Association of hepatitis delta virus infection and hepatocellular carcinoma, hepatic decompensation, all-cause and liver-related death in a national cohort.

BACKGROUND: Hepatitis Delta Virus (HDV) infection is the most severe form of chronic hepatitis. However, studies on outcomes and causes of death in a United States-born population, with primarily horizontal transmission of HDV, are lacking. The aim of this study was to conduct a national study of patients with hepatitis D to understand the natural history and outcomes compared to patients with hepatitis B virus (HBV). infection. METHODS: In a national cohort of 4,817 HBV infected veterans tested for HDV (99.6% US-born, 3.3% HDV positive) over a 23-year period, we used multivariable models to identify the factors associated with a composite outcome of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), decompensation, and liver-related mortality (LRM), as well as all-cause mortality of patients with HDV compared to HBV mono-infection. RESULTS: HDV coinfection (vs. HBV monoinfection) was associated with a significantly higher incidence of composite liver-related outcomes at both 5 (23.84 vs. 7.98, p<0.001), and 10 years (19.14 vs. 10.18, p<0.001) respectively. The most common cause of death was liver-related (33.8% for HDV vs. 24.7% for HBV), followed by non-hepatic malignancies, (15.6 vs. 14.8%),cardiac (11.7 vs. 15.2%), and lung disease (5.2 vs. 3.7%). In multivariable models, HDV was associated with an increased risk of composite liver outcomes (aHR 2.57, 95% CI 1.87-3.52, p<0.001), and all-cause mortality (aHR 1.52, 95% CI 1.20-1.93, p<0.001). CONCLUSION: In a predominantly U.S born cohort of Veterans, HDV co-infection was associated with an increased risk of liver-related outcomes and all-cause mortality. Our findings support widespread testing for early identification of HDV.

A systematic review of experimentally tested implementation strategies across health and human service settings: evidence from 2010-2022.

BACKGROUND: Studies of implementation strategies range in rigor, design, and evaluated outcomes, presenting interpretation challenges for practitioners and researchers. This systematic review aimed to describe the body of research evidence testing implementation strategies across diverse settings and domains, using the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) taxonomy to classify strategies and the Reach Effectiveness Adoption Implementation and Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework to classify outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of studies examining implementation strategies from 2010-2022 and registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021235592). We searched databases using terms "implementation strategy", "intervention", "bundle", "support", and their variants. We also solicited study recommendations from implementation science experts and mined existing systematic reviews. We included studies that quantitatively assessed the impact of at least one implementation strategy to improve health or health care using an outcome that could be mapped to the five evaluation dimensions of RE-AIM. Only studies meeting prespecified methodologic standards were included. We described the characteristics of studies and frequency of implementation strategy use across study arms. We also examined common strategy pairings and cooccurrence with significant outcomes. FINDINGS: Our search resulted in 16,605 studies; 129 met inclusion criteria. Studies tested an average of 6.73 strategies (0-20 range). The most assessed outcomes were Effectiveness (n=82; 64%) and Implementation (n=73; 56%). The implementation strategies most frequently occurring in the experimental arm were Distribute Educational Materials (n=99), Conduct Educational Meetings (n=96), Audit and Provide Feedback (n=76), and External Facilitation (n=59). These strategies were often used in combination. Nineteen implementation strategies were frequently tested and associated with significantly improved outcomes. However, many strategies were not tested sufficiently to draw conclusions. CONCLUSION: This review of 129 methodologically rigorous studies built upon prior implementation science data syntheses to identify implementation strategies that had been experimentally tested and summarized their impact on outcomes across diverse outcomes and clinical settings. We present recommendations for improving future similar efforts.

Organizational and Implementation Factors Associated with Cirrhosis Care in the Veterans Health Administration.

