Efficacy of a Primary Care eHealth Obesity Treatment Pilot Intervention Developed for Vulnerable Pediatric Patients.

Background: Challenges to treat excess weight in primary care settings include time constraints during encounters and barriers to multiple visits for patient families, especially those from vulnerable backgrounds. Dynamo Kids! (DK), a bilingual (English/Spanish) e-health intervention, was created to address these system-level challenges. This pilot study assessed the effect of DK use on parent-reported healthy habits and child BMI. Methods: In this 3-month, quasi-experimental cohort design, DK was offered to parents with children aged 6-12 years with BMI ≥85th percentile in three public primary care sites in Dallas, Texas. DK included three educational modules, one tracking tool, recipes, and links to internet resources. Parents completed an online survey before and after 3 months. Pre-post changes in family nutrition and physical activity (FNPA) scores, clinic-measured child %BMIp95, and self-reported parent BMI were assessed using mixed-effects linear regression modeling. Results: A total of 73 families (mean child age = 9.3 years; 87% Hispanic, 12% non-Hispanic Black, and 77% Spanish-speaking families) completed the baseline survey (participants) and 46 (63%) used the DK site (users). Among users, pre-post changes (mean [standard deviation]) showed an increase in FNPA scores (3.0 [6.3], p = 0.01); decrease in child %BMIp95 (-1.03% [5.79], p = 0.22); and decrease in parent BMI (-0.69 [1.76], p = 0.04). Adjusted models showed -0.02% [95% confidence interval: -0.03 to -0.01] change in child %BMIp95 for each minute spent on the DK website. Conclusions: DK demonstrated a significant increase in parent FNPA scores and decrease in self-reported parent BMI. e-Health interventions may overcome barriers and require a lower dosage than in-person interventions.

Family-based pediatric weight management interventions in US primary care settings targeting children ages 6-12 years old: A systematic review guided by the RE-AIM framework.

Obesity is a pandemic that disproportionately affects children from vulnerable populations in the USA. Current treatment approaches in primary care settings in the USA have been reported to be insufficient at managing pediatric obesity, primarily due to implementation challenges for healthcare systems and barriers for families. While the literature has examined the efficacy of pediatric obesity interventions focused on internal validity, it lacks sufficient reporting and analysis of external validity necessary for successful translation to primary care settings. We conducted a systematic review of the primary-care-setting literature from January 2007 to March 2020 on family-based pediatric weight management interventions in both English and/or Spanish for children ages 6-12 years in the USA using the Reach, Efficacy/Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework. A literature search, using PRISMA guidelines, was conducted in January 2022 using the following electronic databases: Medline Ovid, Embase, and Cochrane Library. 22 270 records were screened, and 376 articles were reviewed in full. 184 studies were included. The most commonly reported dimensions of the RE-AIM framework were Reach (65%), Efficacy/Effectiveness (64%), and Adoption (64%), while Implementation (47%) and Maintenance (42%) were less often reported. The prevalence of reporting RE-AIM construct indicators ranged greatly, from 1% to 100%. This systematic review underscores the need for more focus on external validity to guide the development, implementation, and dissemination of future pediatric obesity interventions based in primary care settings. It also suggests conducting additional research on sustainable financing for pediatric obesity interventions.

Pediatric weight management research focused on primary care centers for children ages 6­12 in the USA has typically focused on assessing the effectiveness of the intervention rather than how to translate and disseminate such interventions into different settings for diverse populations, or external validity. Using the Reach, Efficacy/Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework, we conducted a systematic review to report how existing research reports external validity.

Integration of e-Health Strategies for Post-COVID-19 Pandemic Pediatric Weight Management Programs.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic catalyzed a renewed urgency to address the obesity pandemic and accelerated the use of technology to treat pediatric obesity. Yet, there are significant incongruities between the existing literature on technology for obesity management and the current health care system that may lead to suboptimal outcomes and increased costs. This study reviewed the types of e-health strategies currently in use, highlighted inconsistencies and overlap in terminology, and identified future research directions in e-health for childhood obesity, including gaps in implementation science. Methods: This narrative literature review synthesized seminal articles from the literature, as well as recent articles, using PubMed and Google Scholar that focused on the use of technology in treating pediatric obesity. This inclusive strategy was intended to elucidate the heterogeneity in how different disciplines are using digital health terminology in pediatric obesity research. Results: Both the prevalence of e-health interventions and its associated terminology are increasing in the peer-reviewed literature, especially since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. Yet, their definitions and usage are unstandardized, leading to a lack of cohesion in the research and between disciplines. There is a gap in implementation science outcomes, including reimbursement, that may significantly impact external validity and uptake. Conclusion: A more systematic and precise approach to researching e-health that can assess specific technologies and combinations of technologies, their short-term and long-term effect sizes, and feasibility can produce the necessary data that may lead to reimbursement policies and, ultimately, improved pediatric weight management outcomes.

