Group Well Child Care for Mothers with Opioid Use Disorder: Framework for Implementation.

OBJECTIVE: For parents with opioid use disorder (OUD) and their children, group well child care (WCC) is an under-studied intervention that may reduce stigma, increase quality of care, and improve clinical outcomes. We explored barriers and facilitators to this intervention using an implementation science framework. METHODS: A qualitative study was conducted from October 2020-March 2021 as part of the planning phase of a cluster-randomized trial of group WCC. Parent participants were recruited from one urban, university-affiliated OUD treatment center to participate in semi-structured telephone interviews. Eligible parents had a child under two years old and were English speaking. Clinician participants were recruited from a nearby pediatric primary care practice. Inductive thematic analysis of interview responses was led by two investigators using open coding procedures. RESULTS: Thirty-one parents and thirteen pediatric clinicians participated in the interviews. Most parents (68%) reported that they would be likely or very likely to bring their child to the OUD treatment center for WCC. Six themes emerged describing perceived implementation barriers, including intervention difficulty, complexity, and potential negative outcomes such as loss of privacy. Six themes emerged as implementation facilitators: (1) focus on parental OUD and recovery, (2) peer support, (3) accessibility and coordination of care, (4) clinician skill and expertise in parental OUD, (5) increased time for patient care, and (6) continuity of care. CONCLUSIONS FOR PRACTICE: Parents and clinicians expressed multiple perceived benefits of this intervention. Identified barriers and facilitators will inform implementation and evaluation of group WCC within one OUD treatment program.

The Child Healthcare at MATER Pediatric Study (CHAMPS): a 2-arm cluster randomized control trial of group well child care for mothers in treatment for opioid use disorder and their children.

BACKGROUND: Studies suggest that group-based well child care-a shared medical appointment where families come together as a group to receive pediatric primary care-increases patient-reported satisfaction and adherence to recommended care. Evidence supporting the use of group well child care for mothers with opioid use disorder, however, is lacking. The overall objective of the Child Healthcare at MATER Pediatric Study (CHAMPS) trial is to evaluate a group model of well child care for mothers with opioid use disorder and their children. METHODS: CHAMPS is a single-site 2-arm cluster randomized controlled trial. A total of 108 mother-child dyads will be enrolled into the study. Twenty-six clusters of approximately 4 mother-infant dyads each will be randomized 1:1 to one of two study arms (intervention or control). Clustering will be based on child's month of birth. In the intervention arm, group well child care will be provided on-site at a maternal substance use disorder treatment program. Mother-child dyads in the control arm will receive individual well child care from one nearby pediatric primary care clinic. Dyads in both study arms will be followed prospectively for 18 months, and data will be compared between the two study arms. Primary outcomes include well child care quality and utilization, child health knowledge, and parenting quality. DISCUSSION: The CHAMPS trial will provide evidence to determine if a group well child care offered on-site at an opioid treatment program for pregnant and parenting women is beneficial over individual well child care for families impacted by maternal opioid use disorder. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05488379. Registered on Aug. 04, 2022.

A Conceptual Framework for Group Well-Child Care: A Tool to Guide Implementation, Evaluation, and Research.

OBJECTIVE: To use scoping review methods to construct a conceptual framework based on current evidence of group well-child care to guide future practice and research. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review using Arksey and O'Malley's (2005) six stages. We used constructs from the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research and the quadruple aim of health care improvement to guide the construction of the conceptual framework. RESULTS: The resulting conceptual framework is a synthesis of the key concepts of group well-child care, beginning with a call for a system redesign of well-child care to improve outcomes while acknowledging the theoretical antecedents structuring the rationale that supports the model. Inputs of group well-child care include health systems contexts; administration/logistics; clinical setting; group care clinic team; community/patient population; and curriculum development and training. The core components of group well-child care included structure (e.g., group size, facilitators), content (e.g., health assessments, service linkages). and process (e.g., interactive learning and community building). We found clinical outcomes in all four dimensions of the quadruple aim of healthcare. CONCLUSION: Our conceptual framework can guide model implementation and identifies several outcomes that can be used to harmonize model evaluation and research. Future research and practice can use the conceptual framework as a tool to standardize model implementation and evaluation and generate evidence to inform future healthcare policy and practice.

Examining Processes of Care Redesign: Direct Observation of Group Well-Child Care.

We sought to describe processes of psychosocial screening and discussion with immigrant Latino families in the context of group well-child care. We conducted longitudinal direct observations of the 1-, 2-, 4-, and 6-month visits of 7 group well-child care cohorts at an academic pediatric clinic using unstructured observations of visit and group processes as well as structured observations to code facilitators' behavior. A range of psychosocial and social determinants of health topics were incorporated into discussions. In general, providers skillfully navigated group discussions, but inconsistently introduced the visit purpose. Asking participants to define psychosocial terms (eg, stress) and conversations about managing fussy infants were effective strategies to engage families in psychosocial discussions (eg, about postpartum depression). Some challenges with workflow were identified. Strategies to enhance screening and discussion of psychosocial topics may benefit from adaptation to maximize the effectiveness of this care mechanism.