BACKGROUND: The Veterans Health Administration provides care to more than 100,000 Veterans with cirrhosis. AIMS: This implementation evaluation aimed to understand organizational resources and barriers associated with cirrhosis care. METHODS: Clinicians across 145 Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) medical centers (VAMCs) were surveyed in 2022 about implementing guideline-concordant cirrhosis care. VA Corporate Data Warehouse data were used to assess VAMC performance on two national cirrhosis quality measures: HCC surveillance and esophageal variceal surveillance or treatment (EVST). Organizational factors associated with higher performance were identified using linear regression models. RESULTS: Responding VAMCs (n = 124, 86%) ranged in resource availability, perceived barriers, and care processes. In multivariable models, factors independently associated with HCC surveillance included on-site interventional radiology and identifying patients overdue for surveillance using a national cirrhosis population management tool ("dashboard"). EVST was significantly associated with dashboard use and on-site gastroenterology services. For larger VAMCs, the average HCC surveillance rate was similar between VAMCs using vs. not using the dashboard (47% vs. 41%), while for smaller and less resourced VAMCs, dashboard use resulted in a 13% rate difference (46% vs. 33%). Likewise, higher EVST rates were more strongly associated with dashboard use in smaller (55% vs. 50%) compared to larger (57% vs. 55%) VAMCs. CONCLUSIONS: Resources, barriers, and care processes varied across diverse VAMCs. Smaller VAMCs without specialty care achieved HCC and EVST surveillance rates nearly as high as more complex and resourced VAMCs if they used a population management tool to identify the patients due for cirrhosis care.

Hepatocellular Carcinoma Diagnosis and Management in 2021: A National Veterans Affairs Quality Improvement Project.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The coronavirus disease-2019 pandemic profoundly disrupted preventative health care services including cancer screening. As the largest provider of cirrhosis care in the United States, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) National Gastroenterology and Hepatology Program aimed to assess factors associated with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) stage at diagnosis, treatment, and survival. METHODS: Veterans with a new diagnosis of HCC in 2021 were identified from electronic health records (N = 2306). Structured medical record extraction was performed by expert reviewers in a 10% random subsample of Veterans with new HCC diagnoses. Factors associated with stage at diagnosis, receipt of treatment, and survival were assessed using multivariable models. RESULTS: Among 199 patients with confirmed HCC, the average age was 71 years and most (72%) had underlying cirrhosis. More than half (54%) were at an early stage (T1 or T2) at diagnosis. Less-advanced liver disease, number of imaging tests adequate for HCC screening, HCC diagnosis in the VA, and receipt of VA primary care were associated significantly with early stage diagnosis. HCC-directed treatments were administered to 145 (73%) patients after a median of 37 days (interquartile range, 19-54 d) from diagnosis, including 70 (35%) patients who received potentially curative treatments. Factors associated with potentially curative (vs no) treatments included HCC screening, early stage at diagnosis, and better performance status. Having fewer comorbidities and better performance status were associated significantly with noncurative (vs no) treatment. Early stage diagnosis, diagnosis in the VA system, and receipt of curative treatment were associated significantly with survival. CONCLUSIONS: These results highlight the importance of HCC screening and engagement in care for HCC diagnosis, treatment, and survival while demonstrating the feasibility of developing a national quality improvement agenda for HCC screening, diagnosis, and treatment.

Automated Messaging Program to Facilitate Systematic Home Blood Pressure Monitoring: Qualitative Analysis of Provider Interviews.