The Use of Electronic Health Record Data to Identify Variation in Referral, Consent, and Engagement in a Pediatric Intervention for Overweight and Obesity: A Cross-Sectional Study.

Clinical weight management programs face low participation. The authors assessed whether using electronic health record (EHR) data can identify variation in referral, consent, and engagement in a pediatric overweight and obesity (OW/OB) intervention. Using Epic EHR data collected between August 2020 and April 2021, sociodemographic and clinical diagnostic data (ie, International Classification of Disease [ICD] codes from visit and problem list [PL]) were analyzed to determine their association with referral, consent, and engagement in an OW/OB intervention. Bivariate analyses and multivariable logistic regression modeling were performed, with Bayesian inclusion criterion score used for model selection. Compared with the 581 eligible patients, referred patients were more likely to be boys (60% vs. 54%, respectively; P = 0.04) and have a higher %BMIp95 (119% vs. 112%, respectively; P < 0.01); consented patients were more likely to have a higher %BMIp95 (120% vs. 112%, respectively; P < 0.01) and speak Spanish (71% vs. 59%, respectively; P = 0.02); and engaged patients were more likely to have a higher %BMIp95 (117% vs. 112%, respectively; P = 0.03) and speak Spanish (78% vs. 59%, respectively; P < 0.01). The regression model without either ICD codes or PL diagnoses was the best fit across all outcomes, which were associated with baseline %BMIp95 and health clinic location. Neither visit nor PL diagnoses helped to identify variation in referral, consent, and engagement in a pediatric OW/OB intervention, and their role in understanding participation in such interventions remains unclear. However, additional efforts are needed to refer and engage younger girls with less extreme cases of OW/OB, and to support non-Hispanic families to consent.

Dynamo Kids!/¡Niños Dinámicos! A Web Site for Pediatric Primary Care Providers to Offer Parents of Children 6-12 Years Old With Overweight and Obesity: Web Site Development and Protocol for Pilot Study.

INTRODUCTION: A self-guided web site offered by pediatric primary care providers could help parents implement healthy behaviors. METHOD: The Dynamo Kids/¡Niños Dinámicos program was developed with input from parents and health care professionals, creating a bilingual site for parents to learn why and how to implement healthy behavior changes for their children. A single-arm pilot will enroll parents with children 6-12 years with body mass index (BMI) ≥ 85th percentile seen in safety-net practices. Electronic health record modifications alert providers to eligible children at well-child encounters. Consented parents complete online surveys before accessing the site. At 3 months, the providers see children in weight-focused encounters. Outcomes include change in Family Nutrition and Physical Activity parent survey score (primary) and change in child relative BMI (secondary). Additional data include time spent on site, provider surveys, and provider and parent interviews. RESULTS: Pending implementation. DISCUSSION: If program shows promise, a large, controlled study could further evaluate with a goal of broad dissemination.

Advancing patient-centered care: moving from outcome-based to risk factor-based models using the big four risk factors.

This article reimagines the health care system to focus on risk factors rather than outcomes in order to improve patient-centered care and reduce health care expenditure. Patient-centered care has been a global priority since 2001 when the Institute of Medicine declared it an essential aim for health care systems. As part of this discussion and to help facilitate this change, the concept of the big four risk factors - diet and nutrition; physical activity; smoking and tobacco use; and excessive alcohol consumption - is introduced in the context of the Americas from which it originates. Using peer-reviewed literature, health policy guidelines, theories, frameworks, and transdisciplinary implementation science strategies, this article explains how public health research and medical centers are set up in terms of disease, or outcome, rather than risk factor, or exposure. It suggests how moving from outcome-based health care models to focus on prevention using the big four risk factors will lead to better patient-centered care and health outcomes. Transdisciplinary research and complexity science, a framework largely developed and tested in Latin America, are recommended to facilitate this change and develop multicomponent, multistakeholder action and cooperation. Future research should pilot the proposed changes at various health-system levels and in different settings and report on the outcomes of implementation to assess effectiveness and improve translation of research, perhaps using the standardized RE-AIM (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, Maintenance) evaluation framework.

