Teaming up in primary care: Membership boundaries, interdependence, and coordination.

OBJECTIVE: Increased demand for quality primary care and value-based payment has prompted interest in implementing primary care teams. Evidence-based recommendations for implementing teams will be critical to successful PA participation. This study sought to describe how primary care providers (PCPs) define team membership boundaries and coordinate tasks. METHODS: This mixed-methods study included 28 PCPs from a primary care network. We analyzed survey data using descriptive statistics and interview data using content analysis. RESULTS: Ninety-six percent of PCPs reported team membership. Team models fell into one of five categories. The predominant coordination mechanism differed by whether coordination was required in a visit or between visits. CONCLUSIONS: Team-based primary care is a strategy for improving access to quality primary care. Most PCPs define team membership based on within-visit task interdependencies. Our findings suggest that team-based interventions can focus on clarifying team membership, increasing interaction between clinicians, and enhancing the electronic health record to facilitate between-visit coordination.

Engaging With Communities - Lessons (Re)Learned From COVID-19.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has underscored longstanding societal differences in the drivers of health and demonstrated the value of applying a health equity lens to engage at-risk communities, communicate with them effectively, share data, and partner with them for program implementation, dissemination, and evaluation. Examples of engagement - across diverse communities and with community organizations; tribes; state and local health departments; hospitals; and universities - highlight the opportunity to apply lessons from COVID-19 for sustained changes in how public health and its partners work collectively to prevent disease and promote health, especially with our most vulnerable communities.

Addressing Family Medicine's Capacity to Improve Health Equity Through Collaboration, Accountability and Coalition-Building.

Achieving health equity requires an evaluation of social, economic, environmental, and other factors that impede optimal health for all. Family medicine has long valued an ecological perspective of health, partnering with families and communities. However, both the quantity and degree of continued health disparities requires that family medicine intentionally work toward improvement in health equity. In recognition of this, Family Medicine for America's Health (FMAHealth) formed a Health Equity Tactic Team (HETT). The team's charge was to address primary care's capacity to improve health equity by developing action-oriented approaches accessible to all family physicians. The HETT has produced a number of projects. These include the Starfield II Summit, the focus of which was "Primary Care's Role in Achieving Health Equity." Multidisciplinary thought leaders shared their work around health equity, and actionable interventions were developed. These formed the basis of subsequent work by the HETT. This includes the Health Equity Toolkit, designed for a broad interdisciplinary audience of learners to learn to improve care systems, reduce disparities, and improve patient outcomes. The HETT is also building a business case for health equity. This has focused efforts on demonstrating to the private sector an economic argument for health equity. The HETT has formed a close partnership with the American Academy of Family Physicians' (AAFP's) Center for Diversity and Health Equity (CDHE), collaborating on numerous efforts to increase awareness of health equity. The team has also focused on engaging leadership in all eight US national family medicine organizations to participate in its activities and to ensure that health equity remains a top priority in its leadership. Looking ahead, family medicine will be required to continuously engage with government and nongovernment agencies, academic centers, and the private sector to create partnerships to systematically tackle health inequities.

Geographic clustering of elevated blood heavy metal levels in pregnant women.

BACKGROUND: Cadmium (Cd), lead (Pb), mercury (Hg), and arsenic (As) exposure is ubiquitous and has been associated with higher risk of growth restriction and cardiometabolic and neurodevelopmental disorders. However, cost-efficient strategies to identify at-risk populations and potential sources of exposure to inform mitigation efforts are limited. The objective of this study was to describe the spatial distribution and identify factors associated with Cd, Pb, Hg, and As concentrations in peripheral blood of pregnant women. METHODS: Heavy metals were measured in whole peripheral blood of 310 pregnant women obtained at gestational age ~12 weeks. Prenatal residential addresses were geocoded and geospatial analysis (Getis-Ord Gi* statistics) was used to determine if elevated blood concentrations were geographically clustered. Logistic regression models were used to identify factors associated with elevated blood metal levels and cluster membership. RESULTS: Geospatial clusters for Cd and Pb were identified with high confidence (p-value for Gi* statistic <0.01). The Cd and Pb clusters comprised 10.5 and 9.2 % of Durham County residents, respectively. Medians and interquartile ranges of blood concentrations (µg/dL) for all participants were Cd 0.02 (0.01-0.04), Hg 0.03 (0.01-0.07), Pb 0.34 (0.16-0.83), and As 0.04 (0.04-0.05). In the Cd cluster, medians and interquartile ranges of blood concentrations (µg/dL) were Cd 0.06 (0.02-0.16), Hg 0.02 (0.00-0.05), Pb 0.54 (0.23-1.23), and As 0.05 (0.04-0.05). In the Pb cluster, medians and interquartile ranges of blood concentrations (µg/dL) were Cd 0.03 (0.02-0.15), Hg 0.01 (0.01-0.05), Pb 0.39 (0.24-0.74), and As 0.04 (0.04-0.05). Co-exposure with Pb and Cd was also clustered, the p-values for the Gi* statistic for Pb and Cd was <0.01. Cluster membership was associated with lower education levels and higher pre-pregnancy BMI. CONCLUSIONS: Our data support that elevated blood concentrations of Cd and Pb are spatially clustered in this urban environment compared to the surrounding areas. Spatial analysis of metals concentrations in peripheral blood or urine obtained routinely during prenatal care can be useful in surveillance of heavy metal exposure.

