Getting cozy with causality: Advances to the causal pathway diagramming method to enhance implementation precision.

Background: Implementation strategies are theorized to work well when carefully matched to implementation determinants and when factors-preconditions, moderators, etc.-that influence strategy effectiveness are prospectively identified and addressed. Existing methods for strategy selection are either imprecise or require significant technical expertise and resources, undermining their utility. This article outlines refinements to causal pathway diagrams (CPDs), a method for articulating the causal process through which implementation strategies work and offers illustrations of their use. Method: CPDs are a visualization tool to represent an implementation strategy, its mechanism(s) (i.e., the processes through which a strategy is thought to operate), determinants it is intended to address, factors that may impede or facilitate its effectiveness, and the series of outcomes that should be expected if the strategy is operating as intended. We offer principles for constructing CPDs and describe their key functions. Results: Applications of the CPD method by study teams from two National Institute of Health-funded Implementation Science Centers and a research grant are presented. These include the use of CPDs to (a) match implementation strategies to determinants, (b) understand the conditions under which an implementation strategy works, and (c) develop causal theories of implementation strategies. Conclusions: CPDs offer a novel method for implementers to select, understand, and improve the effectiveness of implementation strategies. They make explicit theoretical assumptions about strategy operation while supporting practical planning. Early applications have led to method refinements and guidance for the field.

Advances to the Causal Pathway Diagramming Method to Enhance Implementation Precision Plain Language Summary Implementation strategies often fail to produce meaningful improvements in the outcomes we hope to impact. Better tools for choosing, designing, and evaluating implementation strategies may improve their performance. We developed a tool, causal pathway diagrams (CPD), to visualize and describe how implementation strategies are expected to work. In this article, we describe refinements to the CPD tool and accompanying approach. We use real illustrations to show how CPDs can be used to improve how to match strategies to barriers, understand the conditions in which those strategies work best, and develop generalizable theories describing how implementation strategies work. CPDs can serve as both a practical and scientific tool to improve the planning, deployment, and evaluation of implementation strategies. We demonstrate the range of ways that CPDs are being used, from a highly practical tool to improve implementation practice to a scientific approach to advance testing and theorizing about implementation strategies.

A pragmatic randomized clinical trial of multilevel interventions to improve adherence to lung cancer screening (The Larch Study): Study protocol.

BACKGROUND: In real-world settings, low adherence to lung cancer screening (LCS) diminishes population-level benefits of reducing lung cancer mortality. We describe the Larch Study protocol, which tests the effectiveness of two patient-centered interventions (Patient Voices Video and Stepped Reminders) designed to address barriers and improve annual LCS adherence. METHODS: The Larch Study is a pragmatic randomized clinical trial conducted within Kaiser Permanente Washington. Eligible patients (target n = 1606) are aged 50-78 years with an index low-dose CT (LDCT) of the chest with negative or benign findings. With a 2 × 2 factorial-design, patients are individually randomized to 1 of 4 arms: video only, reminders only, both video and reminders, or usual care. The Patient Voices video addresses patient education needs by normalizing LCS, reminding patients when LCS is due, and encouraging social support. Stepped Reminders prompts primary care physicians to order patient's repeat screening LDCT and patients to schedule their scan. Intervention delivery is embedded within routine healthcare, facilitated by shared electronic health record components. Primary outcome is adherence to national LCS clinical guidelines, defined as repeat LDCT within 9-15 months. Patient-reported outcomes are measured via survey (knowledge of LCS, perception of stigma) approximately 8 weeks after index LDCT. Our mixed-methods formative evaluation includes process data, collected during the trial, and interviews with trial participants and stakeholders. DISCUSSION: Results will fill an important scientific gap on multilevel interventions to increase annual LCS adherence and provide opportunities for spread and scale to other healthcare settings. REGISTRATION: Trial is registered at clinicaltrials.gov (#NCT05747443).