BACKGROUND: Hypertension is a leading cause of cardiovascular and kidney disease in the United States, yet blood pressure (BP) control at a population level is poor and worsening. Systematic home BP monitoring (HBPM) programs can lower BP, but programs supporting HBPM are not routinely used. The MyBP program deploys automated bidirectional text messaging for HBPM and disease self-management support. OBJECTIVE: We aim to produce a qualitative analysis of input from providers and staff regarding implementation of an innovative HBPM program in primary care practices. METHODS: Semistructured interviews (average length 31 minutes) were conducted with physicians (n=11), nurses, and medical assistants (n=6) from primary care settings. The interview assessed multiple constructs in the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research domains of intervention characteristics, outer setting, inner setting, and characteristics of individuals. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analyzed using inductive coding to organize meaningful excerpts and identify salient themes, followed by mapping to the updated Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research constructs. RESULTS: Health care providers reported that MyBP has good ease of use and was likely to engage patients in managing their high BP. They also felt that it would directly support systematic BP monitoring and habit formation in the convenience of the patient's home. This could increase health literacy and generate concrete feedback to raise the day-to-day salience of BP control. Providers expressed concern that the cost of BP devices remains an encumbrance. Some patients were felt to have overriding social or emotional barriers, or lack the needed technical skills to interact with the program, use good measurement technique, and input readings accurately. With respect to effects on their medical practice, providers felt MyBP would improve the accuracy and frequency of HBPM data, and thereby improve diagnosis and treatment management. The program may positively affect the patient-provider relationship by increasing rapport and bidirectional accountability. Providers appreciated receiving aggregated HBPM data to increase their own efficiency but also expressed concern about timely routing of incoming HBPM reports, lack of true integration with the electronic health record, and the need for a dedicated and trained staff member. CONCLUSIONS: In this qualitative analysis, health care providers perceived strong relative advantages of using MyBP to support patients. The identified barriers suggest the need for corrective implementation strategies to support providers in adopting the program into routine primary care practice, such as integration into the workflow and provider education. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03650166; https://tinyurl.com/bduwn6r4.

Comparing the CFIR-ERIC matching tool recommendations to real-world strategy effectiveness data: a mixed-methods study in the Veterans Health Administration.

BACKGROUND: Practical and feasible methods for matching implementation strategies to diagnosed barriers of evidence-based interventions in real-world contexts are lacking. This evaluation compared actual implementation strategies applied with those recommended by an expert opinion-based tool to improve guideline-concordant cirrhosis care in a Veterans Health Administration national learning collaborative effort. METHODS: This convergent parallel mixed-methods study aimed to (1) identify pre-implementation Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) barriers to cirrhosis care through focus groups with frontline providers, (2) generate 20 recommended strategies using focus group identified barriers entered into the CFIR-Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) Implementation Strategy Matching Tool, (3) survey providers over two consecutive years on the actual use of 73 ERIC strategies and determine strategy effectiveness, (4) compare actual versus recommended strategy use, and (5) compare actual versus expected barriers by reverse applying the CFIR-ERIC Matching Tool. RESULTS: Eighteen semi-structured focus groups were conducted with 197 providers representing 95 VA sites to identify barriers to quality improvement, including cirrhosis care complexity, clarity of national goals, and local leadership support. The CFIR-ERIC Matching Tool recommended strategies such as assessing for readiness and needs, promoting adaptability, building local groups, preparing champions, and working with opinion leaders and early adopters. Subsequent strategy surveys found that sites used the top 20 "recommended" strategies no more frequently than other strategies. However, 14 (70%) of the top recommended strategies were significantly positively associated with cirrhosis care compared to 48% of actual strategies. Reverse CFIR-ERIC matching found that the strategies most used in the first year corresponded to the following barriers: opinion leaders, access to knowledge and information, and resources. The strategies most frequently employed in the second year addressed barriers such as champions, cosmopolitanism, readiness for implementation, relative priority, and patient needs and resources. Strategies used in both years were those that addressed adaptability, trialability, and compatibility. CONCLUSIONS: This study is among the first to empirically evaluate the relationship between CFIR-ERIC Matching Tool recommended strategies and actual strategy selection and effectiveness in the real world. We found closer connections between recommended strategies and strategy effectiveness compared to strategy frequency, suggesting validity of barrier identification, and application of the expert-informed tool.

User experience of a hepatitis c population management dashboard in the Department of Veterans Affairs.