En este artículo se plantea un cambio en el sistema de atención de salud para que esté centrado no en los resultados sino en los factores de riesgo y así mejorar la atención centrada en el paciente y reducir el gasto en atención de salud. La atención centrada en el paciente ha sido una prioridad mundial desde el año 2001, cuando el Instituto de Medicina (IOM, por su sigla en inglés) la declaró un objetivo básico de los sistemas de atención de salud. En el marco de este debate y para ayudar a facilitar este cambio, se introduce el concepto de los cuatro grandes factores de riesgo (régimen alimentario y nutrición, actividad física, tabaquismo y consumo de tabaco, y consumo excesivo de alcohol) en el contexto de la Región de las Américas donde se origina. Empleando bibliografía publicada en revistas arbitradas, directrices de políticas de salud, teorías, marcos y estrategias científicas de aplicación transdisciplinaria, en este artículo se explica cómo se configuran la investigación de salud pública y los centros médicos en términos de enfermedad (o resultado) en lugar de factor de riesgo (o exposición). Se indica que al pasar de modelos de atención de salud basados en los resultados a modelos centrados en la prevención que usen los cuatro grandes factores de riesgo supondrá una mejora de la atención centrada en el paciente y de los resultados de salud. Se recomiendan la investigación transdisciplinaria y la ciencia de la complejidad, un marco creado y puesto a prueba en gran medida en América Latina, para facilitar este cambio y lograr medidas y cooperación con múltiples componentes y partes interesadas. La investigación que se haga en el futuro debería poner a prueba los cambios propuestos en varios niveles del sistema de salud y en diferentes entornos, y presentar información sobre los resultados de la implementación para evaluar la efectividad y mejorar la traducción de la investigación, tal vez utilizando el marco estandarizado de evaluación RE-AIM (sigla en inglés de cobertura, eficacia, adopción, implementación y mantenimiento).

Este artigo reimagina o sistema de saúde para se concentrar nos fatores de risco e não nos desfechos, a fim de melhorar a atenção centrada no paciente e reduzir os gastos com a saúde. A atenção centrada no paciente tem sido uma prioridade global desde 2001, quando o Institute of Medicine dos EUA a declarou um objetivo essencial para os sistemas de saúde. Como parte dessa discussão e para ajudar a facilitar essa mudança, o conceito dos quatro grandes fatores de risco ­ dieta e nutrição, atividade física, tabagismo e uso de tabaco, e consumo excessivo de álcool ­ é introduzido no contexto das Américas, de onde ele se origina. Com base na literatura revisada por pares, diretrizes de políticas de saúde, teorias, estruturas e estratégias científicas de implementação transdisciplinar, este artigo explica como a pesquisa sobre saúde pública e os centros médicos são criados em função de doenças ­ ou desfechos ­, em vez de fatores de risco ­ ou exposições. Sugere-se como a transição de modelos de saúde baseados em desfechos para um foco na prevenção, utilizando os quatro grandes fatores de risco, levará a uma melhor atenção centrada no paciente e a melhores desfechos de saúde. Recomenda-se o uso de pesquisa transdisciplinar e da ciência da complexidade ­ uma estrutura amplamente desenvolvida e testada na América Latina ­ para facilitar essa mudança e desenvolver ações e cooperação entre vários componentes e partes interessadas. Pesquisas futuras devem testar as mudanças propostas em vários níveis do sistema de saúde e em diferentes ambientes e informar sobre os resultados da implementação para avaliar a eficácia e melhorar a tradução da pesquisa, talvez utilizando a estrutura padronizada de avaliação RE-AIM (do inglês Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, Maintenance; em português, Alcance, Eficácia/Efetividade, Adoção, Implementação, Manutenção).

Needs Assessment and Best Practices for Digital Trainings for Health Professionals in Ethiopia Using the RE-AIM Framework: COVID-19, Case Study.