Young Women's Perspectives on Being Screened for Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer Risk During Routine Primary Care.

PURPOSE: The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommends screening women to identify individuals eligible for genetic counseling based on a priori hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome (HBOC) risk (i.e., risk assessment). However, risk assessment has not been widely integrated into primary care. This qualitative study explored young women's views on implementing routine HBOC risk assessment with a focus on equity and patient-centeredness. METHODS: We conducted group discussions with young women (aged 21-40 years) receiving care in an integrated health care system. Discussion groups occurred in two phases and used a modified deliberative approach that included a didactic component and prioritized developing consensus. Twenty women participated in one of three initial small group discussions (phase one). All 20 were invited to participate in a subsequent large group discussion (phase two), and 15 of them attended. FINDINGS: Key themes and recommendations were as follows. Risk assessment should be accessible, contextualized, and destigmatized to encourage participation and reduce anxiety, particularly for women who do not know their family history. Providers conducting risk assessments must be equipped to address women's informational needs, relieve emotionality, and plan next steps after positive screens. Finally, to minimize differential screening uptake, health care systems must prioritize equity in program design and contribute to external educational and outreach efforts. CONCLUSION: Young women see pragmatic opportunities for health systems to optimize HBOC screening implementation.

Study protocol: Novel Methods for Implementing Measurement-Based Care with youth in Low-Resource Environments (NIMBLE).

BACKGROUND: For youth receiving care in community mental health centers, comorbidities are the rule rather than the exception. Using measurement-based care (MBC), or the routine evaluation of symptoms to inform care decisions, as the foundation of treatment for youth with comorbid problems significantly improves the impact of psychotherapy by focusing care and building engagement and alliance. MBC increases the rate of symptom improvement, detects clients who would otherwise deteriorate, and alerts clinicians to non-responders. Despite its demonstrated utility, MBC is rarely implemented with fidelity; less than 15% of providers report using MBC per recommendations. Previous efforts to support MBC implementation have yielded suboptimal outcomes, in part, due to organizations' challenges with identifying and prioritizing barriers and selecting and developing strategies to overcome them. New methods are needed for identifying and prioritizing barriers, and matching strategies to barriers to optimize MBC implementation and treatment quality to improve youth mental health outcomes in community settings. METHODS: Pragmatic implementation methods will be piloted in four diverse community mental health centers. Methods include (a) rapid evidence synthesis; (b) rapid ethnography; (c) design kits (e.g., kits with disposable cameras, journals, maps); (d) barrier prioritization, and (e) causal pathway diagramming. These activities will generate actionable barriers; subsequently, we will use facilitated group processes to prioritize barriers and develop causal pathway diagrams to match strategies to barriers to create implementation plans that optimize MBC fidelity (Aim 1). We will track strategy deployment for 6 months, then compare MBC fidelity for another 6 months post-implementation with data from 2 years of historical controls (Aim 2). Finally, we will co-design a toolkit for design kit methods with youth and the practice and scientific communities (Aim 3). DISCUSSION: Optimizing MBC implementation in community mental health centers could transform youth mental health care by ensuring the most pressing symptoms are targeted early in treatment. The discussion section highlights expected challenges and limits to using the five methods, including recruitment and engagement given the high pressure on community mental health settings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov. NCT05644756 . Registered on 18 November 2022. This trial was retrospectively registered.

Study protocol for a factorial-randomized controlled trial evaluating the implementation, costs, effectiveness, and sustainment of digital therapeutics for substance use disorder in primary care (DIGITS Trial).

