Surfacing the causal assumptions and active ingredients of healthcare quality improvement interventions: An application to primary care opioid prescribing.

Background: Efforts to maximize the impact of healthcare improvement interventions are hampered when intervention components are not well defined or described, precluding the ability to understand how and why interventions are expected to work. Method: We partnered with two organizations delivering province-wide quality improvement interventions to establish how they envisaged their interventions lead to change (their underlying causal assumptions) and to identify active ingredients (behavior change techniques [BCTs]). The interventions assessed were an audit and feedback report and an academic detailing program. Both focused on supporting safer opioid prescribing in primary care in Ontario, Canada. Data collection involved semi-structured interviews with intervention developers (n = 8) and a content analysis of intervention documents. Analyses unpacked and articulated how the interventions were intended to achieve change and how this was operationalized. Results: Developers anticipated that the feedback report would provide physicians with a clear understanding of their own prescribing patterns in comparison to others. In the feedback report, we found an emphasis on BCTs consistent with that assumption (feedback on behavior; social comparison). The detailing was designed to provide tailored support to enable physicians to overcome barriers to change and to gradually enact specific practice changes for patients based on improved communication. In the detailing materials, we found an emphasis on instructions on how to perform the behavior, for a range of behaviors (e.g., tapering opioids, treating opioid use disorder). The materials were supplemented by detailer-enacted BCTs (e.g., social support [practical]; goal setting [behavior]; review behavioral goal[s]). Conclusions: The interventions included a small range of BCTs addressing various clinical behaviors. This work provides a methodological example of how to apply a behavioral lens to surface the active ingredients, target clinical behaviors, and causal assumptions of existing large-scale improvement interventions that could be applied in other contexts to optimize effectiveness and facilitate scale and spread.

What is already known about the topic?: The causal assumptions and key components of implementation interventions are often not well described, which limits the influence of implementation science on implementation practice. What does this paper add?: This work provides an approach for surfacing the causal assumptions from intervention developers (through interviews with eight participants) and active ingredients from intervention materials, focusing on two real-world interventions already delivered at scale and designed to promote safer opioid prescribing. The analysis provides a comprehensive intervention description and reveals the extent to which final interventions align with developers' intentions. What are the implications for practice, research, or policy?: The findings provide a foundation for future work which will describe the effectiveness of these interventions (alone and in combination) and explore whether they achieve change in the intended ways, thereby providing an example of a more fulsome intervention evaluation. More broadly, our methods can be used by implementation practitioners to review and reflect on their intervention development process and support comprehensive intervention descriptions.

Academic detailing to improve appropriate opioid prescribing: a mixed-methods process evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Academic detailing, an educational outreach service for family physicians, was funded by the Ontario government to address gaps in opioid prescribing and pain management. We sought to evaluate the impact of academic detailing on opioid prescribing, and to understand how and why academic detailing may have influenced opioid prescribing. METHODS: In this mixed-methods study, we collected quantitative and qualitative data concurrently from 2017 to 2019 in Ontario, Canada. We analyzed prescribing outcomes descriptively for a sample of participating physicians and compared them with a matched control group. We invited physicians to participate in qualitative interviews to discuss their experiences in academic detailing. Development and analysis of qualitative interviews was informed by the Theoretical Domains Framework. We triangulated qualitative and quantitative findings to understand the mechanisms that drove changes in opioid prescribing. RESULTS: Physicians receiving academic detailing (n = 238) achieved a greater reduction in opioid prescribing than matched controls (n = 238). Seventeen physicians completed interviews and reported that academic detailing addressed barriers to pain care, including lack of confidence, difficult interactions with patients and prescribing and tapering decisions. Academic detailing reinforced knowledge about opioid prescribing and pain management. Discussion of complex patients and talking points to use during challenging conversations were described as key drivers of practice change. INTERPRETATION: The findings of this real-world, mixed-methods evaluation explain how an academic detailing service addressed key barriers and enablers to limit high-risk opioid prescribing in primary care. This nuanced understanding will be used to inform, spread and scale academic detailing.