BACKGROUND: The Veterans Health Administration (VA) is the largest integrated healthcare organization in the US and cares for the largest cohort of individuals with hepatitis C (HCV). A national HCV population management dashboard enabled rapid identification and treatment uptake with direct acting antiviral agents across VA hospitals. We describe the HCV dashboard (HCVDB) and evaluate its use and user experience. METHODS: A user-centered design approach created the HCVDB to include reports based on the HCV care continuum: 1) 1945-1965 birth cohort high-risk screening, 2) linkage to care and treatment of chronic HCV, 3) treatment monitoring, 4) post-treatment to confirm cure (i.e., sustained virologic response), and 5) special populations of unstably housed Veterans. We evaluated frequency of usage and user experience with the System Usability Score (SUS) and Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology 2 (UTAUT2) instruments. RESULTS: Between November 2016 and July 2021, 1302 unique users accessed the HCVDB a total of 163,836 times. The linkage report was used most frequently (71%), followed by screening (13%), sustained virologic response (11%), on-treatment (4%), and special populations (<1%). Based on user feedback (n = 105), the mean SUS score was 73±16, indicating a good user experience. Overall acceptability was high with the following UTAUT2 rated from highest to least: Price Value, Performance Expectancy, Social Influence, and Facilitating Conditions. CONCLUSIONS: The HCVDB had rapid and widespread uptake, met provider needs, and scored highly on user experience measures. Collaboration between clinicians, clinical informatics, and population health experts was essential for dashboard design and sustained use. Population health management tools have the potential for large-scale impacts on care timeliness and efficiency.

Refining Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) strategy surveys using cognitive interviews with frontline providers.

BACKGROUND: The Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) compilation includes 73 defined implementation strategies clustered into nine content areas. This taxonomy has been used to track implementation strategies over time using surveys. This study aimed to improve the ERIC survey using cognitive interviews with non-implementation scientist clinicians. METHODS: Starting in 2015, we developed and fielded annual ERIC surveys to evaluate liver care in the Veterans Health Administration (VA). We invited providers who had completed at least three surveys to participate in cognitive interviews (October 2020 to October 2021). Before the interviews, participants reviewed the complete 73-item ERIC survey and marked which strategies were unclear due to wording, conceptual confusion, or overlap with other strategies. They then engaged in semi-structured cognitive interviews to describe the experience of completing the survey and elaborate on which strategies required further clarification. RESULTS: Twelve VA providers completed surveys followed by cognitive interviews. The "Engage Consumer" and "Support Clinicians" clusters were rated most highly in terms of conceptual and wording clarity. In contrast, the "Financial" cluster had the most wording and conceptual confusion. The "Adapt and Tailor to Context" cluster strategies were considered to have the most redundancy. Providers outlined ways in which the strategies could be clearer in terms of wording (32%), conceptual clarity (51%), and clarifying the distinction between strategies (51%). CONCLUSIONS: Cognitive interviews with ERIC survey participants allowed us to identify and address issues with strategy wording, combine conceptually indistinct strategies, and disaggregate multi-barreled strategies. Improvements made to the ERIC survey based on these findings will ultimately assist VA and other institutions in designing, evaluating, and replicating quality improvement efforts.

Early paracentesis is associated with better prognosis compared with late or no-paracentesis in hospitalized veterans with cirrhosis and ascites.