BACKGROUND: Experts recommend that treatment for substance use disorder (SUD) be integrated into primary care. The Digital Therapeutics for Opioids and Other SUD (DIGITS) Trial tests strategies for implementing reSET® and reSET-O®, which are prescription digital therapeutics for SUD and opioid use disorder, respectively, that include the community reinforcement approach, contingency management, and fluency training to reinforce concept mastery. This purpose of this trial is to test whether two implementation strategies improve implementation success (Aim 1) and achieve better population-level cost effectiveness (Aim 2) over a standard implementation approach. METHODS/DESIGN: The DIGITS Trial is a hybrid type III cluster-randomized trial. It examines outcomes of implementation strategies, rather than studying clinical outcomes of a digital therapeutic. It includes 22 primary care clinics from a healthcare system in Washington State and patients with unhealthy substance use who visit clinics during an active implementation period (up to one year). Primary care clinics implemented reSET and reSET-O using a multifaceted implementation strategy previously used by clinical leaders to roll-out smartphone apps ("standard implementation" including discrete strategies such as clinician training, electronic health record tools). Clinics were randomized as 21 sites in a 2x2 factorial design to receive up to two added implementation strategies: (1) practice facilitation, and/or (2) health coaching. Outcome data are derived from electronic health records and logs of digital therapeutic usage. Aim 1's primary outcomes include reach of the digital therapeutics to patients and fidelity of patients' use of the digital therapeutics to clinical recommendations. Substance use and engagement in SUD care are additional outcomes. In Aim 2, population-level cost effectiveness analysis will inform the economic benefit of the implementation strategies compared to standard implementation. Implementation is monitored using formative evaluation, and sustainment will be studied for up to one year using qualitative and quantitative research methods. DISCUSSION: The DIGITS Trial uses an experimental design to test whether implementation strategies increase and improve the delivery of digital therapeutics for SUDs when embedded in a large healthcare system. It will provide data on the potential benefits and cost-effectiveness of alternative implementation strategies. CLINICALTRIALS: gov Identifier: NCT05160233 (Submitted 12/3/2021). https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05160233.

Theory of Planned Behavior and Mindfulness Intentions in Chronic Low Back Pain.

Objectives: Theory of planned of behavior (TPB) constructs have been linked to health behavior intentions. Intentions to try mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR), a first-line therapy for chronic low back pain (cLBP), have been less studied. This study aimed to identify which TPB constructs could inform strategies to improve adoption of MBSR. Methods: People with cLBP (n = 457) read a description of MBSR then completed survey items assessing TPB constructs: attitudes, norms, self-efficacy, perceived control, and intentions to try MBSR training. Results: Structural equation modeling showed self-efficacy/control (coefficient: 0.564), norms (0.245), and attitudes (0.131) were all positively associated with intentions to try mindfulness trainings. Conclusions: Results suggest self-efficacy/control may be the most strongly related TPB construct with intentions to try MBSR. Dissemination of MBSR for cLBP could focus on adapting the intervention to increase accessibility and improving available resources to overcome logistical barriers (online formats, drop-in classes). Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12671-022-02022-2.

A value proposition for pragmatic clinical trials.

The authors examine the origin, benefits, and challenges of pragmatic clinical trials to assess the ultimate value of this research design.

An experimental study to inform adoption of mindfulness-based stress reduction in chronic low back pain.

