ORCA, a values-based decision aid for selecting additional findings from genomic sequencing in adults: Efficacy results from a randomized trial.

PURPOSE: Individuals having genomic sequencing can choose to be notified about pathogenic variants in genes unrelated to the testing indication. A decision aid can facilitate weighing one's values before making a choice about these additional results. METHODS: We conducted a randomized trial (N = 231) comparing informed values-choice congruence among adults at risk for a hereditary cancer syndrome who viewed either the Optional Results Choice Aid (ORCA) or web-based additional findings information alone. ORCA is values-focused with a low-literacy design. RESULTS: Individuals in both arms had informed values-choice congruence (75% and 73% in the decision aid and web-based groups, respectively; odds ratio [OR] = 1.10, 95% CI = 0.58-2.08). Most participants had adequate knowledge (79% and 76% in the decision aid and web-based groups, respectively; OR = 1.20, 95% CI = 0.61-2.34), with no significant difference between groups. Most had information-seeking values (97% and 98% in the decision aid and web-based groups, respectively; OR = 0.59, 95% CI = 0.10-3.61) and chose to receive additional findings. CONCLUSION: The ORCA decision aid did not significantly improve informed values-choice congruence over web-based information in this cohort of adults deciding about genomic results. Both web-based approaches may be effective for adults to decide about receiving medically actionable additional results.

Strengthening methods for tracking adaptations and modifications to implementation strategies.

BACKGROUND: Developing effective implementation strategies requires adequate tracking and reporting on their application. Guidelines exist for defining and reporting on implementation strategy characteristics, but not for describing how strategies are adapted and modified in practice. We built on existing implementation science methods to provide novel methods for tracking strategy modifications. METHODS: These methods were developed within a stepped-wedge trial of an implementation strategy package designed to help community clinics adopt social determinants of health-related activities: in brief, an 'Implementation Support Team' supports clinics through a multi-step process. These methods involve five components: 1) describe planned strategy; 2) track its use; 3) monitor barriers; 4) describe modifications; and 5) identify / describe new strategies. We used the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change taxonomy to categorize strategies, Proctor et al.'s reporting framework to describe them, the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research to code barriers / contextual factors necessitating modifications, and elements of the Framework for Reporting Adaptations and Modifications-Enhanced to describe strategy modifications. RESULTS: We present three examples of the use of these methods: 1) modifications made to a facilitation-focused strategy (clinics reported that certain meetings were too frequent, so their frequency was reduced in subsequent wedges); 2) a clinic-level strategy addition which involved connecting one study clinic seeking help with community health worker-related workflows to another that already had such a workflow in place; 3) a study-level strategy addition which involved providing assistance in overcoming previously encountered (rather than de novo) challenges. CONCLUSIONS: These methods for tracking modifications made to implementation strategies build on existing methods, frameworks, and guidelines; however, as none of these were a perfect fit, we made additions to several frameworks as indicated, and used certain frameworks' components selectively. While these methods are time-intensive, and more work is needed to streamline them, they are among the first such methods presented to implementation science. As such, they may be used in research on assessing effective strategy modifications and for replication and scale-up of effective strategies. We present these methods to guide others seeking to document implementation strategies and modifications to their studies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov ID: NCT03607617 (first posted 31/07/2018).

Satisfaction with Primary Care Providers and Health Care Services Among Patients with Chronic Pain: a Mixed-Methods Study.

BACKGROUND: Chronic pain is a prevalent health concern in the United States (US) and a frequent reason for patients to seek primary care. The challenges associated with developing effective pain management strategies can be perceived as a burden on the patient-provider relationship. OBJECTIVE: This study explored the relationship between patients' overall satisfaction with their primary care providers (PCPs) and their satisfaction with their chronic pain treatment, as well as the provider behaviors that contributed to chronic pain patients' satisfaction with their PCPs. DESIGN: Concurrent nested mixed-methods design PARTICIPANTS: 97 patients with chronic pain who were assigned to the usual care arm of the Pain Program for Active Coping and Training (PPACT) study. APPROACH: We analyzed phone interview and survey data (n = 97). Interviews assessed provider behaviors that led to patient satisfaction. Interview transcripts were analyzed based on a content analysis approach. Survey responses assessed patient satisfaction with primary care and pain services. We calculated a Pearson's correlation coefficient using five response categories. KEY RESULTS: Interviews revealed that high satisfaction with primary care was driven by five concrete PCP behaviors: (1) listening, (2) maintaining communication with patients, (3) acting as an access point to comprehensive pain care, (4) providing an honest assessment of the possibilities of pain care, and (5) taking time during consultations with patients. In surveys, participants reported higher satisfaction with their primary care services than with the pain services they received; these variables were only moderately correlated (r = 0.586). CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest that patients with chronic pain can view the relationship with their PCPs as positive, even in the face of low satisfaction with their pain treatment. The expectations that these patients held of PCPs could be met regardless of providers' ability to successfully relieve chronic pain.