Guidelines recommend that all hospitalized patients with cirrhosis and ascites receive an early (<24 h from admission) paracentesis. However, national data are not available regarding compliance with and the consequences of this quality metric. We used the national Veterans Administration Corporate Data Warehouse and validated International Classification of Disease codes to evaluate the rate and subsequent outcomes of early, late, and no paracentesis for patients with cirrhosis and ascites during their first inpatient admission between 2016 and 2019. Of 10,237 patients admitted with a diagnosis of cirrhosis with ascites, 14.3% received an early paracentesis, 7.3% received a late paracentesis, and 78.4% never received a paracentesis. In multivariable modeling, compared with an early paracentesis: both late paracentesis and no-paracentesis were significantly associated with increased odds of acute kidney injury (AKI) development [OR: 2.16 (95% CI, 1.59-2.94) and 1.34 (1.09-1.66), respectively]; intensive care unit (ICU) transfer [OR: 2.43 (1.71-3.47) and 2.01 (1.53-2.69), respectively] and inpatient death [OR: 1.54 (1.03-2.29) and 1.42 (1.05-1.93), respectively]. Nationally, only 14.3% of admitted veterans with cirrhosis and ascites received the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD) guideline-recommended diagnostic paracentesis within 24 hours of admission. Failure to complete early paracentesis was associated with higher odds of AKI, ICU transfer, and inpatient mortality. Universal and site-specific barriers to this quality metric should be evaluated and addressed to improve patient outcomes.

Alcohol treatment discussions and clinical outcomes among patients with alcohol-related cirrhosis.

BACKGROUND: Alcohol cessation is the cornerstone of treatment for alcohol-related cirrhosis. This study evaluated associations between medical conversations about alcohol use disorder (AUD) treatment, AUD treatment engagement, and mortality. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included all patients with ICD-10 diagnosis codes for cirrhosis and AUD who were engaged in hepatology care in a single healthcare system in 2015. Baseline demographic, medical, liver disease, and AUD treatment data were assessed. AUD treatment discussions and initiation, alcohol cessation, and subsequent 5-year mortality were collected. Multivariable models were used to assess the factors associated with subsequent AUD treatment and 5-year mortality. RESULTS: Among 436 patients with cirrhosis due to alcohol, 65 patients (15%) received AUD treatment at baseline, including 48 (11%) receiving behavioral therapy alone, 11 (2%) receiving pharmacotherapy alone, and 6 (1%) receiving both. Over the first year after a baseline hepatology visit, 37 patients engaged in AUD treatment, 51 were retained in treatment, and 14 stopped treatment. Thirty percent of patients had hepatology-documented AUD treatment recommendations and 26% had primary care-documented AUD treatment recommendations. Most hepatology (86%) and primary care (88%) recommendations discussed behavioral therapy alone. Among patients with ongoing alcohol use at baseline, AUD treatment one year later was significantly, independently associated with AUD treatment discussions with hepatology (adjusted odds ratio (aOR): 3.23, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.58, 6.89) or primary care (aOR: 2.95; 95% CI: 1.44, 6.15) and negatively associated with having Medicaid insurance (aOR: 0.43, 95% CI: 0.18, 0.93). When treatment was discussed in both settings, high rates of treatment ensued (aOR: 10.72, 95% CI: 3.89, 33.52). Over a 5-year follow-up period, 152 (35%) patients died. Ongoing alcohol use, age, hepatic decompensation, and hepatocellular carcinoma were significantly associated with mortality in the final survival model. CONCLUSION: AUD treatment discussions were documented in less than half of hepatology and primary care encounters in patients with alcohol-related cirrhosis, though such discussions were significantly associated with receipt of AUD treatment.

Dementia Frequently Coexists With Hepatic Encephalopathy but Not Other Cirrhosis Complications in US Veterans.

INTRODUCTION: Hepatic encephalopathy (HE) is a common decompensating event in patients with cirrhosis. Because of the aging population of patients with cirrhosis, differentiating HE from nonhepatic etiologies of cognitive impairment, such as dementia, is increasingly important. METHODS: Veterans with cirrhosis were identified via International Classification of Diseases -10 codes between October 1, 2019, and September 30, 2021, using the VA Corporate Data Warehouse. Baseline characteristics were compared between cohorts based on the presence vs absence of dementia. Factors associated with having a diagnosis of dementia were evaluated using multivariate logistic regression models, adjusting for demographics, comorbid illnesses, cirrhosis etiology, and cirrhosis complications. RESULTS: A total of 71,552 veterans with cirrhosis were identified, of which, 5,647 (7.89%) veterans had a diagnosis of dementia. Veterans with dementia were older, more frequently White, urban located, and diagnosed with alcohol-related cirrhosis, metabolic syndrome, brain trauma, and cerebrovascular disease more frequently. On multivariable analysis, the presence of any decompensating event was associated with dementia. Multivariable analysis of individual decompensating events revealed HE to be associated with a dementia diagnosis, but not ascites, independent of other risk factors analyzed. DISCUSSION: Dementia is commonly diagnosed in patients with cirrhosis and correlates with a diagnosis of HE, independent of alcohol use, brain injury, age, and other metabolic risk factors. Dementia did not correlate with other decompensating events. Increased awareness of the overlap between dementia and HE, as well as reliable diagnostic and treatment strategies, is needed for the aging population of veterans with cirrhosis.