OBJECTIVES: This study is aimed to assess the implementation science outcomes of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) e-health educational intervention in Ethiopia targeting health care workers via the RE-AIM (Reach, Effectiveness, Adaption, Implementation, Maintenance) framework. METHODS: A series of three 1-hour medical seminars focused on COVID-19 prevention and treatment education were conducted between May and August 2020. Educational content was built from medical sites previously impacted by COVID-19. Post-seminar evaluation information was collected from physician and other participants by a survey instrument. Cross-sectional evaluation results are reported here by RE-AIM constructs. RESULTS: The medical seminars reached 324 participants. Key success metrics include that 90% reporting the information delivered in a culturally sensitive/tailored manner (effectiveness), 80% reporting that they planned to share the information presented with someone else (adoption and implementation), and 64% reporting using information presented in their daily clinical responsibilities 6 months after the first medical seminars (maintenance). CONCLUSION: Grounded in a theoretical framework and following evidence-based best practices, this intervention advances the field of dissemination and implementation science by demonstrating how to transition health care training and delivery from an in-person to digital medium in low-resource settings like Ethiopia.

Advancing patient-centered care: moving from outcome-based to risk factor-based models using the big four risk factors

[ABSTRACT]. This article reimagines the health care system to focus on risk factors rather than outcomes in order to improve patient-centered care and reduce health care expenditure. Patient-centered care has been a global priority since 2001 when the Institute of Medicine declared it an essential aim for health care systems. As part of this discussion and to help facilitate this change, the concept of the big four risk factors – diet and nutrition; phys- ical activity; smoking and tobacco use; and excessive alcohol consumption – is introduced in the context of the Americas from which it originates. Using peer-reviewed literature, health policy guidelines, theories, frameworks, and transdisciplinary implementation science strategies, this article explains how public health research and medical centers are set up in terms of disease, or outcome, rather than risk factor, or exposure. It suggests how moving from outcome-based health care models to focus on prevention using the big four risk factors will lead to better patient-centered care and health outcomes. Transdisciplinary research and complex- ity science, a framework largely developed and tested in Latin America, are recommended to facilitate this change and develop multicomponent, multistakeholder action and cooperation. Future research should pilot the proposed changes at various health-system levels and in different settings and report on the outcomes of implementation to assess effectiveness and improve translation of research, perhaps using the standardized RE-AIM (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, Maintenance) evaluation framework.

[RESUMEN]. En este artículo se plantea un cambio en el sistema de atención de salud para que esté centrado no en los resultados sino en los factores de riesgo y así mejorar la atención centrada en el paciente y reducir el gasto en atención de salud. La atención centrada en el paciente ha sido una prioridad mundial desde el año 2001, cuando el Instituto de Medicina (IOM, por su sigla en inglés) la declaró un objetivo básico de los sistemas de atención de salud. En el marco de este debate y para ayudar a facilitar este cambio, se introduce el con- cepto de los cuatro grandes factores de riesgo (régimen alimentario y nutrición, actividad física, tabaquismo y consumo de tabaco, y consumo excesivo de alcohol) en el contexto de la Región de las Américas donde se origina. Empleando bibliografía publicada en revistas arbitradas, directrices de políticas de salud, teorías, marcos y estrategias científicas de aplicación transdisciplinaria, en este artículo se explica cómo se config- uran la investigación de salud pública y los centros médicos en términos de enfermedad (o resultado) en lugar de factor de riesgo (o exposición). Se indica que al pasar de modelos de atención de salud basados en los resultados a modelos centrados en la prevención que usen los cuatro grandes factores de riesgo supondrá una mejora de la atención centrada en el paciente y de los resultados de salud. Se recomiendan la investigación transdisciplinaria y la ciencia de la complejidad, un marco creado y puesto a prueba en gran medida en América Latina, para facilitar este cambio y lograr medidas y cooperación con múltiples compo- nentes y partes interesadas. La investigación que se haga en el futuro debería poner a prueba los cambios propuestos en varios niveles del sistema de salud y en diferentes entornos, y presentar información sobre los resultados de la implementación para evaluar la efectividad y mejorar la traducción de la investigación, tal vez utilizando el marco estandarizado de evaluación RE-AIM (sigla en inglés de cobertura, eficacia, adopción, implementación y mantenimiento).