Effects of an academic detailing service on benzodiazepine prescribing patterns in primary care.

BACKGROUND: Benzodiazepines are commonly used to treat anxiety and/or insomnia but are associated with substantial safety risks. Changes to prescribing patterns in primary care may be facilitated through tailored quality improvement strategies. Academic detailing (AD) may be an effective method of promoting safe benzodiazepine prescribing. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of AD on benzodiazepine prescribing among family physicians. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We used an interrupted time series matched cohort design using population-based administrative claims databases. Participants were family physicians practicing in Ontario, Canada. The intervention was a voluntary AD service which involves brief service-oriented educational outreach visits by a trained pharmacist. The focus was on key messages for safer benzodiazepine prescribing in primary care with an emphasis on judicious prescribing to older adults aged 65 and older. Physicians in the intervention group were those who received at least one AD visit on benzodiazepine use between June 2019 and February 2020. Physicians in the control group were included if they did not receive an AD visit during the study period. Intervention physicians were matched to control physicians 1:4, on a variety of characteristics. Physicians were excluded if they had inactive billing or billing of less than 100 unique patient visits in the calendar year prior to the index date. The primary outcome was mean total benzodiazepine prescriptions at the level of the physician. Secondary outcomes were rate (per 100) of patients with long-term prescriptions, high-risk prescriptions, newly started prescriptions, and benzodiazepine-related patient harms. Data were analyzed using a repeated measures pre-post comparison with an intention-to-treat. Analyses were then stratified to focus on effects within higher-prescribing physicians. There were 1337 physicians were included in the study; 237 who received AD and 1064 who did not. There was no significant change in benzodiazepine prescribing when considering all physicians in the intervention and matched control groups. Although not significant, a greater reduction in total benzodiazepine prescriptions was observed amongst the highest-volume prescribing physicians who received the intervention (% change in slope = -0.53, 95%CI = -2.34 to 1.30, p > .05). The main limitation of our study was the voluntary nature of the AD intervention, which may have introduced a self-selection bias of physicians most open to changing their prescribing. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that future AD interventions should focus on physicians with the greatest room for improvement to their prescribing.

The opioid manager: a point-of-care tool to facilitate the use of the Canadian Opioid Guideline.

The Opioid Manager is designed to be used as a point-of-care tool for providers prescribing opioids for chronic noncancer pain. It condenses the key elements from the Canadian Opioid Guideline and can be used as a chart insert. The Opioid Manager has been validated and is available for download from the Guideline's Web site http://nationalpaincentre.mcmaster.ca/opioidmanager/. The Opioid Manager is divided into the following four parts: A) before you write the first script, B) initiation trial, C) maintenance and monitoring, and D) when is it time to decrease the dose or stop the opioid completely? The Opioid Manager has been downloaded by 1,432 users: 47 percent family physicians, 18 percent pharmacists, 13 percent other physicians, and 22 percent miscellaneous. To show how to use the Opioid Manager, the authors created a 10-minute video that is available on the Internet. The Opioid Manager is being translated to French, Spanish, Portuguese, and Farsi.

Optimizing care in osteoporosis: the Canadian quality circle project.