Addressing Psychosocial Topics in Group Well-Child Care: A Multi-Method Study With Immigrant Latino Families.

OBJECTIVE: Group Well-Child Care (GWCC) has been described as providing an opportunity to enhance well-being for vulnerable families experiencing psychosocial challenges. We sought to explore benefits and challenges to the identification and management of psychosocial concerns in Group Well-Child Care (GWCC) with immigrant Latino families. METHODS: We conducted a case study of GWCC at an urban academic general pediatric clinic serving predominantly Limited English Proficiency Latino families, combining visit observations, interviews, and surveys with Spanish-speaking mothers participating in GWCC, and interviews with providers delivering GWCC. We used an adapted framework approach to qualitative data analysis. RESULTS: A total of 42 mothers and 9 providers participated in the study; a purposefully selected subset of 17 mothers was interviewed, all providers were interviewed. Mothers and providers identified both benefits and drawbacks to the structure and care processes in GWCC. The longer total visit time facilitated screening and education around psychosocial topics such as postpartum depression but made participation challenging for some families. Providers expressed concerns about the effects of shorter one-on-one time on rapport-building; most mothers did not express similar concerns. Mothers valued the opportunity to make social connections and to learn from the lived experiences of their peers. Discussions about psychosocial topics were seen as valuable but required careful navigation in the group setting, especially when fathers were present. CONCLUSIONS: Participants identified unique benefits and barriers to addressing psychosocial topics in GWCC. Future research should explore the effects of GWCC on psychosocial disclosures and examine ways to enhance benefits while addressing the challenges identified.

Pediatric Group Care: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: To describe characteristics and outcomes of Group Well-Child Care programs and provide recommendations for future research. METHODS: Informed by Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, an electronic references database, manual search of bibliographies and peer-reviewed journals, and general Internet search were conducted including research published up to July 2019. English language, peer-reviewed research, with provision of medical care were included. Studies without published outcomes, not specific to well-child care, or included only one visit were excluded. Nineteen articles met review criteria. Study quality was assessed using the Downs and Black tool for rigor. RESULTS: Programs typically included an individual medical examination, check-in, and group discussion. Demographics varied by race, ethnicity, age, income level, education and parity, though many were used specifically with underserved populations. Group size ranged from 3 to 10 and lasted an average of 1.5 h over a period of 6-24 months. Evidence suggests group well-child care is as effective as individual care with improvement noted for health-care utilization, weight outcomes, and more content covered. Design elements such as patient-led discussion, self-check-in, inclusion of other family members, and use of a variety of health care professionals and para-professionals may influence these outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Group well-child care is useful in providing efficient and patient-centered care and shows promise for use in underserved populations. Future research should utilize more rigorous study design and include evaluations of program components and group processes to address implementation challenges and determine effectiveness.

Timeliness of Immunizations in CenteringParenting.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the timeliness of immunizations of children in CenteringParenting (Centering), a group well-child model, compared to children in individual well-child care. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of infants born October 1, 2014 to February 18, 2019 with a 2-month and subsequent well-child visit, both Centering or individual, at an academic pediatric practice in an urban, low-income community. In Centering, same age infants/mothers and a provider meet for 10, 2-hour group visits, and facilitated discussions. Providers are trained in group facilitation and participate in both Centering and individual visits. Primary outcome was timeliness of immunizations at 7, 13, 19, and 25 months. Analyses were by intention to treat. RESULTS: The study population included 1735 children (Centering n = 342, individual n = 1393). By 25 months, 62% of children in Centering were up to date with all recommended immunizations compared to 44.2% of children in individual care, a 17.8% higher rate (P < .001). By 25 months, children in Centering made 3 additional well-child visits (9.2 vs 6.2, P < .001). Mediation analysis showed 82% of the effect on up to date status was due to increased attendance to well-child visits (P < .001); the remaining 18% was due to a Centering effect beyond the visit increase. CONCLUSIONS: Our study showed a strong association of CenteringParenting with timeliness of immunizations and adherence to well-child visits compared to individual visits in a low income community. These findings warrant further exploration of the impact of Centering in reducing health disparities in communities at risk.

Clinician Satisfaction and Self-Efficacy With CenteringParenting Group Well-Child Care Model: A Pilot Study.