Population health initiatives for primary care at Duke University School of Medicine.

To help shape the future of health care in North Carolina, Duke University School of Medicine has implemented several new initiatives aimed at providing primary care providers with the knowledge, skills, and attitudes required to improve population health and health care.

A national strategy to develop pragmatic clinical trials infrastructure.

An important challenge in comparative effectiveness research is the lack of infrastructure to support pragmatic clinical trials, which compare interventions in usual practice settings and subjects. These trials present challenges that differ from those of classical efficacy trials, which are conducted under ideal circumstances, in patients selected for their suitability, and with highly controlled protocols. In 2012, we launched a 1-year learning network to identify high-priority pragmatic clinical trials and to deploy research infrastructure through the NIH Clinical and Translational Science Awards Consortium that could be used to launch and sustain them. The network and infrastructure were initiated as a learning ground and shared resource for investigators and communities interested in developing pragmatic clinical trials. We followed a three-stage process of developing the network, prioritizing proposed trials, and implementing learning exercises that culminated in a 1-day network meeting at the end of the year. The year-long project resulted in five recommendations related to developing the network, enhancing community engagement, addressing regulatory challenges, advancing information technology, and developing research methods. The recommendations can be implemented within 24 months and are designed to lead toward a sustained national infrastructure for pragmatic trials.

Aligning the goals of community-engaged research: why and how academic health centers can successfully engage with communities to improve health.

Community engagement (CE) and community-engaged research (CEnR) are increasingly viewed as the keystone to translational medicine and improving the health of the nation. In this article, the authors seek to assist academic health centers (AHCs) in learning how to better engage with their communities and build a CEnR agenda by suggesting five steps: defining community and identifying partners, learning the etiquette of CE, building a sustainable network of CEnR researchers, recognizing that CEnR will require the development of new methodologies, and improving translation and dissemination plans. Health disparities that lead to uneven access to and quality of care as well as high costs will persist without a CEnR agenda that finds answers to both medical and public health questions. One of the biggest barriers toward a national CEnR agenda, however, are the historical structures and processes of an AHC-including the complexities of how institutional review boards operate, accounting practices and indirect funding policies, and tenure and promotion paths. Changing institutional culture starts with the leadership and commitment of top decision makers in an institution. By aligning the motivations and goals of their researchers, clinicians, and community members into a vision of a healthier population, AHC leadership will not just improve their own institutions but also improve the health of the nation-starting with improving the health of their local communities, one community at a time.

Clinical and translational science awards and community engagement: now is the time to mainstream prevention into the nation's health research agenda.

Although much attention is devoted to the slow process of cutting-edge "bench science" finding its way to clinical translation, less attention is paid to the fact that basic prevention messages, tests, and interventions never find their way into communities. The NIH Clinical & Translational Science Awards program seeks to address a broad mission of improving health, including both speeding up the incorporation of basic science discoveries throughout the clinical research pipeline and incorporating concerns of communities and practices into research agendas. The preventive medicine community now has an important opportunity to marry their mission of promoting and expanding prevention in communities to the nation's medical research agenda. This article suggests opportunities for collaboration.

Defining high-performance teams and physician leadership.

Beset with complex reimbursement and regulatory structures, rapidly advancing technology and a population that is growing increasingly older, sicker, and more obese, the U.S. medical environment needs coordinated interdisciplinary teamwork now more than ever.