BACKGROUND: While the Osteoporosis Canada 2002 Canadian guidelines provided evidence based strategies in preventing, diagnosing, and managing this condition, publication and distribution of guidelines have not, in and of themselves, been shown to alter physicians clinical approaches. We hypothesize that primary care physicians enrolled in the Quality Circle project would change their patient management of osteoporosis in terms of awareness of osteoporosis risk factors and bone mineral density testing in accordance with the guidelines. METHODS: The project consisted of five Quality Circle phases that included: 1) Training & Baseline Data Collection, 2) First Educational Intervention & First Follow-Up Data Collection 3) First Strategy Implementation Session, 4) Final Educational Intervention & Final Follow-up Data Collection, and 5) Final Strategy Implementation Session. A total of 340 circle members formed 34 quality circles and participated in the study. The generalized estimating equations approach was used to model physician awareness of risk factors for osteoporosis and appropriate utilization of bone mineral density testing pre and post educational intervention (first year of the study). Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were calculated. RESULTS: After the 1st year of the study, physicians' certainty of their patients' risk factor status increased. Certainty varied from an OR of 1.4 (95% CI: 1.1, 1.8) for prior vertebral fracture status to 6.3 (95% CI: 2.3, 17.9) for prior hip fracture status. Furthermore, bone mineral density testing increased in high risk as compared with low risk patients (OR: 1.4; 95% CI: 1.2, 1.7). CONCLUSION: Quality Circle methodology was successful in increasing both physicians' awareness of osteoporosis risk factors and appropriate bone mineral density testing in accordance with the 2002 Canadian guidelines.

A novel network for mentoring family physicians on mental health issues using E-mail.

OBJECTIVE: Family practitioners are significant providers of mental health care and routinely report difficulty acquiring timely support in this area. The Collaborative Mental Health Care Network assembled groups of family practitioners and provided them with mental health practitioner mentors. This article addresses communication in the Network, its effect on family practitioners, and the role e-mail plays. METHODS: This descriptive study utilizes two sources of data: a quality assurance survey administered to family practitioners in the Network and a sampling of e-mail correspondence between family practitioners and mental health and addiction mentors, examined qualitatively. RESULTS: Family practitioners in the Network requested consultation on pharmacotherapy (53%), psychotherapy (34%), treatment review (27%), and diagnosis (24%). Satisfaction with the Network was high, with 88% of family practitioners reporting an improvement in ability to provide mental health care. E-mail analysis suggests that mentors convey information directly and indirectly and that a knowledge hierarchy, but not a power hierarchy, develops. The trusted relationship between the mentee and mentor is an important context for effective education. CONCLUSION: This model of mentoring is highly satisfactory to family practitioners and correlates with increased confidence in caring for patients with mental health issues. E-mail is a promising strategy for effective feedback and support between family practitioners and specialists.

Canadian Quality Circle pilot project in osteoporosis: rationale, methods, and feasibility.

UNLABELLED: PROBLEM ADDRESSED Family physicians are not adequately following the 2002 Osteoporosis Canada guidelines for providing optimal care to patients with osteoporosis. OBJECTIVE OF PROGRAM: The Canadian Quality Circle (CQC) pilot project was developed to assess the feasibility of the CQC project design and to gather information for implementing a national study of quality circles (QCs). The national study would assess whether use ofQCs could improve family physicians' adherence to the osteoporosis guidelines. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION: The pilot project enrolled 52 family physicians and involved 7 QCs. The project had 3 phases: training and baseline data collection, educational intervention and follow-up data collection, and sessions on implementing strategies for care. CONCLUSION: Findings from the pilot study showed that the CQC project was well designed and well received. Use of QCs appeared to be feasible for transferring knowledge and giving physicians an opportunity to analyze work-related problems and develop solutions to them.

Shared mental health care. Model for supporting and mentoring family physicians.

PROBLEM BEING ADDRESSED: Family physicians lack access to psychiatrists and mental health services for patients with serious and persistent mental illnesses. OBJECTIVE OF PROGRAM: To develop a mentoring program to provide FPs with education and e-mail, telephone, and face-to-face support for managing patients with mental illness. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION: The Ontario College of Family Physicians' Collaborative Mental Health Care Network developed a mentoring program. Family physicians are grouped according to clinical interest with psychiatrist and general practice psychotherapist mentors whom they can contact for help. Communication is established via e-mail, telephone, fax, or listserv, or even face to face. Monitoring and evaluation is carried out through surveys and chart audits to examine use of, satisfaction with, and effectiveness of the program. CONCLUSION: Mental health care can be enhanced through collaborative at-a-distance relationships between FPs and psychotherapists and psychiatrists. Family physicians can get timely consultation in the areas of psychotherapy and pharmacotherapy, and access to community resources.