BACKGROUND: Chronic low back pain is a common and sometimes disabling condition, and mindfulness-based stress reduction is recommended as a first line of therapy. This study tested whether different descriptions of mindfulness training altered based on influential intervention characteristics increased adoption intentions. METHODS: People with chronic low back pain (n = 452) were randomized to review one of four mindfulness training descriptions in an online survey using a 2 × 2 factorial design. The first factor was evidence strength and quality with relative advantage (ER). The second factor was adaptability, trialability, complexity, and design quality and packaging (AD). Each factor had two levels: a description of standardized mindfulness training that described each intervention characteristic and a patient-centered description emphasizing flexibility and patient testimonials. The primary outcomes were intentions to try mindfulness training and practice mindfulness at home. Using structural equation modeling with a bootstrapped distribution, we tested six mediators, three of which are Theory of Planned Behavior predictors of intention-self-efficacy, norms, and attitudes- and the other three are predictors of adoption-feasibility, appropriateness, and acceptability. RESULTS: Overall, the mindfulness training descriptions were not associated with an increase in intentions compared to the classic vignette (11/12 p's > 0.05). Most descriptions were unrelated to mediators except the classic ER with patient-centered AD was associated with higher self-efficacy/control and feasibility (p's ≤ 0.05; standardized effect range: 0.111-0.125). Self-efficacy/control (training standardized coefficient: 0.531, home: 0.686), norms (training: 0.303, home: 0.256), and attitudes (training: 0.316, home: 0.293) were all positively associated with intentions to adopt mindfulness training and home practice. Feasibility (training: 0.185; home: 0.293) and acceptability (training: 0.639; home: 0.554) were positively related to intentions to adopt mindfulness training. Appropriateness was related to intentions to adopt home practice (0.187) but not mindfulness training (0.100). None of the indirect effects from experimental group to intentions was significant (all p's > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Self-efficacy/control and acceptability may be key mediators for increasing patient adoption of mindfulness. Because experimental manipulation did not substantially change intentions to adopt mindfulness, the presentation and delivery of MBSR may need to be tailored to the individual patient's needs rather than a specific format for chronic low back pain.

What strategies are used by clinician champions to reduce low-value care?

Background: Clinician champions are front-line clinicians who advocate for and influence practice change in their local context. The strategies they use when leading efforts to reduce the use of low-value care have not been well described. The purpose of this study is to identify and describe strategies used by six clinician champions who led a low-value care initiative in their clinical setting. Methods: Qualitative data collected during an overuse reduction initiative led by clinician champions were used to identify strategies, guided by the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change compilation of strategies. Clinician champions were asked to rank the importance of these activities and indicate which one of the six most important activities they would be willing to discuss in an interview. A 30-min semi-structured interview was conducted with each clinician about the activity they selected and thematically analyzed. Results: Twelve Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change strategies were identified. The top six strategies discussed during interviews were: build a coalition, conduct a local needs assessment, develop a formal implementation blueprint, conduct educational meetings, use facilitation, and develop clinical reminders. Common themes that emerged across all interviews were the use of data to engage clinicians in conversations, including the patient's perspective in designing the interventions, and investing the time upfront to plan and launch the initiative because of the inherent challenges of relinquishing a service. Conclusions: Clinician champions identified multiple strategies as important when de-implementing a low-value service. Many were used to engage in conversations with stakeholders, including leadership, providers, and patients, to increase buy-in and support, challenge beliefs, promote behavior change, and gather insights about next steps in their effort. Future work is needed to better understand how prepare clinicians for this role and to understand the mechanisms through which these strategies might be effective.

Patient and caregiver perspectives on a tool to increase recognition of undiagnosed dementia: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Early detection of dementia may improve patient care and quality of life, yet up to half of people with dementia are undiagnosed. Electronic health record (EHR) data could be used to help identify individuals at risk of having undiagnosed dementia for outreach and assessment, but acceptability to people with dementia and caregivers is unknown. METHODS: We conducted five focus groups at Kaiser Permanente Washington (KPWA), an integrated healthcare system in Washington State, to explore people's feelings about timing of dementia diagnosis, use of EHR-based tools to predict risk of undiagnosed dementia, and communication about risk. We recruited people enrolled in KPWA who had dementia or mild cognitive impairment, people enrolled in KPWA who had neither diagnosis, and caregivers (i.e., loved ones of people with dementia who assist with various tasks of daily life). People who were non-white or Hispanic were oversampled. Two team members analyzed transcripts using thematic coding. RESULTS: Forty people (63% women; 59% non-white or Hispanic) participated in the focus groups. Themes that arose included: perceived pros and cons of early dementia diagnosis; questions and concerns about a potential tool to assess risk of undiagnosed dementia; and preferences related to patient-provider conversations disclosing that a person was at high risk to have undiagnosed dementia. Participants supported early diagnosis, describing benefits such as time to adjust to the disease, plan, involve caregivers, and identify resources. They also acknowledged the possible psychosocial toll of receiving the diagnosis. Participants supported use of an EHR-based tool, but some people worried about accuracy and privacy. Participants emphasized that information about risk of undiagnosed dementia should be communicated thoughtfully by a trusted provider and that the conversation should include advice about prognosis, treatment options and other resources when a new dementia diagnosis was made. CONCLUSION: People with dementia or mild cognitive impairment, people with neither diagnosis, and caregivers of people with dementia supported using EHR-based tools to help identify individuals at risk of having undiagnosed dementia. Such tools must be implemented carefully to address concerns and ensure that people living with dementia and their caregivers are adequately supported.

