Trading-off privacy and utility: the Washington State experience assessing the performance of a public health digital exposure notification system for coronavirus disease 2019.

OBJECTIVE: Digital exposure notifications (DEN) systems were an emergency response to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, harnessing smartphone-based technology to enhance conventional pandemic response strategies such as contact tracing. We identify and describe performance measurement constructs relevant to the implementation of DEN tools: (1) reach (number of users enrolled in the intervention); (2) engagement (utilization of the intervention); and (3) effectiveness in preventing transmissions of COVID-19 (impact of the intervention). We also describe WA State's experience utilizing these constructs to design data-driven evaluation approaches. METHODS: We conducted an environmental scan of DEN documentation and relevant publications. Participation in multidisciplinary collaborative environments facilitated shared learning. Compilation of available data sources and their relevance to implementation and operation workflows were synthesized to develop implementation evaluation constructs. RESULTS: We identified 8 useful performance indicators within reach, engagement, and effectiveness constructs. DISCUSSION: We use implementation science to frame the evaluation of DEN tools by linking the theoretical constructs with the metrics available in the underlying disparate, deidentified, and aggregate data infrastructure. Our challenges in developing meaningful metrics include limited data science competencies in public health, validation of analytic methodologies in the complex and evolving pandemic environment, and the lack of integration with the public health infrastructure. CONCLUSION: Continued collaboration and multidisciplinary consensus activities can improve the utility of DEN tools for future public health emergencies.

"What Will Happen If I Say Yes?" Perspectives on a Standardized Firearm Access Question Among Adults With Depressive Symptoms.

OBJECTIVE: Addressing firearm access is recommended when patients are identified as being at risk of suicide. However, the practice of assessing firearm access is controversial, and no national guidelines exist to inform practice. This study qualitatively explored patient perspectives on a routine question about firearm access to optimize the patient centeredness of this practice in the context of suicide risk. METHODS: Electronic health record data were used to identify primary care patients reporting depressive symptoms, including suicidal thoughts, within 2 weeks of sampling. Participants completed a semistructured telephone interview (recorded and transcribed), which focused broadly on the experience of being screened for suicidality and included specific questions to elicit beliefs and opinions about being asked a standard firearm access question. Directive (deductive) and conventional (inductive) content analysis was used to analyze responses to the portion of the interview focused on firearm assessment and disclosure. RESULTS: Thirty-seven patients in Washington State ages 20-95 completed the qualitative interview by phone. Organizing themes included apprehensions about disclosing access to firearms related to privacy, autonomy, and firearm ownership rights; perceptions regarding relevance of the firearm question, informed by experiences with suicidality and common beliefs and misconceptions about the inevitability of suicide; and suggestions for connecting questions about firearms and other lethal means to suicide risk. CONCLUSIONS: Clarifying the purpose and use of routine firearm access assessment, contextualizing firearm questions within injury prevention broadly, and addressing misconceptions about suicide prevention may help encourage disclosure of firearm access and increase the patient centeredness of this practice.

Incorporating Patient-Reported Outcomes Into Health Care To Engage Patients And Enhance Care.

The provision of patient-centered care requires a health care environment that fosters engagement between patients and their health care team. One way to encourage patient-centered care is to incorporate patient-reported outcomes into clinical settings. Collecting these outcomes in routine care ensures that important information only the patient can provide is captured. This provides insights into patients' experiences of symptoms, quality of life, and functioning; values and preferences; and goals for health care. Previously embraced in the research realm, patient-reported outcomes have started to play a role in successful shared decision making, which can enhance the safe and effective delivery of health care. We examine the opportunities for using patient-reported outcomes to enhance care delivery and outcomes as health care information needs and technology platforms change. We highlight emerging practices in which patient-reported outcomes provide value to patients and clinicians and improve care delivery. Finally, we examine present and future challenges to maximizing the use of patient-reported outcomes in the clinic.