[RESUMO]. Este artigo reimagina o sistema de saúde para se concentrar nos fatores de risco e não nos desfechos, a fim de melhorar a atenção centrada no paciente e reduzir os gastos com a saúde. A atenção centrada no paciente tem sido uma prioridade global desde 2001, quando o Institute of Medicine dos EUA a declarou um objetivo essencial para os sistemas de saúde. Como parte dessa discussão e para ajudar a facilitar essa mudança, o conceito dos quatro grandes fatores de risco – dieta e nutrição, atividade física, tabagismo e uso de tabaco, e consumo excessivo de álcool – é introduzido no contexto das Américas, de onde ele se origina. Com base na literatura revisada por pares, diretrizes de políticas de saúde, teorias, estruturas e estratégias científicas de implementação transdisciplinar, este artigo explica como a pesquisa sobre saúde pública e os centros médicos são criados em função de doenças – ou desfechos –, em vez de fatores de risco – ou exposições. Sugere-se como a transição de modelos de saúde baseados em desfechos para um foco na prevenção, utilizando os quatro grandes fatores de risco, levará a uma melhor atenção centrada no paciente e a melhores desfechos de saúde. Recomenda-se o uso de pesquisa transdisciplinar e da ciência da complex- idade – uma estrutura amplamente desenvolvida e testada na América Latina – para facilitar essa mudança e desenvolver ações e cooperação entre vários componentes e partes interessadas. Pesquisas futuras devem testar as mudanças propostas em vários níveis do sistema de saúde e em diferentes ambientes e informar sobre os resultados da implementação para avaliar a eficácia e melhorar a tradução da pesquisa, talvez utilizando a estrutura padronizada de avaliação RE-AIM (do inglês Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implemen- tation, Maintenance; em português, Alcance, Eficácia/Efetividade, Adoção, Implementação, Manutenção).

Evaluation of Harms Reporting in U.S. Cancer Screening Guidelines.

BACKGROUND: Cancer screening should be recommended only when the balance between benefits and harms is favorable. This review evaluated how U.S. cancer screening guidelines reported harms, within and across organ-specific processes to screen for cancer. OBJECTIVE: To describe current reporting practices and identify opportunities for improvement. DESIGN: Review of guidelines. SETTING: United States. PATIENTS: Patients eligible for screening for breast, cervical, colorectal, lung, or prostate cancer according to U.S. guidelines. MEASUREMENTS: Information was abstracted on reporting of patient-level harms associated with screening, diagnostic follow-up, and treatment. The authors classified harms reporting as not mentioned, conceptual, qualitative, or quantitative and noted whether literature was cited when harms were described. Frequency of harms reporting was summarized by organ type. RESULTS: Harms reporting was inconsistent across organ types and at each step of the cancer screening process. Guidelines did not report all harms for any specific organ type or for any category of harm across organ types. The most complete harms reporting was for prostate cancer screening guidelines and the least complete for colorectal cancer screening guidelines. Conceptualization of harms and use of quantitative evidence also differed by organ type. LIMITATIONS: This review considers only patient-level harms. The authors did not verify accuracy of harms information presented in the guidelines. CONCLUSION: The review identified opportunities for improving conceptualization, assessment, and reporting of screening process-related harms in guidelines. Future work should consider nuances associated with each organ-specific process to screen for cancer, including which harms are most salient and where evidence gaps exist, and explicitly explore how to optimally weigh available evidence in determining net screening benefit. Improved harms reporting could aid informed decision making, ultimately improving cancer screening delivery. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Cancer Institute.

The Comprehensive Communal Trauma Intervention Model (CCTIM), an Innovative Transdisciplinary Population-Level Model for Treating Trauma-Induced Illness and Mental Health in Global Vulnerable Communities: Palestine, a Case Study.

This paper explores how Western medicine may not fully understand and address post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and other trauma-induced illnesses in a culturally appropriate manner in marginalized communities and offers a theoretical framework to develop comprehensive, effective, and sustainable solutions that comprehensively address and treat the trauma on both a collective and individual level. Focused on Palestinians, this paper discusses the collective trauma Palestinians experienced and how it manifests in transgenerational effects on the body and mind that may be post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) or perhaps another distinct condition that is yet to be codified in the Western medical lexicon. It describes local alternatives to Western medical diagnostic tools like the "ease to disease" diagnostic scale and the sociopolitical context-in this case, the Palestinian fight for karamah, or dignity-from which such alternatives arise. Based on these findings, a novel theoretical framework, the comprehensive communal trauma intervention model (CCTIM), a truly transdisciplinary population-level model for treating mental health in vulnerable communities globally, is proposed. It articulates the need to address the root cause of collective trauma, make modifications to the healthcare system, and cultivate strategic equity-oriented and research-based partnerships.

