Translating CKD Research into Primary Care Practice: a Group-Randomized Study.

BACKGROUND: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is common in the primary care setting. Early interventions may prevent progression of renal disease and reduce risk for cardiovascular complications, yet quality gaps have been documented. Successful approaches to improve identification and management of CKD in primary care are needed. OBJECTIVE: To assess whether implementation of a primary care improvement model results in improved identification and management of CKD DESIGN: 18-month group-randomized study PARTICIPANTS: 21 primary care practices in 13 US states caring for 107,094 patients INTERVENTIONS: To promote implementation of CKD improvement strategies, intervention practices received clinical quality measure (CQM) reports at least quarterly, hosted an on-site visit and 2 webinars, and sent clinician/staff representatives to a "best practice" meeting. Control practices received CQM reports at least quarterly. MAIN MEASURES: Changes in practice adherence to a set of 11 CKD CQMs KEY RESULTS: We observed significantly greater improvements among intervention practices for annual screening for albuminuria in patients with diabetes or hypertension (absolute change 22% in the intervention group vs. - 2.6% in the control group, p < 0.0001) and annual monitoring for albuminuria in patients with CKD (absolute change 21% in the intervention group vs. - 2.0% in the control group, p < 0.0001). Avoidance of NSAIDs in patients with CKD declined in both intervention and control groups, with a significantly greater decline in the control practices (absolute change - 5.0% in the intervention group vs. - 10% in the control group, p < 0.0001). There were no other significant changes found for the other CQMs. Variable implementation of CKD improvement strategies was noted across the intervention practices. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of a primary care improvement model designed to improve CKD identification and management resulted in significantly improved care on 3 out of 11 CQMs. Incomplete adoption of improvement strategies may have limited further improvement. Improving CKD identification and management likely requires a longer and more intensive intervention.

Preventive services delivery in patients with chronic illnesses: parallel opportunities rather than competing obligations.

PURPOSE: Whether patients with 1 or more chronic illnesses are more or less likely to receive recommended preventive services is unclear and an important public health and health care system issue. We addressed this issue in a large national practice-based research network (PBRN) that maintains a longitudinal database derived from electronic health records. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study as of October 1, 2011, of the association between being up to date with 10 preventive services and the prevalence of 24 chronic illnesses among 667,379 active patients aged 18 years or older in 148 member practices in a national PBRN. We used generalized linear mixed models to assess for the association of being up to date with each preventive service as a function of the patient's number of chronic conditions, adjusted for patient age and encounter frequency. RESULTS: Of the patients 65.4% had at least 1 of the 24 chronic illnesses. For 9 of the 10 preventive services there were strong associations between the odds of being up to date and the presence of chronic illness, even after adjustment for visit frequency and patient age. Odds ratios increased with the number of chronic conditions for 5 of the preventive services. CONCLUSIONS: Rather than a barrier, the presence of chronic illness was positively associated with receipt of recommended preventive services in this large national PBRN. This finding supports the notion that modern primary care practice can effectively deliver preventive services to the growing number of patients with multiple chronic illnesses.

Colorectal cancer screening in primary care: theoretical model to improve prevalence in the practice partner research network.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second leading cause of cancer death in the United States. Half of Americans older than age 50 are not current with recommended screening; research is needed to assess the impact of interventions designed to increase receipt of CRC screening. The Colorectal Cancer Screening in Primary Care (C-TRIP) study is a theoretically informed group randomized trial within 32 primary care practices. Baseline median proportion of active patients aged 50 years or older up-to-date with CRC screening among the 32 practices was 50.8% (N = 55,746). Men were more likely to have been screened than women (52.9% vs. 49.2%, respectively). Patients 50 to 59 years of age were less likely to be up-to-date with screening (45.4%) than those in the 60 to 69 years and 70 to 79 years groups (58.5% in both groups). Opportunities exist to increase the proportion of CRC screening received in adults aged 50 and older. C-TRIP evaluates the effectiveness of a model for improvement for increasing this proportion.