The road to pandemic recovery: Tracking COVID-19's impact on cirrhosis care and outcomes among 111,558 Veterans.

BACKGROUND AIMS: This study aimed to evaluate quarterly trends in process and health outcomes among Veterans with cirrhosis and assess the factors associated with cirrhosis outcomes before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. APPROACH RESULTS: US Veterans with cirrhosis were identified using the Veterans Health Administration Corporate Data Warehouse. Quarterly measures were evaluated from September 30, 2018, through March 31, 2022, including twice yearly screening for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC-6), new HCC, surveillance for or treatment of esophageal varices, variceal bleeding, all-cause hospitalization, and mortality. Joinpoint analyses were used to assess the changes in trends over time. Logistic regression models were used to identify the demographic and medical factors associated with each outcome over time. Among 111,558 Veterans with cirrhosis with a mean Model for End-stage Liver Disease-Sodium of 11±5, rates of HCC-6 sharply declined from a prepandemic peak of 41%, to a nadir of 28%, and rebounded to 36% by March 2022. All-cause mortality did not significantly change over the pandemic, but new HCC diagnosis, EVST, variceal bleeding, and all-cause hospitalization significantly declined over follow-up. Quarterly HCC diagnosis declined from 0.49% to 0.38%, EVST from 50% to 41%, variceal bleeding from 0.15% to 0.11%, and hospitalization from 9% to 5%. Rurality became newly, significantly associated with nonscreening over the pandemic (aOR for HCC-6=0.80, 95% CI 0.74 to 0.86; aOR for EVST=0.95, 95% CI 0.90 to 0.997). CONCLUSIONS: The pandemic continues to impact cirrhosis care. Identifying populations at the highest risk of care disruptions may help to address ongoing areas of need.

National Survey Using CFIR to Assess Early Outpatient Specialty Palliative Care Implementation.

CONTEXT: The American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) recommends that outpatient specialty palliative care (OSPC) be offered within eight weeks of an advanced cancer diagnosis. To meet the rising demand, there has been an increase in the availability of OSPC services at National Cancer Institute (NCI)-designated cancer centers; however, many OSPC referrals still occur late in the disease course. OBJECTIVES: Using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), we evaluated facilitators and barriers to early OSPC implementation and associated clinic characteristics. METHODS: We selected relevant CFIR constructs for inclusion in a survey that was distributed to the OSPC clinic leader at each NCI-designated cancer center. For each statement, respondents were instructed to rate the degree to which they agreed on a five-point Likert scale. We used descriptive statistics to summarize responses to survey items and explore differences in barriers based on OSPC clinic size and maturity. RESULTS: Of 60 eligible sites, 40 (67%) completed the survey. The most commonly agreed upon barriers to early OSPC included inadequate number of OSPC providers (73%), lack of performance metric goals (65%), insufficient space to deliver early OSPC (58%), logistical challenges created by early OSPC (55%), and absence of formal interdisciplinary communication systems (53%). The most frequently reported barriers differed according to clinic size and maturity. CONCLUSION: Most barriers were modifiable in nature and related to the "Inner Setting" domain of the CFIR, which highlights the need for careful strategic planning by leadership when implementing early OSPC.