Understanding Patient and Clinical Stakeholder Perspectives to Improve Adherence to Lung Cancer Screening.

INTRODUCTION: Limited evidence-based implementation strategies exist for maintaining lung cancer screening. We evaluated the Lung Cancer Screening Program at Kaiser Permanente Washington (KPWA) to develop multilevel interventions to improve screening adherence. METHODS: We conducted a concurrent mixed-methods study 1) to measure adherence to repeat screening with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT); 2) to interview KPWA stakeholders to understand the Lung Cancer Screening Program; and 3) to conduct codesign workshops with KPWA members and researchers. We used descriptive statistics to describe adherence, and rapid qualitative data analysis for stakeholder interviews and workshops. RESULTS: Between 2015 and 2019, 2089 KPWA members had initial LDCT scans with negative, benign or short-interval follow-up results. Among those with sufficient follow-up, the proportion with on-time repeat screening after a negative LDCT was 26.4% after the initial scan, and increased to 43.1% on subsequent scans. Opportunities for health-care system improvement included clarification of clinical roles and responsibilities, care coordination across providers, ongoing training in lung cancer screening, and revising electronic health record tools. From patient perspectives, facilitators to repeat screening were making screening personalized and convenient; offering consistent messages and reminders in different modes; increasing patient knowledge about benefits, harms, and expectations of LDCT; and providing nonfinancial and financial incentives for adherence. From a storyboard exercise, we identified 10 design features for lung cancer screening interventions, including versatility of communication, social support, and knowledge. CONCLUSION: We identified clear gaps in adherence to lung cancer screenings, organizational and clinical barriers to care, and design features for patient-centered interventions to improve lung cancer screening in US settings.

A pilot study comparing tools for tracking implementation strategies and treatment adaptations.

Background: Tailoring implementation strategies and adapting treatments to better fit the local context may improve their effectiveness. However, there is a dearth of valid, reliable, pragmatic measures that allow for the prospective tracking of strategies and adaptations according to reporting recommendations. This study describes the development and pilot testing of three tools to be designed to serve this purpose. Methods: Measure development was informed by two systematic reviews of the literature (implementation strategies and treatment adaptation). The three resulting tools vary with respect to the degree of structure (brainstorming log = low, activity log = moderate, detailed tracking log = high). To prospectively track treatment adaptations and implementation strategies, three stakeholder groups (treatment developer, implementation practitioners, and mental health providers) were randomly assigned one tool per week through an anonymous web-based survey for 12 weeks and incentivized to participate. Three established implementation outcome measures, the Acceptability of Intervention Measure, Intervention Appropriateness Measure, and Feasibility of Intervention Measure, were used to assess the tools. Semi-structured interviews were conducted to gather more nuanced information from stakeholders regarding their perceptions of the tools and the tracking process. Results: The three tracking tools demonstrated moderate to good acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility; the activity log was deemed the most feasible of the three tools. Implementation practitioners rated the tools the highest of the three stakeholder groups. The tools took an average of 15 min or less to complete. Conclusion: This study sought to fill methodological gaps that prevent stakeholders and researchers from discerning which strategies are most important to deploy for promoting implementation and sustainment of evidence-based practices. These tools would allow researchers and practitioners to track whether activities were treatment adaptations or implementation strategies and what barrier(s) each targets. These tools could inform prospective tailoring of implementation strategies and treatment adaptations, which would promote scale out and spread. Plain Language Summary: Strategies to support the implementation of evidence-based practices may be more successful if they are carefully customized based on local factors. Evidence-based practices themselves may be thoughtfully changed to better meet the needs of the settings and recipients. This study reports on a pilot study that aimed to create various types of tools to help individuals involved in implementation efforts track the actions they take to modify and implement interventions. These tools allow individuals to track the types of activities they are involved in, when the activities occurred, who was involved in the implementation efforts, and the reasons or rationale for the actions. The three tools in this study used a combination of open-ended and forced-response questions to test how the type of data recorded changed. Participants generally found the tools quick and easy to use and helpful in planning the delivery of an evidence-based practice. Most participants wanted more training in implementation science terminology and how to complete the tracking tools. Participating mental health providers would have liked more opportunities to review the data collected from the tools with their supervisors to use the data to improve the delivery of the evidence-based practice. These tools can help researchers, providers, and staff involved in implementation efforts to better understand what actions are needed to improve implementation success. Future research should address gaps identified in this study, such as the need to involve more participants in the tool development process.