Advancing patient-centered care: moving from outcome-based to risk factor-based models using the big four risk factors / Promover la atención centrada en el paciente: pasar de modelos basados en los resultados a modelos basados en los factores de riesgo empleando los cuatro grandes factores de riesgo / Como avançar na atenção centrada no paciente: transição de modelos baseados em desfechos para modelos baseados em fatores de risco utilizando os quatro grandes fatores de risco

ABSTRACT This article reimagines the health care system to focus on risk factors rather than outcomes in order to improve patient-centered care and reduce health care expenditure. Patient-centered care has been a global priority since 2001 when the Institute of Medicine declared it an essential aim for health care systems. As part of this discussion and to help facilitate this change, the concept of the big four risk factors - diet and nutrition; physical activity; smoking and tobacco use; and excessive alcohol consumption - is introduced in the context of the Americas from which it originates. Using peer-reviewed literature, health policy guidelines, theories, frameworks, and transdisciplinary implementation science strategies, this article explains how public health research and medical centers are set up in terms of disease, or outcome, rather than risk factor, or exposure. It suggests how moving from outcome-based health care models to focus on prevention using the big four risk factors will lead to better patient-centered care and health outcomes. Transdisciplinary research and complexity science, a framework largely developed and tested in Latin America, are recommended to facilitate this change and develop multicomponent, multistakeholder action and cooperation. Future research should pilot the proposed changes at various health-system levels and in different settings and report on the outcomes of implementation to assess effectiveness and improve translation of research, perhaps using the standardized RE-AIM (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, Maintenance) evaluation framework.

RESUMEN En este artículo se plantea un cambio en el sistema de atención de salud para que esté centrado no en los resultados sino en los factores de riesgo y así mejorar la atención centrada en el paciente y reducir el gasto en atención de salud. La atención centrada en el paciente ha sido una prioridad mundial desde el año 2001, cuando el Instituto de Medicina (IOM, por su sigla en inglés) la declaró un objetivo básico de los sistemas de atención de salud. En el marco de este debate y para ayudar a facilitar este cambio, se introduce el concepto de los cuatro grandes factores de riesgo (régimen alimentario y nutrición, actividad física, tabaquismo y consumo de tabaco, y consumo excesivo de alcohol) en el contexto de la Región de las Américas donde se origina. Empleando bibliografía publicada en revistas arbitradas, directrices de políticas de salud, teorías, marcos y estrategias científicas de aplicación transdisciplinaria, en este artículo se explica cómo se configuran la investigación de salud pública y los centros médicos en términos de enfermedad (o resultado) en lugar de factor de riesgo (o exposición). Se indica que al pasar de modelos de atención de salud basados en los resultados a modelos centrados en la prevención que usen los cuatro grandes factores de riesgo supondrá una mejora de la atención centrada en el paciente y de los resultados de salud. Se recomiendan la investigación transdisciplinaria y la ciencia de la complejidad, un marco creado y puesto a prueba en gran medida en América Latina, para facilitar este cambio y lograr medidas y cooperación con múltiples componentes y partes interesadas. La investigación que se haga en el futuro debería poner a prueba los cambios propuestos en varios niveles del sistema de salud y en diferentes entornos, y presentar información sobre los resultados de la implementación para evaluar la efectividad y mejorar la traducción de la investigación, tal vez utilizando el marco estandarizado de evaluación RE-AIM (sigla en inglés de cobertura, eficacia, adopción, implementación y mantenimiento).

RESUMO Este artigo reimagina o sistema de saúde para se concentrar nos fatores de risco e não nos desfechos, a fim de melhorar a atenção centrada no paciente e reduzir os gastos com a saúde. A atenção centrada no paciente tem sido uma prioridade global desde 2001, quando o Institute of Medicine dos EUA a declarou um objetivo essencial para os sistemas de saúde. Como parte dessa discussão e para ajudar a facilitar essa mudança, o conceito dos quatro grandes fatores de risco - dieta e nutrição, atividade física, tabagismo e uso de tabaco, e consumo excessivo de álcool - é introduzido no contexto das Américas, de onde ele se origina. Com base na literatura revisada por pares, diretrizes de políticas de saúde, teorias, estruturas e estratégias científicas de implementação transdisciplinar, este artigo explica como a pesquisa sobre saúde pública e os centros médicos são criados em função de doenças - ou desfechos -, em vez de fatores de risco - ou exposições. Sugere-se como a transição de modelos de saúde baseados em desfechos para um foco na prevenção, utilizando os quatro grandes fatores de risco, levará a uma melhor atenção centrada no paciente e a melhores desfechos de saúde. Recomenda-se o uso de pesquisa transdisciplinar e da ciência da complexidade - uma estrutura amplamente desenvolvida e testada na América Latina - para facilitar essa mudança e desenvolver ações e cooperação entre vários componentes e partes interessadas. Pesquisas futuras devem testar as mudanças propostas em vários níveis do sistema de saúde e em diferentes ambientes e informar sobre os resultados da implementação para avaliar a eficácia e melhorar a tradução da pesquisa, talvez utilizando a estrutura padronizada de avaliação RE-AIM (do inglês Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, Maintenance; em português, Alcance, Eficácia/Efetividade, Adoção, Implementação, Manutenção).

