Group prenatal care successes, challenges, and frameworks for scaling up: a case study in adopting health care innovations.

BACKGROUND: Group prenatal care enhances quality of care, improves outcomes, and lowers costs. However, this healthcare innovation is not widely available. Using a case-study approach, our objectives were to (1) examine organizational characteristics that support implementation of Expect With Me group prenatal care and (2) identify key factors influencing adoption and sustainability. METHODS: We studied five clinical sites implementing group prenatal care, collecting qualitative data including focus group discussions with clinicians (n = 4 focus groups, 41 clinicians), key informant interviews (n = 9), and administrative data. We utilized a comparative qualitative case-study approach to characterize clinical sites and explain organizational traits that fostered implementation success. We characterized adopting and non-adopting (unable to sustain group prenatal care) sites in terms of fit for five criteria specified in the Framework for Transformational Change: (1) impetus to transform, (2) leadership commitment to quality, (3) improvement initiatives that engage staff, (4) alignment to achieve organization-wide goals, and (5) integration. RESULTS: Two sites were classified as adopters and three as non-adopters based on duration, frequency, and consistency of group prenatal care implementation. Adopters had better fit with the five criteria for transformational change. Adopting organizations were more successful implementing group prenatal care due to alignment between organizational goals and resources, dedicated healthcare providers coordinating group care, space for group prenatal care sessions, and strong commitment from organization leadership. CONCLUSIONS: Adopting sites were more likely to integrate group prenatal care when stakeholders achieved alignment across staff on organizational change goals, leadership buy-in, and committed institutional support and dedicated resources to sustain it. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The Expect With Me intervention's design and hypotheses were preregistered: https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT02169024 . Date: June 19, 2014.

Discrimination and perinatal depressive symptoms: The protective role of social support and resilience.

BACKGROUND: Discrimination is an important social determinant of perinatal depression; however, evidence is limited regarding modifiable social and psychological factors that may moderate this association. We examined whether social support and resilience could protect against the adverse effects of discrimination on perinatal depressive symptoms. METHODS: Pregnant people (N = 589) receiving Expect With Me group prenatal care in Nashville, TN and Detroit, MI completed surveys during third trimester of pregnancy and six months postpartum. Linear regression models tested the association between discrimination and depressive symptoms, and the moderating effects of social support and resilience, during pregnancy and postpartum. RESULTS: The sample was predominantly Black (60.6 %), Hispanic (15.8 %) and publicly insured (71 %). In multivariable analyses, discrimination was positively associated with depressive symptoms during pregnancy (B = 4.44, SE = 0.37, p ≤0.001) and postpartum (B = 3.78, SE = 0.36, p < 0.001). Higher social support and resilience were associated with less depressive symptoms during pregnancy (B = -0.49, SE = 0.08, p < 0.001 and B = -0.67, SE = 0.10, p < 0.001, respectively) and postpartum (B = -0.32, SE = 0.07, p < 0.001 and B = -0.56, SE = 0.08, p < 0.001, respectively). Social support was protective against discrimination (pregnancy interaction B = -0.23, SE = 0.09, p = 0.011; postpartum interaction B = -0.35, SE = 0.07, p < 0.001). There was no interaction between discrimination and resilience at either time. LIMITATIONS: The study relied on self-reported measures and only included pregnant people who received group prenatal care in two urban regions, limiting generalizability. CONCLUSIONS: Social support and resilience may protect against perinatal depressive symptoms. Social support may also buffer the adverse effects of discrimination on perinatal depressive symptoms, particularly during the postpartum period.

Association of the US Department of Justice Investigation of Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators and Devices Not Meeting the Medicare National Coverage Determination, 2007-2015.