Fostering Partnerships with the Safety Net: An Evaluation of Kaiser Permanente's Community Ambassador Program in the Mid-Atlantic States.

INTRODUCTION: Kaiser Permanente (KP) Mid-Atlantic States has partnered with communities in its service area since 2011 to provide health services to underserved individuals. As part of KP's Community Benefit investment, the Community Ambassador Program places KP advanced-practice clinicians in safety-net clinics to share best practices and to improve access and quality of care. OBJECTIVE: To report program outcomes and disseminate lessons learned. METHODS: Using data from participating clinics, we retrospectively evaluated the program and estimated Community Ambassadors' contributions to clinic capacity, patient access, evidence-based care, and clinical quality measures. Furthermore, we conducted 29 semistructured phone interviews with stakeholders. Questions focused on program benefits, challenges, learning, and sustainability. RESULTS: From 2013 to 2017, Community Ambassadors filled up to 32.8 full-time equivalent positions and conducted 294,436 patient encounters in 19 clinics. In certain years and for subsets of clinics, Community Ambassadors performed above average on 2 high-priority quality measures: Cervical cancer screening for women aged 21 to 64 years and diabetes (blood glucose) control. Interviews with 15 Community Ambassadors, 15 health centers leaders, and 7 KP Mid-Atlantic States staff members revealed that Community Ambassadors improved patient access, clinic capacity, and care quality. Ambassadors also exported KP best practices and supported KP's community relations. Challenges included patient acuity, clinic resources, staff turnover, and long-term sustainability. CONCLUSION: The Community Ambassador Program achieved its goals and had clear benefits, offering a model for large health care systems wanting to collaborate with community-based clinics. Careful planning is needed to ensure that positive results are sustained.

One-Year Outcomes of an Integrated Multiple Sclerosis Disease Management Program.

