High Impact for Whom? A Qualitative Analysis of Organization Concerns About the Transition to High-Impact Prevention Policy.

HIV represents a significant health burden in the United States. In 2012, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) stopped recommending many once-promoted interventions as part of a shift from one HIV intervention policy, Diffusion of Effective Behavioral Interventions (DEBI), to another, High Impact Prevention (HIP). Twenty-nine staff members from 10 organizations were interviewed to explore how organizations reacted to this shift. Three major themes emerged: (1) Personal experience, community assessment, and epidemiological evidence influenced organizations' perceptions of efficacy and preference for earlier interventions. (2) Organizations were concerned that HIP interventions were not a good fit for their priority populations. (3) Organizations were frustrated with the top-down approach by the CDC prioritizing HIP interventions over earlier interventions. These results indicate that organizations continue to see value in and provide DEBI interventions. In addition, a more participatory process incorporating qualitative evidence and organizations' experiences may be necessary to achieve widespread de-implementation of DEBI interventions.

Better Service by Doing Less: Introducing De-implementation Research in HIV.

The course of HIV research has led to a multitude of interventions to prevent and treat HIV. With the arrival of more effective interventions comes the need to end, or de-implement, less effective interventions. PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To describe the state of de-implementation research in HIV and provide a rationale for expanded research in this area. RECENT FINDINGS: Existing studies have identified a set of HIV-specific interventions appropriate for de-implementing and described the persistence of interventions that should be ended. However, to our knowledge, strategies to successfully promote appropriate de-implementation of HIV-specific interventions have not been examined. De-implementing interventions that are no longer needed is an opportunity to improve the quality and effectiveness of HIV services. Opportunities to expand this field of research abound.

Decreasing Patient Visit Length at a Student-Run Free Clinic via a Continuous Quality Improvement Project.

INTRODUCTION: The University of Florida Equal Access Clinic Network (EACN) is the largest student-run free clinic (SRFC) network in Florida. This student-driven, continuous quality improvement (CQI) project is intended to decrease total patient visit length at Eastside clinic, one of EACN's primary care sites. The original median visit length of 126.25 minutes represented a significant time burden for patients, especially those with limited transportation or inflexible schedules. METHODS: Over six months, four Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycles were implemented. PDSA cycle 1 increased personnel and space for taking vitals. PDSA cycle 2 reduced redundancy in the intake process. PDSA cycle 3 triaged patients to match patient complexity with student experience level. PDSA cycle 4 introduced "nudge" interventions to reinforce clinic flow. Total patient visit length and time spent at each step of clinic flow were recorded anonymously for each patient visit. The median visit length per week was tracked on a run chart. RESULTS: From PDSA cycle 1 through PDSA cycle 4, the median visit length decreased from 126 minutes to 114 minutes. This shift was primarily driven by a decrease in the length of patient intake from a median of 19 minutes to 9 minutes. The run chart did not show clear trends until PDSA cycle 4, which demonstrated a strong downward trend. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated the ability of a student-driven CQI model to decrease patient visit length in an SRFC setting. Similar models could be used to address this and other contributors to patient experience across SRFCs nationwide.

Medical emergencies on a medium-sized urban university campus with collegiate-based EMS.

ObjectiveThis study aimed to identify the types and frequency of acute medical events at a university with a collegiate-based emergency medical services (CBEMS) agency. Participants: Patients who requested assistance from the studied CBEMS agency, which provides emergency medical services coverage at a medium-sized urban university. Methods: This retrospective chart review examined requests for emergency service from August 2010-July 2017. Data abstracted include the type of medical event, frequency, call times/dates, and locations of reported medical events. Results: The studied agency received an average 889.4 (SD +/-68.6 calls) per year with the most common falling under the categories of "Substance Abuse" (231.7 calls/year, SD +/-15.7) and "Minor Trauma" (207.1 calls/year, SD+/-37.8). Most requests for acute medical attention occurred between the hours of 1800-0600 on Fridays and Saturdays. Implications/Conclusions: These results suggest that universities can potentially predict patterns and prepare for the types of acute medical issues that occur on campus.

Persistence of inefficient HIV prevention interventions: a mixed-method analysis of the reasons why.

Growing evidence suggests that public health organizations continue to provide inefficient interventions even when better intervention options may be available. Factors informing an organization's decision to continue providing inefficient interventions are unclear. We present an analysis of HIV service organizations to understand factors influencing organizations to continue or end interventions. Between 2017 and 2019, HIV service organizations were recruited from the Center for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC) website gettested.org, in the 20 metropolitan areas with the highest HIV incidence. Organizations were eligible to participate if they had provided at least one of 37 HIV prevention interventions identified as inefficient by the CDC. 877 organizations were recruited, with a response rate of 66%, (n = 578). Thirty-eight percent (n = 213) of organizations met the eligibility criteria, and 188 organizations completed the survey asking about reasons for continuing or ending interventions. Funding status (41%, n = 79) and client demand for interventions (60%, n = 116) were reported as the primary driving factors why organizations continued ineffective interventions. Scientific evidence was a rarely reported reason for ending an inefficient intervention (12%, n = 23). Qualitative responses indicated interventions were continued if clients demanded interventions they found useful or if staff perceived interventions as improving client behavior and health outcomes. Conversely, interventions were ended if client demand or retention was low, not relevant to the target population or funding ended. The decision to continue or end inefficient interventions is influenced by a number of factors-most often by funding and client interest but not scientific evidence.