Colorectal cancer screening in primary care: translating research into practice.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is recommended for all adults 50 to 75 years old, yet only slightly more than one-half of eligible people are current with screening. Because CRC screening is usually initiated upon recommendations of primary care physicians, interventions in these settings are needed to improve screening. OBJECTIVES: To assess the impact of a quality improvement intervention combining electronic medical record based audit and feedback, practice site visits for academic detailing and participatory planning, and "best-practice" dissemination on CRC screening in primary care practice. RESEARCH DESIGN: Two-year group randomized trial. SUBJECTS: Physicians, midlevel providers, and clinical staff members in 32 primary care practices in 19 States caring for 68,150 patients 50 years of age or older. MEASURES: Proportion of active patients up-to-date (UTD) with CRC screening (colonoscopy within 10 years, sigmoidoscopy within 5 years, or at home fecal occult blood testing within 1 year) and having screening recommended within past year among those not UTD. RESULTS: Patients 50 to 75 years in intervention practices exhibited significantly greater improvement (from 60.7% to 71.2%) in being UTD with CRC screening than patients in control practices (from 57.7% to 62.8%), the adjusted difference being 4.9% (95% confidence interval, 3.8%-6.1%). Recommendations for screening also increased more in intervention practices with the adjusted difference being 7.9% (95% confidence interval, 6.3%-9.5%). There was wide interpractice variation in CRC screening throughout the intervention. CONCLUSIONS: A multicomponent quality improvement intervention in practices that use electronic medical record can improve CRC screening.

Alcohol screening and brief counseling in a primary care hypertensive population: a quality improvement intervention.

AIMS: To determine the effect of an intervention to improve alcohol screening and brief counseling for hypertensive patients in primary care. DESIGN: Two-year randomized, controlled trial. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-one primary care practices across the United States with a common electronic medical record. INTERVENTION: To promote alcohol screening and brief counseling. Intervention practices received site visits from study personnel and were invited to annual network meetings to review the progress of the project and share improvement strategies. MEASUREMENTS: Main outcome measures included rates of documented alcohol screening in hypertensive patients and brief counseling administered in those diagnosed with high-risk drinking, alcohol abuse or alcohol dependence. Secondary outcomes included change in blood pressure among patients with these diagnoses. FINDINGS: Hypertensive patients in intervention practices were significantly more likely to have been screened after 2 years than hypertensive patients in control practices [64.5% versus 23.5%; adjusted odds ratio (OR) = 8.1; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.7-38.2; P < 0.0087]. Patients in intervention practices diagnosed with high-risk drinking, alcohol abuse or alcohol dependence were more likely than those in control practices to have had alcohol counseling documented (50.5% versus 29.6%; adjusted OR = 5.5, 95% CI 1.3-23.3). Systolic (adjusted mean decline = 4.2 mmHg, P = 0.036) and diastolic (adjusted mean decline = 3.3 mmHg, P = 0.006) blood pressure decreased significantly among hypertensive patients receiving alcohol counseling. CONCLUSIONS: Primary care practices receiving an alcohol-focused intervention over 2 years improved rates of alcohol screening for their hypertensive population. Implementation of alcohol counseling for high-risk drinking, alcohol abuse or alcohol dependence also improved and led to changes in patient blood pressures.

Inappropriate medication use in the elderly: results from a quality improvement project in 99 primary care practices.

BACKGROUND: The use of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) in the elderly population is common. Interventions to decrease PIM use in primary care settings are needed. OBJECTIVE: This study was designed to assess the time trends in use of always inappropriate and rarely appropriate medications in primary care patients aged >or=65 years during a quality improvement project. METHODS: A 4-year, prospective demonstration project was delivered to 99 primary care practices that use a common electronic medical record and are members of the Practice Partner Research Network. Each participating practice received quarterly performance reports on the use of always inappropriate and rarely appropriate medications in the elderly. Optional interventions included biannual on-site visits and annual network meetings for performance review, academic detailing, and quality improvement planning. General linear mixed regression models were used to analyze the change in prescribing rates over time. RESULTS: Across 42 months of project exposure, 124,802 active patients (61% women, 39% men) aged >or=65 years were included in the analyses. Among the 33 practices that participated in all 42 months of the intervention, the proportion of patients with a prescription for an always inappropriate medication decreased from 0.41% to 0.33%, and the proportion of patients with a prescription for a rarely appropriate medication decreased from 1.48% to 1.30%. Across all 99 practices, the adjusted absolute annual declines for the comprehensive categories of always inappropriate medications (00.018%, P = 0.03) and rarely appropriate medications (0.113%, P = 0.001) were statistically significant. Propoxyphene was the only individual medication that decreased significantly in use over time (baseline proportion, 0.72%; adjusted absolute annual decline, 0.072% [P = 0.001]). CONCLUSIONS: Always inappropriate and rarely appropriate medication use decreased over time in this practice-based research network study. Additional studies of robust interventions for improving medication use in the elderly are warranted.