Barriers to eliciting patient goals and values in shared decision-making breast cancer surgery consultations: An ethnographic and interview study.

OBJECTIVE: Previous research has demonstrated the importance of eliciting patients' goals and values during shared decision-making (SDM), but this does not occur in most SDM conversations. Understanding challenges to eliciting patients' goals and values is crucial. This study assessed how clinicians balanced sharing medical information and considering patients' goals and values during breast cancer surgery consultation in an integrated health care system. METHODS: We conducted interviews with clinicians (n = 6) and patients (n = 11) and conducted naturalistic, ethnographic observations of eight surgical consultations in a multidisciplinary breast cancer clinic. We analyzed the data following the template method using the qualitative software NVivo 10. RESULTS: Clinicians prioritized sharing medical information. We identified four patient factors necessary to integrate patients' values and goals into the conversation in addition to sharing medical information: ability to process large quantities of information quickly, willingness to embrace swift decision-making, ability to quickly formulate one's values, and prioritization of surgical choice as the goal of the conversation. CONCLUSIONS: We found that SDM implementation results in practices that emphasize information and choice, with less focus on patient goals and values. More research is needed to explore factors that may encourage the elicitation of patients' goals and values.

Colorectal cancer survivors' challenges to returning to work: A qualitative study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the challenges and needs of colorectal cancer (CRC) survivors in maintaining employment and returning to work (RTW) from the perspectives of both CRC survivors and employers in the United States. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews with CRC survivors (n = 10) and employers (n = 4) were transcribed, coded and thematically analysed using NVivo 12 software. RESULTS: Workplace challenges for survivors included the following: inadequate availability of paid and unpaid leave, limited availability of workplace accommodations, and employers' lack of knowledge about CRC and the recovery process. Survivors were concerned about the lack of adequate financial resources to take unpaid leave and the need to relearn control of bodily functions. Workplace challenges for employers of cancer survivors included the following: limited institutional flexibility to provide individualised accommodations, communication with frontline managers about leave availability for employees and communication with employees about legal protections and limitations. Employers perceived that employees were unwilling to take leave. CONCLUSION: Colorectal cancer survivors in the US face difficult, sometimes insurmountable, challenges when trying to balance their physical and financial needs within the constraints of employment. Employers recognise challenges associated with this concern. Multi-level interventions-ranging from flexible work schedules to training for frontline managers-might facilitate the RTW process.

Utilizing deliberative engagement for identifying implementation strategy priorities: lessons learned from an online deliberative forum with dental professionals.

BACKGROUND: Selecting effective implementation strategies to support guideline-concordant dental care is a complex process. We are drawing on data collected during the DISGO study to reflect on barriers we encountered in implementing a deliberative engagement process for discussing implementation strategies relevant to the evidence-based guideline targeted in this intervention. The goal is to identify factors that may influence the success of deliberative engagement as a technique to involve healthcare staff in identifying priorities for implementation strategies. METHODS: We drew on online chat transcripts from the deliberative engagement forums collected during the DISGO study. The chat transcripts were automatically generated for each discussion and captured the written exchanges between participants and moderators in all participating dental clinics. Chat transcripts were analyzed following a content analysis approach. RESULTS: Our findings revealed barriers to the successful implementation of deliberative engagement in the context of the DISGO study. Participants were not familiar with the materials that had been prepared for the forum and lacked familiarity with the topic of deliberation. Participants also did not share divergent viewpoints and reinforced existing ideas rather than introducing new ideas. CONCLUSIONS: In order to ensure that obstacles that were encountered in this study are not repeated, it is important to carefully consider how staff can effectively be prepared for the deliberations. Participants must be familiar with the content of the guideline, and most questions about the content and evidence should be answered before the deliberative engagement sessions. If perspectives among staff on a guideline are homogenous, briefing materials should introduce perspectives that complement existing views among staff. It is also necessary to create an environment in which staff are comfortable introducing opinions that may not be held by the majority of colleagues. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This project is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov with ID NCT04682730. The trial was first registered on 12/18/2020. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04682730 .