BACKGROUND: Multiple sclerosis (MS) is associated with high total health care cost, the majority of which is attributable to medications. Patients with MS are less likely to experience relapses, emergency department (ED) visits, and hospitalizations when they are adherent to disease-modifying treatments. Disease management programs are hypothesized to improve medication adherence thereby improving clinical and economic outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the clinical and economic effects of a specialty pharmacy and chronic disease management program for patients with MS from a health plan perspective. METHODS: This study was a retrospective analysis using prescription drug claims, medical claims, and electronic medical record information (2013-2015) 1 year before and after enrollment in the disease management program for members with 24 months of continuous health plan coverage. Medication adherence was calculated using proportion of days covered (PDC). Relapse rate was defined as an MS outpatient visit associated with a corticosteroid dispense within 7 days of the visit or an MS hospitalization. Disease progression was assessed using the Modified Expanded Disability Status Scale (mEDSS). Resource use included outpatient visits, ED visits, and hospitalizations. Cost information was collected as health plan-paid amount and was reported in 2013 U.S. dollars. RESULTS: The analysis included 377 patients (mean age 55 years, 76.4% female). After enrollment in the program, 78.7% of the study group had a PDC of ≥ 0.80 compared with 70.0% before enrollment (P < 0.001). There was no difference in MS relapse rate (0.25 after vs. 0.45 before, P = 0.11) or mEDSS score (3.77 after vs. 3.76 before, P = 0.19). Health care resource utilization was minimal and did not change significantly throughout the study period: mean outpatient visits (13.09 after vs. 13.78 before, P = 0.69); mean ED visits (0.18 after vs. 0.16 before, P = 0.60); and mean hospitalizations (0.12 after vs. 0.12 before, P = 1.00). This nonsignificant finding remained when the analysis was limited to MS-related visits only. Average annual health plan spend per patient on MS medications significantly increased ($55,835 after vs. $40,883 before, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Specialty pharmacy and chronic disease management for patients with MS can increase the proportion of patients adherent to medication. The increase in health plan spend on MS medications is not offset by savings in health care resource utilization. DISCLOSURES: This study was funded by Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute and Kaiser Permanente Washington Pharmacy Administration. The authors have no disclosures to report.

Design and Implementation of a Physician Coaching Pilot to Promote Value-Based Referrals to Specialty Care.

INTRODUCTION: Referral rates to specialty care from primary care physicians vary widely. To address this variability, we developed and pilot tested a peer-to-peer coaching program for primary care physicians. OBJECTIVES: To assess the feasibility and acceptability of the coaching program, which gave physicians access to their individual-level referral data, strategies, and a forum to discuss referral decisions. METHODS: The team designed the program using physician input and a synthesis of the literature on the determinants of referral. We conducted a single-arm observational pilot with eight physicians which made up four dyads, and conducted a qualitative evaluation. RESULTS: Primary reasons for making referrals were clinical uncertainty and patient request. Physicians perceived doctor-to-doctor dialogue enabled mutual learning and a pathway to return joy to the practice of primary care medicine. The program helped physicians become aware of their own referral data, reasons for making referrals, and new strategies to use in their practice. Time constraints caused by large workloads were cited as a barrier both to participating in the pilot and to practicing in ways that optimize referrals. Physicians reported that the program could be sustained and spread if time for mentoring conversations was provided and/or nonfinancial incentives or compensation was offered. CONCLUSION: This physician mentoring program aimed at reducing specialty referral rates is feasible and acceptable in primary care settings. Increasing the appropriateness of referrals has the potential to provide patient-centered care, reduce costs for the system, and improve physician satisfaction.

The characteristics of registered nurses whose licenses expire: why they leave nursing and implications for retention and re-entry.

Little is known about RNs who drop their licenses and their potential re-entry into the nursing workforce. The results of this study provide insight into reasons nurses leave their careers and the barriers to re-entry, all important indicators of the current professional climate for nursing. While representing only one state, these findings suggest that RNs who allow their licenses to expire do so because they have reached retirement age or, among those who do not cite age as a factor, because many are unable or unwilling to work in the field. Inactive nurses who might otherwise appear to be likely candidates for re-entry into the profession may not be easily encouraged to practice nursing again without significant changes in their personal circumstances or the health care work environment. Effective ways to address current and pending RN workforce shortages include expanding RN education capacity to produce more RNs who can contribute to the workforce across the coming decades, and promote work environments in which RNs want to, and are able to, practice across a long nursing career.

Characteristics of registered nurses in rural versus urban areas: implications for strategies to alleviate nursing shortages in the United States.