Improving the translation of research into primary care practice: results of a national quality improvement demonstration project.

BACKGROUND: There is widespread evidence of inadequate translation of research findings into primary care practice. Theoretically sound demonstrations of how health care organizations can overcomes these deficiencies are needed. A demonstration project was conducted from January 1, 2003, through June 30, 2006, to evaluate the impact of a multicomponent intervention and improvement models intended to enhance adherence to clinical practice guidelines across eight broad clinical areas. METHODS: The demonstration project involving 530 clinicians and staff members from 99 primary practices in 36 states entailed practice performance reports (audit and feedback), practice site visits for academic detailing and participatory planning, and network meetings for sharing 4 of "best practice" approaches. Data from electronic medical records (EMRs) of 847,073 patients were abstracted to identify 31 process and 5 outcome quality measures for prevention and treatment of cardiovascular disease and diabetes, cancer screening, adult immunization, respiratory and infectious disease, mental health and substance abuse, obesity and nutrition, safe medication prescribing in the elderly, and a summary measure, the Summary Quality Index (SQUID). RESULTS: The yearly adjusted absolute improvement in the SQUID was 2.43% (95% confidence interval [C.I.], 2.24%-2.63%). Clinically and statistically significant improvements occurred for 29 of the 36 quality measures, including all 5 outcome measures. DISCUSSION: The findings suggest that a multicomponent quality improvement intervention involving audit and feedback, academic detailing and participatory planning activities, and sharing of "best practice" approaches in practices with EMRs can have a robust impact in quality of care for Americans seen in primary care practices.

Achievable benchmarks of care for primary care quality indicators in a practice-based research network.

A number of sources publish health care quality reports in the United States, but there is limited information about achievable performance in primary care settings. The objective of this article is to report Achievable Benchmarks of Care (ABCs) for 54 quality indicators. Eighty-seven practices participating in a demonstration project in the Practice Partner Research Network (PPRNet), representing 35 US states and 711 969 patients, were included in the analyses. PPRNet practices use a common electronic medical record (Practice Partner, Seattle, Washington). ABCs ranged from 25% to 99%. High ABCs (> or =90%) were achieved for blood pressure screening, lipid screening, and avoiding antibiotics in upper respiratory infection. Some calculated ABCs may be lower than the actual ABCs due to incomplete data recording or abstracting. Primary care practices can achieve high performance across a number of quality indicators, and PPRNet ABCs can serve as benchmarks for primary care practitioners and payers.

Different paths to high-quality care: three archetypes of top-performing practice sites.

PURPOSE: Primary care practices use different approaches in their quest for high-quality care. Previous work in the Practice Partner Research Network (PPRNet) found that improved outcomes are associated with strategies to prioritize performance, involve staff, redesign elements of the delivery system, make patients active partners in guideline adherence, and use tools embedded in the electronic medical record. The aim of this study was to examine variations in the adoption of improvements among sites achieving the best outcomes. METHODS: This study used an observational case study design. A practice-level measure of adherence to clinical guidelines was used to identify the highest performing practices in a network of internal and family medicine practices participating in a national demonstration project. We analyzed qualitative and quantitative information derived from project documents, field notes, and evaluation questionnaires to develop and compare case studies. RESULTS: Nine cases are described. All use many of the same improvement strategies. Differences in the way improvements are organized define 3 distinct archetypes: the Technophiles, the Motivated Team, and the Care Enterprise. There is no single approach that explains the superior performance of high-performing practices, though each has adopted variations of PPRNet's improvement model. CONCLUSIONS: Practices will vary in their path to high-quality care. The archetypes could prove to be a useful guide to other practices selecting an overall quality improvement approach.

Improving diabetes care through a multicomponent quality improvement model in a practice-based research network.

