Connecting Clinical Capacity and Intervention Sustainability in Resource-Variable Pediatric Oncology Centers in Latin America.

Clinical capacity for sustainability, or the clinical resources needed to sustain an evidence-based practice, represent proximal determinants that contribute to intervention sustainment. We examine the relationship between clinical capacity for sustainability and sustainment of PEWS, an evidence-based intervention to improve outcomes for pediatric oncology patients in resource-variable hospitals. We conducted a cross-sectional survey among Latin American pediatric oncology centers participating in Proyecto Escala de Valoración de Alerta Temprana (EVAT), an improvement collaborative to implement Pediatric Early Warning Systems (PEWS). Hospitals were eligible if they had completed PEWS implementation. Clinicians were eligible to participate if they were involved in PEWS implementation or used PEWS in clinical work. The Spanish language survey consisted of 56 close and open-ended questions about the respondent, hospital, participants' assessment of clinical capacity to sustain PEWS using the clinical sustainability assessment tool (CSAT), and perceptions about PEWS and its use as an intervention. Results were analyzed using a multi-level modeling approach to examine the relationship between individual, hospital, intervention, and clinical capacity determinants to PEWS sustainment. A total of 797 responses from 37 centers in 13 countries were included in the analysis. Eighty-seven percent of participants reported PEWS sustainment. After controlling for individual, hospital, and intervention factors, clinical capacity was significantly associated with PEWS sustainment (OR 3.27, p < .01). Marginal effects from the final model indicate that an increasing capacity score has a positive influence (11% for every additional CSAT point) of predicting PEWS sustainment. PEWS is a sustainable intervention and clinical capacity to sustain PEWS contributes meaningfully to PEWS sustainment.

Sustainability determinants of an intervention to identify clinical deterioration and improve childhood cancer survival in Latin American hospitals: the INSPIRE study protocol.

BACKGROUND: More than 90% of children with cancer live in low-resourced settings, where survival is only 20%. Sustainable evidence-based (EB) interventions yielding ongoing beneficial patient outcomes are critical to improve childhood cancer survival. A better understanding of factors promoting intervention sustainability in these settings is urgently needed. The aim of this study is to provide an empirical understanding of how clinical capacity for sustainability, or the resources needed to sustain an intervention, impacts the sustainment of Pediatric Early Warning System (PEWS), an EB intervention that improves pediatric oncology outcomes in low-resource hospitals by detecting clinical deterioration and preventing the need for more intense treatment. METHODS: We will conduct a prospective, longitudinal study of approximately 100 resource-variable hospitals implementing and sustaining PEWS participating in Proyecto EVAT, a quality improvement collaborative of Latin American pediatric oncology centers. Aim 1: We will evaluate how clinical capacity for sustainability changes over time through 5 to 9 prospective measurements of capacity via survey of clinical staff using PEWS (approximately n = 13 per center) during the phases of PEWS adoption, implementation, and sustainability using the Clinical Sustainability Assessment Tool (CSAT). Aim 2: We will determine the relationship between capacity and a) PEWS sustainment and b) clinical deterioration mortality among pediatric oncology patients at centers sustaining PEWS for 2 to 10 years using chart review and an existing patient outcomes registry. Aim 3: We will develop novel strategies to promote sustainability by gaining a deeper understanding of perceived challenges to building capacity and PEWS sustainment. In combination with quantitative outcomes, we will conduct 24 focus groups with staff (doctors, nurses, and administrators) from hospitals with both high (n = 4) and low capacity (n = 4). We will then use implementation mapping to generate theoretically driven, empirically-supported sustainability strategies. DISCUSSION: This study will advance implementation science by providing a theoretically driven, foundational understanding of factors that predict sustainability among a large, diverse cohort of hospitals. We will then use this knowledge to develop sustainability evidence-informed strategies that optimize capacity and promote long-term sustainment of PEWS and improvements in patient outcomes, thus promoting equity in childhood cancer care globally.

CritCom: assessment of quality of interdisciplinary communication around deterioration in pediatric oncologic patients.