The Implementation and Five-Year Evolution of a Childhood Healthy Weight Program: Making a Health Care-Community Partnership Work.

Background: Sustained implementation of moderate to high-intensity interventions to treat childhood obesity meets many barriers. This report uses the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC's) Replicating Effective Programs framework to describe and evaluate the implementation of a 5-year health care-community collaborative program. Methods: Interviews with program leadership provided information on setting, organizational culture, program creation and adaptation, and costs. Administrative data were used for number of sessions and their characteristics; referrals; and 2018-2019 participant enrollment, attendance, completion numbers, and completer outcomes. Results: Preconditions for this program were high childhood obesity prevalence, and the complementary strengths of the health care organization (primary care treatment referral stream, population health orientation, alternative Medicaid funding) and the community organization (accessible space and time, staffing model, and organization mission). Preimplementation steps included collaborative design of a curriculum and allocation of administrative tasks. Implementation led to simultaneous deployment in as many as 17 community locations, with sessions offered free to families weekday evenings or weekends, delivered in English or Spanish. From 2018 to 2019, 2746 children were referred from nearly 300 providers, 832 (30.3%) enrolled, and 553 (66.3%) attended at least once, with 392 (70.8% of attenders and 47.1% of enrolled) completing the program. Outcomes in completers included improvement in %BMIp95 [-2.34 (standard deviation, SD 4.19)] and Progressive Aerobic Cardiovascular Endurance Run (PACER) laps [2.46 (SD 4.74)], p < 0.0001 for both. Evolution, including in referral process, Spanish program material and delivery, and range of ages, occurred continuously rather than at discrete intervals. Major system disruptions also affected the implementation. Maintenance of the program relied on the health care organization's administrative team and the collaboration with the community organization. Conclusion: This program's collaboration across organizations and ongoing adaptation were necessary to build and sustain a program with broad reach and positive health outcomes. The lessons learned may be helpful for other programs.

A Pilot and Feasibility Mobile Health Intervention to Support Healthy Behaviors in African American Breast Cancer Survivors.

African American breast cancer (AA BC) survivors are more likely to have cancer-related comorbidities compared with other women, ultimately putting them at higher risk for overall mortality and breast cancer-specific mortality. Survivorship care guidelines emphasize the importance of attention to obesity, weight management, and physical activity. Mobile technologies have been effective for improving health behaviors among cancer survivors, though few studies have focused on AA BC survivors. Creating Healthy Actions through Technology (CHAT) was a 4-week pilot intervention that employed an ecological momentary assessment (EMA) to improve survivors' physical activity and diet behaviors. We evaluated the acceptability, feasibility, and impact of a mHealth intervention for AA BC survivors. Participants (N = 22) were randomized to intervention (n = 13) or control (n = 9). All participants completed daily EMAs via smartphone for 4 weeks and wore accelerometers for seven consecutive days at baseline, 4, and 8 weeks. Intervention participants additionally received tailored health messages. Diet was measured using a self-reported questionnaire and physical activity with accelerometers. Participant engagement was high. Of 84 EMA assessments, the average response was 63 (SD 16.1). Participant accelerometer wear was at least 6 of the 7 days (SD 1.7) for each assessment. Eighty-five percent of participants reported the intervention helped change behaviors. Intervention participants reduced their sedentary time by 4.37 (SD = 7.14) hours/day versus controls (p = .05), reduced fast food intake by 1.5 servings (p = 0.008), and increased vigorous activity by 0.56 (SD = 28.10) minutes, which was non-significant (p = 0.959). Findings show feasibility and acceptability and potential of the intervention to positively impact physical activity among AA BC survivors.