This article reports the impact of a multicomponent quality improvement intervention on adherence with 13 measures of diabetes care and a summary measure, the Diabetes Summary Quality Index (Diabetes-SQUID). The intervention was conducted between January 1, 2004, and July 1, 2005, within 66 primary care practices in 33 states, including 372 providers and 24 250 adult patients with diabetes. Across all practices, the average Diabetes-SQUID was 50.6% (10th percentile 36.5%, 90th percentile 63.0%) on January 1, 2004, and 58.4% (10th percentile 47.6%, 90th percentile 69.7%) on July 1, 2005, with an average absolute improvement of 7.8% (95% confidence interval, 5.9%-9.7%). Significant improvements occurred for 12 of the 13 individual measures: blood pressure and urine microalbumin monitoring; HDL cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, triglyceride, and glycosylated hemoglobin measurements; prescription of antiplatelet therapy; and blood pressure, HDL-cholesterol, LDL-cholesterol, triglyceride, and glycosylated hemoglobin control. The findings suggest that a multicomponent intervention can have a robust impact on quality of care for diabetes.

Quality improvement for prevention of cardiovascular disease and stroke in an academic family medicine center: do racial differences in outcome exist?

OBJECTIVES: We evaluated whether a one-year, multifaceted quality improvement intervention improved adherence to 13 clinical guidelines for lipid screening, hypertension management, and diabetes management among White and African-American adult patients. SETTING: An academic family medicine center. PARTICIPANTS: Six faculty physicians and a clinical pharmacist participated between July 1, 2002, and June 30, 2003. Data from 2860 patients' electronic medical records were abstracted. INTERVENTIONS: Performance reports and lists of patients eligible for each guideline measure were generated. Interventions targeted patients who needed improvement. Statistical analyses used generalized estimating equations to determine the intervention effect. RESULTS: Significant improvements occurred in blood pressure control for all adults (OR= 1.44) and those with hypertension (OR=1.82), measures of total cholesterol (OR=1.10) and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (OR= 1.27) for all patients, and measure of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (OR=2.01) and blood pressure control (OR=1.71) for patients with diabetes mellitus. Significant decline was seen in measures of blood pressure for all patients (OR=.60). After adjusting for patient demographic factors, provider variability, and comorbidities, race was not associated with the change observed in any of the measures from baseline to follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Even though a multifaceted intervention can improve process of care measures for Whites and African Americans, further studies are needed to improve outcome measures, especially in African Americans.

The logic behind a multimethod intervention to improve adherence to clinical practice guidelines in a nationwide network of primary care practices.

The gap between evidence-based guidelines for clinical care and their application in medical settings is well established and widely discussed. Effective interventions are needed to help health care providers reduce this gap. Whereas the development of clinical practice guidelines from biomedical and clinical research is an example of Type 1 translation, Type 2 translation involves successful implementation of guidelines in clinical practice. This article describes a multimethod intervention that is part of a Type 2 translation project aimed at increasing adherence to clinical practice guidelines in a nationwide network of primary care practices that use a common electronic medical record (EMR). Practice performance reports, site visits, and network meetings are intervention methods designed to stimulate improvement in practices by addressing personal and organizational factors. Theories and evidence supporting these interventions are described and could prove useful to others trying to translate medical research into practice. Additional theory development is needed to support translation in medical offices.

A multimethod quality improvement intervention to improve preventive cardiovascular care: a cluster randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Research is needed to validate effective and practical strategies for improving the provision of evidence-based medicine in primary care. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether a multimethod quality improvement intervention was more effective than a less intensive intervention for improving adherence to 21 quality indicators for primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease and stroke. DESIGN: 2-year randomized, controlled clinical trial with the practice as the unit of randomization. SETTING: 20 community-based family or general internal medicine practices in 14 states. All used the same electronic medical record. PARTICIPANTS: 44 physicians, 17 midlevel providers, and approximately 200 staff members; data from the electronic medical records of 87,291 patients. INTERVENTIONS: All practices received copies of practice guidelines and quarterly performance reports. Intervention practices also hosted quarterly site visits to help them adopt quality improvement approaches and participated in 2 network meetings to share "best practice" approaches. MEASUREMENTS: The percentage of indicators at or above predefined targets and the percentage of patients who had achieved each clinical indicator. RESULTS: Intervention practices improved 22.4 percentage points (from 11.3% to 33.7%) in the percentage of indicators at or above the target; control practices improved 16.4 percentage points (from 6.3% to 22.7%). The 6.0-percentage point absolute difference between the intervention and control group was not statistically significant (P > 0.2). Patients in intervention practices had greater improvements than those in control practices for diagnoses of hypertension (improvement difference, 15.7 percentage points [95% CI, 5.2 to 26.3 percentage points]) and blood pressure control in patients with hypertension (improvement difference, 8.0 percentage points [CI, 0.0 to 16.0 percentage points]). LIMITATIONS: The study involved a small number of practices and lacked a pure control group. CONCLUSIONS: Primary care practices that use electronic medical records and receive regular performance reports can improve their adherence to clinical practice guidelines for cardiovascular disease and stroke prevention.

