The impact of injury control research centers: Advancing the field of injury and violence prevention.

INTRODUCTION: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC) National Center for Injury Prevention and Control (NCIPC) funds Injury Control Research Centers (ICRCs). These centers study injury and violence prevention through three core areas: (1) Research conducts cutting-edge, multidisciplinary research in the injury and violence prevention field; (2) Outreach translates injury and violence prevention research into action; and (3) Training educates and trains the next generation of injury and violence prevention professionals. We examined ICRC work from 2012 to 2019 to determine whether they fulfilled their goal of furthering injury and violence prevention research and practice. METHODS: We created a database of core area accomplishments reported through annual and interim progress reports. These reports track core area accomplishments by injury and violence prevention topic area, publications, partnerships, and trainings. RESULTS: From 2012 to 2019, ten ICRCs from two funding cycles received approximately $49 million. ICRCs reported 703 research, 1,432 outreach, and 660 training accomplishments. There were also 342 accomplishments contributing to a special tool or resource. These accomplishments focused on preventing traumatic brain injury, suicide, adverse childhood experiences, and transportation safety. ICRCs produced over 3,500 peer-reviewed publications. ICRCs reported over 3,600 accomplishments partnered with academic institutions, public health agencies, healthcare, and non-profit organizations. ICRCs created resources for audiences such as students, law enforcement, and policy makers. ICRCs trained 3,131 students and faculty. PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS: ICRCs are the hubs of modern research and practice in the injury and violence prevention field. They successfully bring together stakeholders from disparate disciplines, perspectives, and agencies to join forces and tackle critical public health problems. CONCLUSION: ICRCs are an integral component of NCIPC's, CDC's and the Department of Health and Human Service's missions to protect and enhance the health of Americans. Research covered NCIPC research priorities over the funding period, furthering injury and violence prevention research and working as a foundation to practice and policy. Outreach and partnerships with an array of organizations put research into action. Trainings educated the new generation of injury and violence prevention professionals.

Engaging patients and stakeholders in preresearch: findings from the Pipeline to Proposal Awards Initiative.

Aim: The Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute Pipeline to Proposal (P2P) Awards Initiative funded 177 awardees to engage patients and stakeholder partners in preresearch. Based on P2P, we described engagement strategies; outcomes; facilitators; and challenges to inform research funders and stakeholders participating in preresearch. Materials & methods: We used a qualitative approach based on content analysis of program data and interviews with P2P awardees and partners. Results: Awardees developed partnership infrastructure by recruiting patients and stakeholders, establishing clear roles, and providing training. Building trust was key to engaging patients and stakeholders in preresearch. Awardees reported partners were more likely to engage in PCOR in the future. Conclusion: P2P awardees increased capacity of patient and stakeholder partnerships to conduct PCOR.

A Framework for Rigorous Qualitative Research as a Component of Mixed Method Rapid-Cycle Evaluation.

As federal, state, and local governments continue to test innovative approaches to health care delivery, the ability to produce timely and reliable evidence of what works and why it works is crucial. There is limited literature on methodological approaches to rapid-cycle qualitative research. The purpose of this article is to describe the advantages and limitations of a broadly applicable framework for in-depth qualitative analysis placed within a larger rapid-cycle, multisite, mixed-method evaluation. This evaluation included multiple cycles of primary qualitative data collection and quarterly and annual reporting. Several strategies allowed us to be adaptable while remaining rigorous; these included planning for multiple waves of qualitative coding, a hybrid inductive/deductive approach informed by a cross-program evaluation framework, and use of a large team with specific program expertise. Lessons from this evaluation can inform researchers and evaluators functioning in rapid assessment or rapid-cycle evaluation contexts.

Physician Engagement Strategies in Care Coordination: Findings from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services' Health Care Innovation Awards Program.

OBJECTIVE: To identify roles physicians assumed as part of new health care delivery models and related strategies that facilitated physician engagement across 21 Health Care Innovation Award (HCIA) programs. DATA SOURCES: Site-level in-depth interviews, conducted from 2014 to 2015 (N = 672) with program staff, leadership, and partners (including 95 physicians) and direct observations. STUDY DESIGN: NORC conducted a mixed-method evaluation, including two rounds of qualitative data collected via site visits and telephone interviews. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: We used qualitative thematic coding for data from 21 programs actively engaging physicians as part of HCIA interventions. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Establishing physician champions and ensuring an innovation-values fit between physicians and programs, including the strategies programs employed, facilitated engagement. Among engagement practices identified in this study, tailoring team working styles to meet physician preferences and conducting physician outreach and education were the most common successful approaches. CONCLUSIONS: We describe engagement strategies derived from a diverse range of programs. Successful programs considered physicians' values and engagement as components of process and policy, rather than viewing them as exogenous factors affecting innovation adoption. These types of approaches enabled programs to accelerate acceptance of innovations within organizations.

Integrating community health workers within Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act implementation.

CONTEXT: The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act's (PPACA) emphasis on community-based initiatives affords a unique opportunity to disseminate and scale up evidence-based community health worker (CHW) models that integrate CHWs within health care delivery teams and programs. Community health workers have unique access and local knowledge that can inform program development and evaluation, improve service delivery and care coordination, and expand health care access. As a member of the PPACA-defined health care workforce, CHWs have the potential to positively impact numerous programs and reduce costs. OBJECTIVE: This article discusses different strategies for integrating CHW models within PPACA implementation through facilitated enrollment strategies, patient-centered medical homes, coordination and expansion of health information technology (HIT) efforts, and also discusses payment options for such integration. RESULTS: Title V of the PPACA outlines a plan to improve access to and delivery of health care services for all individuals, particularly low-income, underserved, uninsured, minority, health disparity, and rural populations. Community health workers' role as trusted community leaders can facilitate accurate data collection, program enrollment, and provision of culturally and linguistically appropriate, patient- and family-centered care. Because CHWs already support disease management and care coordination services, they will be critical to delivering and expanding patient-centered medical homes and Health Home services, especially for communities that suffer disproportionately from multiple chronic diseases. Community health workers' unique expertise in conducting outreach make them well positioned to help enroll people in Medicaid or insurance offered by Health Benefit Exchanges. New payment models provide opportunities to fund and sustain CHWs. CONCLUSION: Community health workers can support the effective implementation of PPACA if the capacity and potential of CHWs to serve as cultural brokers and bridges among medically underserved communities and health care delivery systems is fully tapped. Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and current payment structures provide an unprecedented and important vehicle for integrating and sustaining CHWs as part of these new delivery and enrollment models.