Background: High-quality clinical care requires excellent interdisciplinary communication, especially during emergencies, and no tools exist to evaluate communication in critical care. We describe the development of a pragmatic tool focusing on interdisciplinary communication during patient deterioration (CritCom). Methods: The preliminary CritCom tool was developed after a literature review and consultation with a multidisciplinary panel of global experts in communication, pediatric oncology, and critical care to review the domains and establish content validity iteratively. Face and linguistic validity were established through cognitive interviews, translation, and linguistic synthesis. We conducted a pilot study among an international group of clinicians to establish reliability and usability. Results: After reviewing 105 potential survey items, we identified 52 items across seven domains. These were refined through cognitive interviews with 36 clinicians from 15 countries. CritCom was piloted with 433 clinicians (58% nurses, 36% physicians, and 6% other) from 42 hospitals in 22 countries. Psychometric testing guided the refinement of the items for the final tool. CritCom comprised six domains with five items each (30 total). The final tool has excellent reliability (Cronbach's alpha 0.81-0.86), usability (93% agree or strongly agree that the tool is easy to use), and similar performance between English and Spanish tools. Confirmatory factor analysis was used to establish the final 6-domain structure. Conclusions: CritCom is a reliable and pragmatic bilingual tool to assess the quality of interdisciplinary communication around patient deterioration for children in diverse resource levels globally. Critcom results can be used to design and evaluate interventions to improve team communication.

A new measure for multi-professional medical team communication: design and methodology for multilingual measurement development.

Background: As implementation science in global health continues to evolve, there is a need for valid and reliable measures that consider diverse linguistic and cultural contexts. A standardized, reproducible process for multilingual measure development may improve accessibility and validity by participants in global health settings. To address this need, we propose a rigorous methodology for multilingual measurement development. We use the example of a novel measure of multi-professional team communication quality, a determinant of implementation efforts. Methods: The development and translation of this novel bilingual measure is comprised of seven steps. In this paper, we describe a measure developed in English and Spanish, however, this approach is not language specific. Participants are engaged throughout the process: first, an interprofessional panel of experts and second, through cognitive interviewing for measure refinement. The steps of measure development included: (1) literature review to identify previous measures of team communication; (2) development of an initial measure by the expert panel; (3) cognitive interviewing in a phased approach with the first language (English); (4): formal, forward-backward translation process with attention to colloquialisms and regional differences in languages; (5) cognitive interviewing repeated in the second language (Spanish); (6) language synthesis to refine both instruments and unify feedback; and (7) final review of the refined measure by the expert panel. Results: A draft measure to assess quality of multi-professional team communication was developed in Spanish and English, consisting of 52 questions in 7 domains. This measure is now ready for psychometric testing. Conclusions: This seven-step, rigorous process of multilingual measure development can be used in a variety of linguistic and resource settings. This method ensures development of valid and reliable tools to collect data from a wide range of participants, including those who have historically been excluded due to language barriers. Use of this method will increase both rigor and accessibility of measurement in implementation science and advance equity in research and practice.

Assessing the sustainability capacity of evidence-based programs in community and health settings.

Background: Within many public health settings, there remain large challenges to sustaining evidence-based practices. The Program Sustainability Assessment Tool has been developed and validated to measure sustainability capacity of public health, social service, and educational programs. This paper describes how this tool was utilized between January 2014 and January 2019. We describe characteristics of programs that are associated with increased capacity for sustainability and ultimately describe the utility of the PSAT in sustainability research and practice. Methods: The PSAT is comprised of 8 subscales, measuring sustainability capacity in eight distinct conceptual domains. Each subscale is made up of five items, all assessed on a 7-point Likert scale. Data were obtained from persons who used the PSAT on the online website (https://sustaintool.org/), from 2014 to 2019. In addition to the PSAT scale, participants were asked about four program-level characteristics. The resulting dataset includes 5,706 individual assessments reporting on 2,892 programs. Results: The mean overall PSAT score was 4.73, with the lowest and highest scoring subscales being funding stability and program adaptation, respectively. Internal consistency for each subscale was excellent (average Cronbach's alpha = 0.90, ranging from 0.85 to 0.94). Confirmatory factor analysis highlighted good to excellent fit of the PSAT measurement model (eight distinct conceptual domains) to the observed data, with a comparative fit index of 0.902, root mean square error of approximation equal to 0.054, and standardized root mean square residual of 0.054. Overall sustainability capacity was significantly related to program size (F = 25.6; p < 0.001). Specifically, smaller programs (with staff sizes of ten or below) consistently reported lower program sustainability capacity. Capacity was not associated with program age and did not vary significantly by program level. Discussion: The PSAT maintained its excellent reliability when tested with a large and diverse sample over time. Initial criterion validity was explored through the assessment of program characteristics, including program type and program size. The data collected reinforces the ability of the PSAT to assess sustainability capacity for a wide variety of public health and social programs.