Sharing voice during deliberative engagement to improve guideline adherence in dental clinics: findings from a qualitative evaluation of an online deliberative forum discussion.

OBJECTIVES: Selecting effective implementation strategies to support guideline-concordant dental care is a complex process. For this research project, an online deliberative forum brought together staff from dental clinics to discuss the strengths and weaknesses of implementation strategies and barriers to implementation of a component of a dental (pit-and-fissure) guideline. The goal was to determine whether deliberative engagement enabled participants' sharing of promotive and prohibitive voice about implementation strategies to promote guideline-concordant care. DESIGN: Qualitative analysis of online chat transcripts of facilitated deliberations from 31 small group sessions. SETTING: Kaiser Permanente Dental (KP Dental) in the USA. PARTICIPANTS: All staff from 16 dental offices. RESULTS: The directed content analysis revealed that participants shared prohibitive and promotive voice when offering critique of the barriers and the implementation strategies suggested by the researchers. The analysis also revealed that the focus of the deliberations often was not on the aspect of the pit-and-fissure guideline intended by the research team for deliberation. CONCLUSIONS: The deliberative forum discussions were a productive venue to ask staff in dental clinics to share their perspectives on strategies to promote guideline-concordant care as well as barriers. Participants demonstrated prohibitive voice and engaged critically with the materials the research team had put together. An important limitation of the deliberation was that the discussion often centred around an aspect of the pit-and-fissure guideline that already was implemented well. To ensure a deliberation oriented towards resolving challenging aspects of the pit-and-fissure guideline, greater familiarity with the guideline would have been important, as well as more intimate knowledge of the current discrepancies in guideline-concordant care. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: This project is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov with ID NCT04682730. The trial was first registered on 18 December 2020. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04682730.

Testing a Deliberative Democracy Engagement Intervention to Increase Guideline-Concordance Among Oral Health Providers: Results from the DISGO Cluster-Randomized, Stepped-Wedge Trial.

Background: Dental caries affects billions worldwide and in the U.S. is among the most prevalent noncommunicable diseases in both children and adults. Early in the caries process, it can be arrested by dental sealants, which are non-invasive and thus tooth sparing, however, few dentists have adopted this approach. Deliberative engagement processes enable participants to engage with diverse perspectives on a policy issue and develop and share with policy makers informed opinions about the policy issue. We examined the effects of a deliberative engagement process on the ability of oral health providers to endorse implementation interventions and to apply dental sealants. Methods: Using a stepped wedge design, 16 dental clinics were cluster randomized, and 680 providers and staff were exposed to a deliberative engagement process that included an introductory session, workbook, facilitated small group deliberative forum, and post-forum survey. Forum participants were assigned to forums to ensure diverse role representation. Mechanisms of action examined included sharing voice and diversity of opinion. Three months after each clinic's forum, the clinic manager was interviewed about implementation interventions deployed. There were 98 clinic-months in the non-intervention period and 101 clinic-months in the intervention period. Results: Compared with providers and staff in small clinics, providers and staff in medium and large clinics more strongly agreed that their clinic should adopt two of the three proposed implementation interventions targeting the first barrier and one of the two proposed implementation interventions targeting the second barrier. Compared with the non-intervention period, in the intervention period providers did not place more sealants on occlusal non-cavitated carious lesions. Survey respondents reported sharing both promotive and prohibitive voice. From the beginning to the end of the forums, most forum participants did not change their opinions about the possible implementation interventions. At the end of the forums, there was no significant within-group variability in implementation interventions endorsed. Conclusions: Deliberative engagement intervention may help clinic leadership identify implementation interventions when there is a challenging problem, a network of semi-autonomous clinics, and autonomous providers within those clinics. It remains to be determined whether there is a range of perspectives within clinics. Trial Registration: This project is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov with ID NCT04682730. The trial was first registered on 12/18/2020. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04682730.

Participants' perspectives on perceived usefulness of digital and in-person diabetes prevention programs: A qualitative study to inform decisions related to program participation.