Learning from primary care meaningful use exemplars.

BACKGROUND: Submission of clinical quality measures (CQMs) data are 1 of 3 major requirements for providers to receive meaningful use (MU) incentive payments under the 2009 Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health (HITECH) Act. Some argue that CQMs are the most important component of MU. Developing an evidence base for how practices can successfully use electronic health records (EHRs) to achieve improvement in CQMs is essential and may benefit from the study of exemplars who have successfully implemented EHRs and demonstrated high performance on CQMs. METHODS: Conducted in PPRNet, a national primary care practice-based research network, this study used a multimethod approach combining an EHR-based CQM performance assessment, a provider survey, and focus groups among high CQM performers. Practices whose providers had attested for stage 1 MU were eligible for the study. Performance on 21 CQMs included in the 2014 MU CQM set and a summary measure was assessed as of October 1, 2013, through an automated data extract and standard analytic procedures. A web-based provider survey, conducted in November to December 2013, assessed provider agreement, staff education, use of EHR reminders, standing orders, and EHR-based patient education related to the 21 CQMs. The survey also had more general questions about the practices' use of EHR functionality and quality improvement (QI) strategies. Statistical analyses using general linear mixed models assessed the associations between responses to the survey and CQM performance, adjusted for several practice covariates. Three focus groups, held in early 2014, provided an opportunity for clinicians to provide their perspectives on the validity of the statistical analyses and to provide context-specific examples from their practice that supported their assessment. RESULTS: Seventy-one practices completed the study, and 319 (92.1%) of their providers completed the survey. There was wide variability in performance on the 21 CQMs among the practices. Mean performance ranged from 89.8% for tobacco use screening and counseling to 12.9% for chlamydia screening. In bivariate analyses, more positive associations were found between CQM performance and staff education, use of standing orders, and EHR reminders than for provider agreement or EHR-based patient education. In multivariate analyses, EHR reminders were most frequently associated with individual CQM performance; several EHR, practice QI, and administrative variables were associated with the summary quality measure. CONCLUSIONS: Purposeful use of EHR functionality coupled with staff education in a milieu where QI is valued and supported is associated with higher performance on CQM.

The effect of ethnicity on outcomes in a practice-based trial to improve cardiovascular disease prevention.

BACKGROUND: Health disparities are a growing concern. Recently, we conducted a practice-based trial to help primary care physicians improve adherence with 21 quality indicators relevant to the primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease and stroke. Although the primary concern in that study was whether patients in intervention practices outperformed those in control practices, we were also interested in determining whether minority patients were more, less, or just as likely to benefit from the intervention as non-minorities. METHODS: Baseline (fourth quarter 2000) and follow-up (fourth quarter 2002) data were obtained from 3 intervention practices believed to have at least 10% minority representation. Two practices had a black (non-Hispanic) population sufficient for analysis, while the other had a sufficient Hispanic population. Within each practice, changes in the 21 indicators were compared between the minority patient population and the entire patient population. The proportion of measures in which minority patients exhibited greater improvement was calculated for each practice and for all 3 practices combined, and comparisons were made using non-parametric methods. RESULTS: For all black patients, the observed improvement in 50% of 22 eligible study indicators was better than that observed among all white patients in the same practices. The average changes in the study indicators observed among the black and white patients were not significantly different (p = 0.300) from one another. Likewise for all minority patients in all 3 practices combined, the observed improvement in 14 of 29 (43.3%) eligible study indicators was better than that observed among all white patients. The average changes in the study indicators among all minority patients were not significantly different from the changes observed among the white patients (p = 0.272). CONCLUSIONS: Among 3 intervention practices involved in a quality improvement project, there did not appear to be any significant disparity between minority and non-minority patients in the improvement in study indicators.

The prevalence of chronic diseases and multimorbidity in primary care practice: a PPRNet report.