Sustainability in pediatric hospitals: An exploration at the intersection of quality improvement and implementation science.

Background: Although new evidence-based practices are frequently implemented in clinical settings, many are not sustained, limiting the intended impact. Within implementation science, there is a gap in understanding sustainability. Pediatric healthcare settings have a robust history of quality improvement (QI), which includes a focus on continuation of change efforts. QI capability and sustainability capacity, therefore, serve as a useful concept for connecting the broader fields of QI and implementation science to provide insights on improving care. This study addresses these gaps in understanding of sustainability in pediatric settings and its relationship to QI. Methods: This is a cross-sectional observational study conducted within pediatric academic medical centers in the United States. Clinicians surveyed worked with one of three evidence-based clinical programs: perioperative antimicrobial stewardship prescribing, early mobility in the intensive care unit, and massive blood transfusion administration. Participants completed two assessments: (1) the Clinical Sustainability Assessment Tool (CSAT) and (2) a 19-question assessment that included demographics and validation questions, specifically a subset of questions from the Change Process Capability Questionnaire, a QI scale. Initial descriptive and bivariate analyses were conducted prior to building mixed-effects models relating perceived QI to clinical sustainability capacity. Results: A total of 181 individuals from three different programs and 30 sites were included in the final analyses. QI capability scores were assessed as a single construct (5-point Likert scale), with an average response of 4.16 (higher scores indicate greater QI capability). The overall CSAT score (7-point Likert scale) was the highest for massive transfusion programs (5.51, SD = 0.91), followed by early mobility (5.25, SD = 0.92) and perioperative antibiotic prescribing (4.91, SD = 1.07). Mixed-effects modeling illustrated that after controlling for person and setting level variables, higher perceptions of QI capabilities were significantly related to overall clinical sustainability. Conclusion: Organizations and programs with higher QI capabilities had a higher sustainability capacity, even when controlling for differences at the individual and intervention levels. Organizational factors that enable evidence-based interventions should be further studied, especially as they relate to sustainability. Issues to be considered by practitioners when planning for sustainability include bedside provider perceptions, intervention achievability, frequency of delivery, and organizational influences.

Reliability and validity of a Spanish-language measure assessing clinical capacity to sustain Paediatric Early Warning Systems (PEWS) in resource-limited hospitals.

BACKGROUND: Paediatric Early Warning Systems (PEWSs) improve identification of deterioration, however, their sustainability has not been studied. Sustainability is critical to maximise impact of interventions like PEWS, particularly in low-resource settings. This study establishes the reliability and validity of a Spanish-language Clinical Sustainability Assessment Tool (CSAT) to assess clinical capacity to sustain interventions in resource-limited hospitals. METHODS: Participants included PEWS implementation leadership teams of 29 paediatric cancer centres in Latin America involved in a collaborative to implement PEWS. The CSAT, a sustainability assessment tool validated in high-resource settings, was translated into Spanish and distributed to participants as an anonymous electronic survey. Psychometric, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), and multivariate analyses were preformed to assess reliability, structure and initial validity. Focus groups were conducted after participants reviewed CSAT reports to assess their interpretation and utility. RESULTS: The CSAT survey achieved an 80% response rate (n=169) with a mean score of 4.4 (of 5; 3.8-4.8 among centres). The CSAT had good reliability with an average internal consistency of 0.77 (95% CI 0.71 to 0.81); and CFAs supported the seven-domain structure. CSAT results were associated with respondents' perceptions of the evidence for PEWS, its implementation and use in their centre, and their assessment of the hospital culture and implementation climate. The mean CSAT score was higher among respondents at centres with longer time using PEWS (p<0.001). Focus group participants noted the CSAT report helped assess their centre's clinical capacity to sustain PEWS and provided constructive feedback for improvement. CONCLUSIONS: We present information supporting the reliability and validity of the CSAT tool, the first Spanish-language instrument to assess clinical capacity to sustain evidence-based interventions in hospitals of variable resource levels. This assessment demonstrates a high capacity to sustain PEWS in these resource-limited centres with improvement over time from PEWS implementation.