Objective: Given the effectiveness of both in-person and digital diabetes prevention programs (DPPs), participants have an opportunity to select a delivery mode based on their needs and preferences. The objective of this study was to understand and compare participants' experiences with digital and in-person DPPs to identify factors that affected how useful participants perceived these two program delivery modes. Methods: Semi-structured interviews with participants who were enrolled in DPPs as either a digital (n = 23) or in-person (n = 20) program within one health care system were conducted. Data were analyzed following the template method using the qualitative software NVivo 12. Results: Findings from the interviews indicated that creating accountability for weight loss was crucial for all program participants. In the digital program, weight and food tracking played a central role in creating accountability, while in the in-person program, group interactions fostered accountability. The digital program was perceived to encourage self-monitoring, oftentimes resulting in participants' reflection on their habits. The in-person program provided a platform for group support and mutual encouragement. Conclusions: Participants perceived both programs as similarly useful. Yet program characteristics such as the ability to engage with other participants in-person or to seamlessly track weight on a daily basis appealed to different participants. It may be beneficial to align participants' preferences with programs' characteristics and strengths.

Dental providers' perceptions of the feasibility and acceptability of implementing vaccine administration programs in dental settings: A qualitative study.

OBJECTIVES: Involving dental offices in routine vaccinations could have a positive impact on public health. In this study, we assessed dental providers' attitudes and perceptions regarding implementing vaccination in dental settings. METHODS: We performed semi-structured interviews with 31 dental providers (25 dentists and 6 dental hygienists) enrolled in the Western region of the National Dental Practice-Based Research Network as of June 28, 2021. Interviews were recorded and transcribed. We analyzed transcripts using deductive and inductive coding approaches. RESULTS: We identified three main themes that captured the perceptions of dental practitioners regarding the feasibility of implementing vaccine administration in a dental setting: (1) dental practitioners perceive contributing to the public health mission of disease prevention as having high value, (2) dental practitioners face considerable complexity when deciding whether to implement vaccine administration, and (3) dental practitioners do not understand current laws and associated reimbursement models related to vaccine administration. CONCLUSIONS: To make vaccination commonplace in dental practices, legal changes to allow dental practitioners to administer vaccines should be followed by concrete guidance and relevant trainings to help interested dental practitioners successfully implement vaccination programs in their clinical settings.

Prepare randomized clinical trial: Acceptability, engagement, and lifestyle effects of a weight loss intervention beginning in pre-pregnancy.

Background: Healthier lifestyles in early pregnancy are associated with lower rates of pregnancy complications, childhood adiposity, and maternal and child cardiovascular risks. However, it is not known whether lifestyle coaching initiated prior to pregnancy can affect behavior and attitudes during pregnancy. Methods: Three hundred and twenty six women planning pregnancy within 2 years with BMI ≥27 kg/m2 were randomized to a behavioral weight loss intervention or to usual care. Analyses reported here examined the intervention's impact on mid-pregnancy diet quality and activity levels; program acceptability; and effects of pregnancy on intervention engagement. Results: One hundred and sixty eight participants experienced pregnancy during the study (intervention: 91; usual care: 77). From randomization to mid-pregnancy, participants who received the intervention had larger increases in fruit intake than usual care participants (+0.67 vs. +0.06 cups; p = 0.02) and engaged in more vigorous-intensity activity (3.9 [5.5] vs. 1.2 [3.0] Met-hr/week p = 0.002) and sports/exercise (17.0 [14.1] vs. 11.0 [9.5] Met-hr/week; p = 0.03); the groups also differed in changes in sedentary time (-4.9 [15.0] vs. +0.5 [7.6] Met-hr/week; p = 0.02). Intervention satisfaction was high (>80%), and experiencing pregnancy during the intervention was associated with higher engagement. Conclusion: A coaching-based intervention beginning in pre-pregnancy successfully helped women attain healthier diet and exercise habits in mid-pregnancy. Clinical trials registration: Registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02346162, first registered on January 26, 2015, before date of initial participant enrollment (May 2015), https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02346162.

Costs and Cost-Effectiveness of Implementing a Digital Diabetes Prevention Program in a Large, Integrated Health System.

BackgroundThe Diabetes Prevention Program (DPP) has been translated into digital formats. We report an economic evaluation of a digital DPP implemented in a large, integrated health care system. MethodsPatients (n = 4148) were invited to participate in digital DPP based on clinical characteristics (HbA1c 5.7%-6.4% and body mass index ≥ 30 kg/m2) assessed using electronic medical record data. Using a propensity score we matched (1:1) enrolled and not enrolled patients for a total of 784. We identified high-risk patients (ie, above the 50th percentile of risk; n = 202) by calculating each patient's 2-year of developing diabetes. We report the cost of the intervention and the costs of medical care over 12- and 24-month follow-up, and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio as the cost per additional kilogram weight loss at 24 months. ResultsAt 12 months, enrolled patients had lower total costs ($6,926, 95% CI $5,681-$8,171) than not enrolled patients ($7,538, 95% CI $6,293-$8,783). This pattern attenuated slightly at 24 months (enrolled = $16,255, 95% CI $14,097-$18,412; not enrolled = $16,688, 95% CI $14,531-$18,846). We found an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $81.92 per additional kilogram weight loss. For high-risk patients, the digital DPP group had, on average, lower costs and greater weight loss. We found a 55% chance of the digital DPP program being cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay of $150 per additional kilogram of weight loss; at the same willingness-to-pay, there is a 60% chance in the high-risk subgroup. Limitations include the nonrandomized design and potential volunteer bias. ConclusionDigital DPP had a favorable cost-effectiveness profile compared to other lifestyle interventions.