INTRODUCTION: Multimorbidity (multiple chronic illnesses) greatly affects the delivery of health care and assessment of health care quality. There is a lack of basic epidemiologic data on multimorbidity in the United States. This article addresses the prevalence of 24 chronic illnesses and multimorbidity from primary care practices across the United States. METHODS: This cross-sectional study was conducted in the PPRNet, a practice-based research network among 226 practices in 43 states that maintains a clinical database derived from a common electronic health record. Practices providing data as of October 1, 2011, and their active adult patients comprised the population used for analyses. The prevalence of each chronic illness and multimorbidity were calculated. RESULTS: Included in these analyses were 148 practices with 667,379 active patients. Median prevalence across practices ranged from 35.8% for hypertension to 0.23% for Parkinson disease, with wide variability among practices for all conditions. Multimorbidity increased steeply with age, leveling off at age 80; overall, 45.2% of patients had more than one chronic illness. CONCLUSION: Multimorbidity is a prevalent problem in primary care practice, a finding with implications for health care delivery and payment, quality assessment, and research.

Organizational attributes and screening and brief intervention in primary care.

Overconsumption of alcohol is well known to lead to numerous health and social problems. Prevalence studies of United States adults found that 20% of patients meet criteria for an alcohol use disorder. Routine screening for alcohol use is recommended in primary care settings, yet little is known about the organizational factors that are related to successful implementation of screening and brief intervention (SBI) and treatment in these settings. The purpose of this study was to evaluate organizational attributes in primary care practices that were included in a practice-based research network trial to implement alcohol SBI. The Survey of Organizational Attributes in Primary Care (SOAPC) has reliably measured four factors: communication, decision-making, stress/chaos and history of change. This 21-item instrument was administered to 178 practice members at the baseline of this trial, to evaluate for relationship of organizational attributes to the implementation of alcohol SBI and treatment. No significant relationships were found correlating alcohol screening, identification of high-risk drinkers and brief intervention, to the factors measured in the SOAPC instrument. These results highlight the challenges related to the use of organizational survey instruments in explaining or predicting variations in clinical improvement. Comprehensive mixed methods approaches may be more effective in evaluations of the implementation of SBI and treatment.

Medication Safety in Primary Care Practice: results from a PPRNet quality improvement intervention.

Reducing medication errors is a fundamental patient safety goal; however, few improvement interventions have been evaluated in primary care settings. The Medication Safety in Primary Care Practice project was designed to test the impact of a multimethod quality improvement intervention on 5 categories of preventable prescribing and monitoring errors in 20 Practice Partner Research Network (PPRNet) practices. PPRNet is a primary care practice-based research network among users of a common electronic health record (EHR). The intervention was associated with significant improvements in avoidance of potentially inappropriate therapy, potential drug-disease interactions, and monitoring of potential adverse events over 2 years. Avoidance of potentially inappropriate dosages and drug-drug interactions did not change over time. Practices implemented a variety of medication safety strategies that may be relevant to other primary care audiences, including use of EHR-based audit and feedback reports, medication reconciliation, decision-support tools, and refill protocols.

Integration and sustainability of alcohol screening, brief intervention, and pharmacotherapy in primary care settings.

OBJECTIVE: At-risk drinking and alcohol use disorders are common in primary care and may adversely affect the treatment of patients with diabetes and/or hypertension. The purpose of this article is to report the impact of dissemination of a practice-based quality improvement approach (Practice Partner Research Network-Translating Research into Practice [PPRNet-TRIP]) on alcohol screening, brief intervention for at-risk drinking and alcohol use disorders, and medications for alcohol use disorders in primary care practices. METHOD: Nineteen primary care practices from 15 states representing 26,005 patients with diabetes and/or hypertension participated in a group-randomized trial (early intervention vs. delayed intervention). The 12-month intervention consisted of practice site visits for academic detailing and participatory planning and network meetings for "best practice" dissemination. RESULTS: At the end of Phase 1, eligible patients in early-intervention practices were significantly more likely than patients in delayed-intervention practices to have been screened (odds ratio [OR] = 3.30, 95% CI [1.15, 9.50]) and more likely to have been provided a brief intervention (OR = 6.58, 95% CI [1.69, 25.7]. At the end of Phase 2, patients in delayed-intervention practices were more likely than at the end of Phase 1 to have been screened (OR = 5.18, 95% CI [4.65, 5.76]) and provided a brief intervention (OR = 1.80, 95% CI [1.31, 2.47]). Early-intervention practices maintained their screening and brief intervention performance during Phase 2. Medication for alcohol use disorders was prescribed infrequently. CONCLUSIONS: PPRNet-TRIP is effective in improving and maintaining improvement in alcohol screening and brief intervention for patients with diabetes and/or hypertension in primary care settings.