The Clinical Sustainability Assessment Tool: measuring organizational capacity to promote sustainability in healthcare.

BACKGROUND: Few validated assessment tools are available to increase understanding and measure factors associated with sustainment of clinical practices, an increasingly recognized need among clinicians. We describe the development of the Clinical Sustainability Assessment Tool (CSAT), designed to assess factors that contribute to sustainable practices in clinical settings. METHODS: Sixty-four participants from clinical and research fields participated in concept mapping and were recruited to brainstorm factors that lead to sustained clinical practices. Once repeated factors were removed, participants sorted items based on similarity and rated them by importance and feasibility. Using concept mapping analyses, items were grouped into meaningful domains to develop an initial tool. We then recruited pilot sites and early adopters, for a total of 286 practicing clinicians, to pilot and evaluate the tool. Individuals were recruited from clinical settings across pediatric and adult medical and surgical subspecialties. The data were analyzed using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to test hypothesized subscale structure in the instrument. We used root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) and the standardized root mean square residual (SRMR) to assess fit and thus the ability of CSAT to measure the identified domains. RESULTS: The concept mapping produced sorted statements that were edited into items that could be responded to, resulting in the creation of a tool with seven determinant domains and 47 items. The pilot and CFA testing resulted in a final CSAT instrument made up 35 items, five per domain. CFA results demonstrated very good fit of the seven domain structure of the CSAT (RMSEA = 0.049; SRMR = 0.049). Usability testing indicated the CSAT is brief, easy to use, easy to learn, and does not require extensive training. Additionally, the measure scored highly (18/20) on the Psychometric and Pragmatic Evidence Rating Scale (PAPERS). The seven final CSAT domains were engaged staff and leadership, engaged stakeholders, organizational readiness, workflow integration, implementation and training, monitoring and evaluation, and outcomes and effectiveness. CONCLUSIONS: The CSAT is a new reliable assessment tool which allows for greater practical and scientific understanding of contextual factors that enable sustainable clinical practices over time.

Do State Community Health Worker Laws Align with Best Available Evidence?

Community health workers (CHWs) are expected to improve patient care and population health while reducing health care costs. Law is a tool states are using to build a supportive infrastructure for the CHW workforce. This study assessed the extent existing state law pertaining to the CHW workforce aligned with best available evidence. We used the previously developed Quality and Impact of Component (QuIC) Evidence Assessment method to identify and prioritize those components that could comprise an evidence-informed CHW policy at the state level. We next assessed the extent codified statutes and regulations in effect as of December 31, 2014 for the 50 states and D.C. included the components identified in the evidence assessment. Fourteen components of an evidence-informed CHW policy were identified; eight had best, three had promising, and three had emerging evidence bases. Codified law in 18 states (35.3 % of 51) pertained to the CHW workforce. Fifteen of these 18 states authorized at least one of the 14 components from the evidence assessment (maximum: nine components, median: 2.5). The most frequently authorized component was a defined scope of practice for CHWs (authorized by eight states) followed by a standard core competency curriculum and inclusion of CHWs in multidisciplinary health care teams (each authorized by six states). States could consider the components presented in this article when developing new or strengthening existing law.

Social network analysis of public health programs to measure partnership.

In order to prevent chronic diseases, community-based programs are encouraged to take an ecological approach to public health promotion and involve many diverse partners. Little is known about measuring partnership in implementing public health strategies. We collected data from 23 Missouri communities in early 2012 that received funding from three separate programs to prevent obesity and/or reduce tobacco use. While all of these funding programs encourage partnership, only the Social Innovation for Missouri (SIM) program included a focus on building community capacity and enhancing collaboration. Social network analysis techniques were used to understand contact and collaboration networks in community organizations. Measurements of average degree, density, degree centralization, and betweenness centralization were calculated for each network. Because of the various sizes of the networks, we conducted comparative analyses with and without adjustment for network size. SIM programs had increased measurements of average degree for partner collaboration and larger networks. When controlling for network size, SIM groups had higher measures of network density and lower measures of degree centralization and betweenness centralization. SIM collaboration networks were more dense and less centralized, indicating increased partnership. The methods described in this paper can be used to compare partnership in community networks of various sizes. Further research is necessary to define causal mechanisms of partnership development and their relationship to public health outcomes.