METHODS: This study compares characteristics of rural and urban registered nurses (RNs) in the United States using data from the 2000 National Sample Survey of Registered Nurses. RNs in 3 types of rural areas are examined using the rural-urban commuting area taxonomy. FINDINGS: Rural and urban RNs are similar in age and sex; nonwhites and Hispanics are underrepresented in both groups. Rural RNs have less nursing education, are less likely to work in hospitals, and are more likely to work full time and in public/community health than urban RNs. The more rural an RN's residence, the more likely he/she commutes to another area for work and the lower salary he/she receives. CONCLUSIONS: Strategies to reduce nurse shortages should consider differences in education, work patterns, and commuting behavior among rural and urban RNs. Solutions for rural areas require understanding of the impact of the workplace on these behaviors.

The contribution of nurse practitioners and physician assistants to generalist care in Washington State.

OBJECTIVE: To quantify the total contribution to generalist care made by nurse practitioners (NPs) and physician assistants (PAs) in Washington State. DATA SOURCES: State professional licensure renewal survey data from 1998-1999. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional. Data on medical specialty, place of practice, and outpatient visits performed were used to estimate productivity of generalist physicians, NPs, and PAs. Provider head counts were adjusted for missing specialty and productivity data and converted into family physician full-time equivalents (FTEs) to facilitate estimation of total contribution to generalist care made by each provider type. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Nurse practitioners and physician assistants make up 23.4 percent of the generalist provider population and provide 21.0 percent of the generalist outpatient visits in Washington State. The NP/PA contribution to generalist care is higher in rural areas (24.7 percent of total visits compared to 20.1 percent in urban areas). The PAs and NPs provide 50.3 percent of generalist visits provided by women in rural areas, 36.5 percent in urban areas. When productivity data were converted into family physician FTEs, the productivity adjustments were large. A total of 4,189 generalist physicians produced only 2,760 family physician FTEs (1 FTE = 105 outpatient visits per week). The NP and PA productivity adjustments were also quite large. CONCLUSIONS: Accurate estimates of available generalist care must take into account the contributions of NPs and PAs. Additionally, simple head counts of licensed providers are likely to result in substantial overestimates of available care. Actual productivity data or empirically derived adjustment factors must be used for accurate estimation of provider shortages.

Who is caring for the underserved? A comparison of primary care physicians and nonphysician clinicians in California and Washington.

PURPOSE: Little is known about whether different types of physician and nonphysician primary care clinicians vary in their propensity to care for underserved populations. The objective of this study was to compare the geographic distribution and patient populations of physician and nonphysician primary care clinicians. METHODS: This study was a cross-sectional analysis of 1998 administrative and survey data on primary care clinicians (family physicians, general internists, general pediatricians, nurse practitioners, physician assistants, and certified nurse-midwives) in California and Washington. For geographic analysis, main outcome measures were practice in a rural area, a vulnerable population area (communities with high proportions of minorities or low-income residents), or a health professions shortage area (HPSA). For patient population analysis, outcomes were the proportions of Medicaid, uninsured, and minority patients in the practice. RESULTS: Physician assistants ranked first or second in each state in the proportion of their members practicing in rural areas and HPSAs, and in California physician assistants also had the greatest proportion of their members working in vulnerable populations areas (P < .001). Compared with primary care physicians overall, nurse practitioners and certified nurse-midwives also tended to have a greater proportion of their members in rural areas and HPSAs (P < .001). Family physicians were much more likely than other primary care physicians to work in rural areas and HPSAs (P < .001). Compared with physicians, nonphysician clinicians in California had a substantially greater proportion of Medicaid, uninsured, and minority patients (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Nonphysician primary care clinicians and family physicians have a greater propensity to care for underserved populations than do primary care physicians in other specialties. Achieving a more equitable pattern of service to needy populations will require ongoing, active commitment by policy makers, educational institutions, and the professions to a mission of public service and to incentives that support and promote care to the underserved.