engagement; 3) staff engagement; 4) focus on innovations; 5) alignment of staff roles and priorities; 6) organizational structures and processes; 7) environment of care. Within each domain, we identified multi-faceted strategies for implementing change. These included efforts by all levels of organizational leaders who modeled patient-centered care in their interactions and fostered willingness to try novel approaches to care amongst staff. Alignment and integration of patient centered care within the organization, particularly surrounding roles, priorities and bureaucratic rules, remained major challenges. CONCLUSIONS: Transforming healthcare systems to focus on patient-centered care and better serve the "whole" patient is a complex endeavor. Efforts to transform healthcare culture require robust, multi-pronged efforts at all levels of the organization; leadership is only the beginning. Challenges remain for incorporating patient-centered approaches in the context of competing priorities and regulations. Through actions within each of the domains, organizations may begin to truly transform to patient-driven care.

Surgeons' Disclosures of Clinical Adverse Events.

Importance: Surgeons are frequently faced with clinical adverse events owing to the nature of their specialty, yet not all surgeons disclose these events to patients. To sustain open disclosure programs, it is essential to understand how surgeons are disclosing adverse events, factors that are associated with reporting such events, and the effect of disclosure on surgeons. Objective: To quantitatively assess surgeons' reports of disclosure of adverse events and aspects of their experiences with the disclosure process. Design, Setting, and Participants: An observational study was conducted from January 1, 2011, to December 31, 2013, involving a 21-item baseline questionnaire administered to 67 of 75 surgeons (89%) representing 12 specialties at 3 Veterans Affairs medical centers. Sixty-two surveys of their communication about adverse events and experiences with disclosing such events were completed by 35 of these 67 surgeons (52%). Data were analyzed using mixed linear random-effects and logistic regression models. Main Outcomes and Measures: Self-reports of disclosure assessed by 8 items from guidelines and pilot research, surgeons' perceptions of the adverse event, reported personal effects from disclosure, and baseline attitudes toward disclosure. Results: Most of the surgeons completing the web-based surveys (41 responses from men and 21 responses from women) used 5 of the 8 recommended disclosure items: explained why the event happened (55 of 60 surveys [92%]), expressed regret for what happened (52 of 60 [87%]), expressed concern for the patient's welfare (57 of 60 [95%]), disclosed the adverse event within 24 hours (58 of 60 [97%]), and discussed steps taken to treat any subsequent problems (59 of 60 [98%]). Fewer surgeons apologized to patients (33 of 60 [55%]), discussed whether the event was preventable (33 of 60 [55%]), or how recurrences could be prevented (19 of 59 [32%]). Surgeons who were less likely to have discussed prevention (33 of 60 [55%]), those who stated the event was very or extremely serious (40 of 61 surveys [66%]), or reported very or somewhat difficult experiences discussing the event (16 of 61 [26%]) were more likely to have been negatively affected by the event. Surgeons with more negative attitudes about disclosure at baseline reported more anxiety about patients' surgical outcomes or events following disclosure (odds ratio, 1.54; 95% CI, 1.16-2.06). Conclusions and Relevance: Surgeons who reported they were less likely to discuss preventability of the adverse event, or who reported difficult communication experiences, were more negatively affected by disclosure than others. Quality improvement efforts focused on recognizing the association between disclosure and surgeons' well-being may help sustain open disclosure policies.

Using Mixed Methods to Examine the Role of Veterans' Illness Perceptions on Depression Treatment Utilization and HEDIS Concordance.

BACKGROUND: Although depression screening occurs annually in the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) primary care, many veterans may not be receiving guideline-concordant depression treatment. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether veterans' illness perceptions of depression may be serving as barriers to guideline-concordant treatment. RESEARCH DESIGN: We used a prospective, observational design involving a mailed questionnaire and chart review data collection to assess depression treatment utilization and concordance with Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set guidelines adopted by the VA. The Self-Regulation Model of Illness Behavior guided the study. SUBJECTS: Veterans who screened positive for a new episode of depression at 3 VA primary care clinics in the US northeast. MEASURES: The Illness Perceptions Questionnaire-Revised, measuring patients' perceptions of their symptoms, cause, timeline, consequences, cure or controllability, and coherence of depression and its symptoms, was our primary measure to calculate veterans' illness perceptions. Treatment utilization was assessed 3 months after the positive depression screen through chart review. Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set (HEDIS) guideline-concordant treatment was determined according to a checklist created for the study. RESULTS: A total of 839 veterans screened positive for a new episode of depression from May 2009-June 2011; 275 (32.8%) completed the survey. Ninety-two (33.9%) received HEDIS guideline-concordant depression treatment. Veterans' illness perceptions of their symptoms, cause, timeline, and controllability of depression predicted receiving guideline-concordant treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Many veterans are not receiving guideline-concordant treatment for depression. HEDIS guideline measures may not be assessing all aspects of quality depression care. Conversations about veterans' illness perceptions and their specific needs are encouraged to ensure that appropriate treatment is achieved.

The role of coping in depression treatment utilization for VA primary care patients.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the impact of Veterans' coping strategies on mental health treatment engagement following a positive screen for depression. METHODS: A mixed-methods observational study using a mailed survey and semi-structured interviews. Sample included 271 Veterans who screened positive for depression during a primary care visit at one of three VA medical centers and had not received a diagnosis of depression or prescribed antidepressants 12 months prior to screening. A subsample of 23 Veterans was interviewed. RESULTS: Logistic regression models showed that Veterans who reported more instrumental support and active coping were more likely to receive depression or other mental health treatment within three months of their positive depression screen. Those who reported emotional support or self-distraction as coping strategies were less likely to receive any treatment in the same time frame. Qualitative analyses revealed that how Veterans use these and other coping strategies can impact treatment engagement in a variety of ways. CONCLUSIONS: The relationship between Veterans' use of coping strategies and treatment engagement for depression may not be readily apparent without in-depth exploration. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: In VA primary care clinics, nurse care managers and behavioral health providers should explore how Veterans' methods of coping may impact treatment engagement.