Introduction: Group-based models for well-child care have been shown to positively affect patient experience. One promising group well-child care model is CenteringParenting. However, clinician self-efficacy with delivery of the model is unknown and clinician satisfaction with the model has been understudied. Objectives: To investigate sense of self-efficacy, degree of satisfaction, and comfort with trauma-informed care (TIC) among diverse clinical providers implementing the CenteringParenting curriculum. We also examined the relationship between self-efficacy, satisfaction, and comfort with TIC, and delivery of the model. Methods: Electronic surveys were sent to CenteringParenting providers (N = 98) from 49 clinics. Providers (N = 41) from 24 clinical sites completed the survey, corresponding to a 42% individual and 49% site response rate. Surveys explored provider: satisfaction with the curriculum, perceived self-efficacy, and perspective on competency with TIC. Results: Providers indicated that the CenteringParenting model achieves each of its four objectives (means ranged from 4.10 to 4.52 for each objective, with 5 being the highest possible response). Providers rated their level of satisfaction (scale of 1 [unsatisfied] to 5 [very satisfied]) with their ability to address patient concerns higher with CenteringParenting in the group care setting (mean = 4.10) than in the individual care setting (mean = 3.55). Respondents demonstrated a high mean average Self-Efficacy in Group Care score of 93.63 (out of 110). Unadjusted logistical regression analyses demonstrated that higher provider Self-Efficacy in Group Care score (odds ratio [OR] = 1.08) and higher comfort with TIC (OR = 22.16) is associated with curriculum content being discussed with a facilitative approach. Conclusions: Providers from diverse clinical sites report high satisfaction with and self-efficacy in implementing the CenteringParenting model.

Qualitative Evaluation of Individual and Group Well-Child Care.

OBJECTIVE: Individual well care (IWC) is the standard delivery model for well-child care in the United States. Alternative models, such as group well care (GWC), may create opportunities to enhance care for babies. The purpose of this study was to evaluate parents' perceptions of social/wellness benefits and system challenges of IWC and GWC. METHODS: Since 2014, we have provided both IWC and GWC at an urban academic practice serving a low-income minority community. We conducted a mixed method study involving surveys and 18 focus groups (11 IWC groups, n = 32 parents; 7 GWC groups, n = 33 parents). Parents completed surveys before convening focus group discussions. Survey results were analyzed using independent t tests; focus groups were digitally recorded, transcribed, and analyzed to identify themes. RESULTS: Both groups had similar demographics: parents were mostly female (91%) and black (>80%); about half had incomes < $20,000. Parents' mean age was 27 years; children's mean age was 11 months. There were no significant differences in overall scores measuring trust in physicians, parent empowerment, or stress. IWC parents' themes highlighted ways to improve care delivery, while GWC parents highlighted both satisfaction with care delivery and social/wellness benefits. GWC parents strongly endorsed this model and reported unique benefits, such as garnering social support and learning from other parents. CONCLUSIONS: Parents receiving both models of care identified ways to improve primary care delivery. Given some of the benefits reported by GWC parents, this model may provide the means to enhance resilience in parents and children in low-income communities.

Feasibility of Implementing Group Well Baby/Well Woman Dyad Care at Federally Qualified Health Centers.

OBJECTIVE: Group care has been shown to be effective for delivery of infant well child care. Centering Parenting (CP) is a model of group dyad care for mothers and infants. CP might improve quality and efficiency of preventive care, particularly for low-income families. Federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) might be optimal sites for implementation, however, facilitators and barriers might be unique. The aim of this qualitative study was to assess stakeholder perspectives on the feasibility of implementing CP in FQHCs in Baltimore. METHODS: Semistructured interviews were conducted with mothers, clinicians, staff, and administrators recruited from 2 FQHCs using purposive sampling. Interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim, and uploaded to Atlas.ti version 7.0 (Atlas.ti Scientific Software Development, GmbH Berlin, Germany) for analysis. Using an inductive thematic analysis approach, 2 investigators coded the transcripts. Matrices of key codes were developed to identify themes and patterns across stakeholder groups. RESULTS: Interviews were completed with 26 mothers and 16 clinicians, staff, and administrators. Most participants considered CP desirable. Facilitators included: peer support and education, emphasis on maternal wellness, and increased patient and clinician satisfaction. Barriers included: exposure to "others," scheduling and coordination of care, productivity, training requirements, and cost. Parenting experience did not appear to affect perspectives on CP. CONCLUSIONS: Perceptions regarding facilitators and barriers to CP implementation in FQHCs are similar to existing group well-child care literature. The benefit of emphasis on maternal wellness is a unique finding. Maternal wellness integration might make CP a particularly desirable model for implementation at FQHCs, but potential systems barriers must be addressed.

Group well-child care: an analysis of cost.

OBJECTIVE: To determine if group well-child visits (WCV) can be cost neutral compared with individual WCV by varying health care providers, group size, and physician salary. METHOD: We created 6 economic models to evaluate the costs of WCV: 3 for individual WCV delivered by (1) advanced practice registered nurse (APRN), (2) resident, and (3) attending and 3 for group WCV delivered by (4) APRN with a nurse and social worker; (5) resident with an attending, nurse, and child life specialist; and (6)attending with a nurse. For group WCV, we performed sensitivity analyses on group size and duration of provider participation. RESULTS: We achieved cost-neutrality at 4 families in the APRN group WCV model; at 3, 4, 5, and 6 families in the resident model with 30, 45, 60, and 90 minutes of attending supervision, respectively; and at 4 and 5 families in the low and high attending salary model, respectively. CONCLUSION: Group WCV can be delivered in a cost-neutral manner by optimizing group size and provider participation.