Importance: The US Department of Justice (DOJ) conducted an investigation into implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) not meeting the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services National Coverage Determination (NCD) criteria. Objective: To examine changes in the proportion of initial primary prevention ICDs that did not meet NCD criteria following the announcement of the DOJ investigation at hospitals that reached settlements (settlement hospitals) and those that did not (nonsettlement hospitals). Design, Setting, and Participants: Multicenter, longitudinal, serial cross-sectional analysis of 300 151 initial primary prevention ICDs among Medicare beneficiaries from January 1, 2007, through December 31, 2015, at 1809 US hospitals in the National Cardiovascular Data Registry (NCDR) ICD Registry, of which 452 hospitals (with 99 591 primary prevention ICDs) reached settlements with the DOJ. Exposures: The DOJ investigation announcement in 2010. Main Outcomes and Measures: Proportion of initial primary prevention ICDs not meeting NCD criteria. Results: In January 2007, the proportion of initial ICDs not meeting NCD criteria was 25.8% (95% CI, 24.7% to 26.8%) at settlement hospitals and 22.8% (95% CI, 22.1% to 23.5%) at nonsettlement hospitals (P < .001). Over the study period, there was a 62.7% (95% CI, 59.2% to 66.1%) relative decrease and 16.1% (95% CI, 14.8% to 17.5%) absolute decrease in the proportion of ICDs not meeting NCD criteria at settlement hospitals compared with a 53.2% (95% CI, 50.4% to 56.0%) relative decrease and 12.1% (95% CI, 11.2% to 13.0%) absolute decrease in proportion at nonsettlement hospitals (P < .001 for both; P for interaction < .001). Trends significantly differed between hospital groups only in the period following the announcement of the DOJ investigation (January 2010-June 2011) [corrected], with larger and more rapid decreases at settlement hospitals (P for interaction = .01). Over the study period, there was a 32.8% (95% CI, 29.9% to 35.7%) relative decrease and a 1703 ICDs (95% CI, 1520 to 1886) absolute decrease in the volume of primary prevention ICDs implanted at settlement hospitals compared with a 17.4% (95% CI, 14.8% to 20.0%) relative decrease and a 1495 ICDs (95% CI, 1249 to 1741) absolute decrease in volume at nonsettlement hospitals (P < .001 for both; P for interaction < .001), with more modest decreases or slight increases in secondary prevention ICD volume. These patterns were similar when examining ICD utilization among non-Medicare beneficiaries. Conclusions and Relevance: From 2007 through 2015, the volume of primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillators and the proportion of devices not meeting the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services National Coverage Determination criteria decreased at all hospitals with substantially larger decreases at hospitals that reached settlements in the US Department of Justice investigation. These patterns extended to implantable cardioverter-defibrillators placed in non-Medicare beneficiaries, which were not the focus of the US Department of Justice investigation.

Design and rationale of the Cardiovascular Health and Text Messaging (CHAT) Study and the CHAT-Diabetes Mellitus (CHAT-DM) Study: two randomised controlled trials of text messaging to improve secondary prevention for coronary heart disease and diabetes.

INTRODUCTION: Mobile health interventions have the potential to promote risk factor management and lifestyle modification, and are a particularly attractive approach for scaling across healthcare systems with limited resources. We are conducting two randomised trials to evaluate the efficacy of text message-based health messages in improving secondary coronary heart disease (CHD) prevention among patients with or without diabetes. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The Cardiovascular Health And Text Messaging (CHAT) Study and the CHAT-Diabetes Mellitus (CHAT-DM) Study are multicentre, single-blind, randomised controlled trials of text messaging versus standard treatment with 6 months of follow-up conducted in 37 hospitals throughout 17 provinces in China. The intervention group receives six text messages per week which target blood pressure control, medication adherence, physical activity, smoking cessation (when appropriate), glucose monitoring and lifestyle recommendations including diet (in CHAT-DM). The text messages were developed based on behavioural change techniques, using models such as the information-motivation-behavioural skills model, goal setting and provision of social support. A total sample size of 800 patients would be adequate for CHAT Study and sample size of 500 patients would be adequate for the CHAT-DM Study. In CHAT, the primary outcome is the change in systolic blood pressure (SBP) at 6 months. Secondary outcomes include a change in proportion of patients achieving a SBP <140 mm Hg, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), physical activity, medication adherence, body mass index (BMI) and smoking cessation. In CHAT-DM, the primary outcome is the change in glycaemic haemoglobin (HbA1C) at 6 months. Secondary outcomes include a change in the proportion of patients achieving HbA1C<7%, fasting blood glucose, SBP, LDL-C, BMI, physical activity and medication adherence. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The central ethics committee at the China National Center for Cardiovascular Disease and the Yale University Institutional Review Board approved the CHAT and CHAT-DM studies. Results will be disseminated via usual scientific forums including peer-reviewed publications. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: CHAT (NCT02888769) and CHAT-DM (NCT02883842); Pre-results.