Quantifying implementation strategy and dissemination channel preferences and experiences for pain management in primary care: a novel implementer-reported outcome.

BACKGROUND: Precision implementation science requires methods to evaluate and select implementation strategies. This study developed and evaluated a novel measure of concordance between current and preferred dissemination channels (DC) and implementation strategies (IS) to guide efforts to improve the adoption of evidence-based management strategies for chronic pain. METHODS: We conducted a one-time electronic survey of Pennsylvania primary care practitioners (PCPs) about current vs. preferred chronic pain management DC and IS use. Survey items were selected based on preliminary data, the Model for Dissemination of Research, and the Evidence-Based Recommendations for Implementing Change taxonomy of implementation strategies. We used Cohen's kappa (κ) to assess the agreement between participant-level current and preferred DC/IS. We calculated % preferred minus % experienced for each DC/IS and assessed the equality of proportions to determine whether this difference significantly departed from zero. We categorized DC and IS based on the degree of use and preference, to evaluate alignment. RESULTS: The current sample included 101 Pennsylvania PCPs primarily in urban (94.06%), non-academic (90.10%) settings who self-identified as mostly female (66.34%) and white (85.15%). The greatest difference between preferred and experienced DCs, or "need," was identified by participants as workshops, clinical experts, seminars, and researchers. Similarly, participants reported the greatest IS gaps as multidisciplinary chronic pain workgroups, targeted support for clinicians, and a chronic pain clinical champion. Participating PCPs had moderate DC concordance (kappa = 0.45, 95% CI = 0.38-0.52) and low IS concordance (kappa = 0.18, 95% CI = 0.13-0.23). DC and IS concordance were both greater than that expected by chance. We further identified well-aligned DC and IS, including professional organizations, briefs, and guidelines. CONCLUSION: We identified a novel implementer-reported outcome of dissemination channel and implementation strategy concordance that allows implementation scientists to quantify the magnitude of the gap between the current and preferred experience of implementers. This quantitative measure can help with the selection and evaluation of dissemination channels and implementation strategies. Future research should leverage this measure to understand the degree to which preference concordance influences clinical outcomes and performance.

Getting To Implementation (GTI)-Teach: A seven-step approach for teaching the fundamentals of implementation science.

Introduction: Implementation Science (IS) is a complex and rapidly evolving discipline, posing challenges for educators. We developed, implemented, and evaluated a novel, pragmatic approach to teach IS. Methods: Getting To Implementation (GTI)-Teach was developed as a seven-step educational model to guide students through the process of developing, conducting, and sustaining an IS research project. During the four-week online course, students applied the steps to self-selected implementation problems. Students were invited to complete two online post-course surveys to assess course satisfaction and self-reported changes in IS knowledge and relevance of GTI-Teach Steps to their work. Results were summarized using descriptive statistics; self-reported post-course changes in IS knowledge were compared using paired t-tests. Results: GTI-Teach was developed to include seven Steps: 1. Define the implementation problem; 2. Conceptualize the problem; 3. Prioritize implementation barriers and facilitators; 4. Select and tailor implementation strategies; 5. Design an implementation study; 6. Evaluate implementation; 7. Sustain implementation. Thirteen students, ranging in experience from medical students to full professors, enrolled in and completed the first GTI-Teach course. Of the seven students (54%) completing an end-of course survey, six (86%) were very satisfied with the course. Ten students (77%) responded to the tailored, 6-month post-course follow-up survey. They retrospectively reported a significant increase in their knowledge across all steps of GTI-Teach (1.3-1.8 points on a 5-point Likert scale) and rated each of the Steps as highly relevant to their work. Conclusions: GTI-Teach is a seven-step model for teaching IS fundamentals that students reported increased their knowledge and was relevant to their work.

Assessment of Alcohol and Other Substance Use in Patients With Chronic Liver Disease.

Content available: Audio Recording.