Application and effectiveness of eHealth strategies for metabolic and bariatric surgery patients: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To date the application of eHealth strategies among adults and adolescents undergoing metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) has not been systematically reviewed. This study comprehensively examines eHealth intervention studies among MBS patients within the RE-AIM framework to assess reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation and maintenance of these efforts. METHODS: A search was conducted using PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycNET and SCOPUS of original research relating to eHealth strategies for MBS patients published in peer-reviewed journals and revealed 38 published articles between 2011 and 2019. RESULTS: Studies varied widely in terms of design (qualitative to randomized controlled trials) and eHealth delivery method (telemedicine to blog post content) with a balance of pre- or post-MBS use. No studies included adolescents and very few reported (1) a conceptual framework to support study design/outcomes; and (2) race/ethnicity composition. CONCLUSIONS: Although some studies report that eHealth strategies/interventions are effective in producing post-MBS weight loss and other positive health outcomes, most are pilot studies or have study design limitations. There is an opportunity for development of (1) tailored eHealth interventions to support pre- and post-MBS sustained behavior change and improved outcomes; and (2) rigorous studies that employ robust conceptual frameworks so dissemination and implementation efforts can be mapped to construct-driven outcomes.

Partnering Support Interventions with Bariatric Surgery to Maximize Health Outcomes in Adolescents with Severe Obesity.

OBJECTIVE: Rates of adolescents with severe obesity continue to rise worldwide, with concurrent increases in metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) uptake. The gap between support (lifestyle, pharmacotherapy) interventions and MBS as treatment options for adolescents has been understudied. This review, couched in a socio-ecological framework, investigates how support interventions for adolescents with severe obesity could be combined or sequenced with MBS to optimize health outcomes. METHODS: A comprehensive search revealed 36 published articles between 1995 and 2019 that included the combination of support interventions and MBS among adolescents. RESULTS: There were no studies that specifically reported outcomes or effect sizes for the combination of lifestyle intervention with MBS. Previous studies have reported individual results for either lifestyle intervention or MBS but not for their compound effect. CONCLUSIONS: As rates of adolescents with severe obesity are on the rise globally, future research should focus on how partnering support interventions with MBS can amplify positive short- and long-term health outcomes and within a socio-ecological framework. Understanding the sequence of these approaches will be of particular importance. High-risk and vulnerable populations such as ethnic minorities who have suffered a disproportionate burden of the obesity epidemic must be included in rigorously tested future trials of combination interventions to maximize health outcomes worldwide.

Patient-Reported Barriers to Completing a Diagnostic Colonoscopy Following Abnormal Fecal Immunochemical Test Among Uninsured Patients.

BACKGROUND: For colorectal cancer (CRC) screening to improve survival, patients with an abnormal fecal immunochemical test (FIT) must follow-up with a diagnostic colonoscopy. Adherence to follow-up is low and patient-level barriers for suboptimal adherence have yet to be explored. OBJECTIVE: To characterize barriers for non-completion of diagnostic colonoscopy after an abnormal FIT reported by under- and uninsured patients receiving care in a safety-net health system. DESIGN: A longitudinal, cohort study of CRC screening outreach to 8565 patients using mailed FIT kits. Patients with abnormal FIT results received telephonic navigation to arrange for a no-cost diagnostic colonoscopy. PATIENTS: Adults aged 50-64 years receiving care at a North Texas safety-net health system. APPROACH: Descriptive analyses characterized the patient sample and reasons for lack of follow-up after abnormal FIT over the 3-year outreach program. Thematic qualitative analyses characterized reasons for lack of follow-up with a colonoscopy after the abnormal FIT. KEY RESULTS: Of 689 patients with an abnormal FIT, 45% (n = 314) did not complete a follow-up colonoscopy. Among the 314 non-completers, 184 patients reported reasons for not completing a follow-up colonoscopy included health insurance-related challenges (38%), comorbid conditions (37%), social barriers such as transportation difficulties and lack of social support (29%), concerns about FIT/colonoscopy process (12%), competing life priorities (12%), adverse effects of bowel preparation (3%), and poor health literacy (3%). Among the 314 non-completers, 131 patients did not report a barrier, as 51% reported that that had completed a previous colonoscopy in the past 10 years, 10% refused with no reason, and 10% were never reached by phone. CONCLUSIONS: Future studies aimed at improving FIT screening and subsequent colonoscopy rates need to address the unique needs of patients for effective and sustainable screening programs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01946282.