Motherhood, substance use and peer support: Benefits of an integrated group program for pregnant and postpartum women.

OBJECTIVE: Little is known though about the experiences that pregnant and postpartum women have in integrated care programs for substance use disorder and the mechanisms that may contribute to the treatment success. METHODS: We conducted 16 semi-structured interviews with women and staff who participated in an integrated care initiative for pregnant and postpartum women with SUD focusing on participants' experiences with the support group. The data was analyzed following a thematic analysis approach. RESULTS: Three themes emerged that captured the benefits women felt they received from the peer support group: 1) sustained engagement in, and accountability for, participation in SUD treatment, 2) well-coordinated access to medical and social support resources, and 3) establishing community around motherhood to learn selfacceptance and experience validation. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the important role a peer support group within an integrated treatment program can play in supporting mothers in their recovery.

Colorectal Cancer and Return to Work: A Pilot Study of Recruiting Cancer Survivors and Their Employers.

INTRODUCTION: In this study we assessed the feasibility of recruiting colorectal cancer survivors and their employers to participate in research on returning to work after a cancer diagnosis. METHODS: Semistructured qualitative interviews were conducted with 6 survivors and 4 employers to collect feedback on 2 recruitment approaches: 1) an employee/cancer survivor-focused approach whereby researchers obtained employer contact information directly from survivors and 2) an employer-focused approach whereby researchers interviewed employers to identify pathways to recruiting survivor-supervisor dyads. Recordings of all interviews were transcribed and analyzed. RESULTS: Of the 6 survivor participants, 3 (50%) consented to follow up with their supervisors. One of the 3 supervisors responded but declined participation in the study. The 4 participating employers included 2 compensation/benefits managers and 2 human resources managers. Employers identified specific avenues for potential recruitment of survivor-supervisor dyads, including first obtaining organizational support for participating in this type of research. DISCUSSION: While challenges and opportunities exist with both the employee- and the employer-focused recruitment approaches, our findings suggest that an employer-focused approach, whereby researchers obtain organizational support for the research first, may be more promising for recruiting survivor-supervisor dyads to studies on cancer and employment. Results from this study underscore the importance of gaining support from all stakeholders-from administrators to employees who are cancer survivors. CONCLUSION: Our study informs recruitment strategies that bring together cancer survivors and employers to improve our understanding of the barriers and facilitators of returning to work after cancer, in effort to develop interventions that mitigate employment challenges for cancer survivors.

Patient Interest in Receiving Assistance with Self-Reported Social Risks.

OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated how often patients who reported social risk factors requested assistance with these risks in an integrated health system. METHODS: We examined how self-reports of risk related to stated desire for help with that risk reported during social risk screenings at Kaiser Permanente Northwest (KPNW). We examined how patient characteristics were associated with desire for help with each social risk domain using logistic regression. RESULTS: Approximately 24% (n = 7,807) of the 32,865 KPNW members aged ≥ 18 years who were screened between June 1, 2017, and December 31, 2019, reported at least 1 social risk. More than half of patients who reported a risk were risk/help concordant (i.e., they also wanted help with that risk). The highest concordance (81.7%) was observed among patients reporting medical financial hardship. Several demographic, health, and other factors were associated with concordance across domains. CONCLUSIONS: Patients do not request assistance for all reported social needs. Our findings could help shape future work examining patients' reasons for not accepting assistance and developing interventions to help patients with high social risk more effectively.

Challenges with implementing the Diabetes Prevention Program for Medicare beneficiaries in an integrated health system.

OBJECTIVES: In April 2018, CMS began reimbursing both clinical and community settings for providing the CDC-recognized Diabetes Prevention Program (DPP) to eligible Medicare beneficiaries. To better understand the process of offering the program to Medicare beneficiaries, we interviewed relevant stakeholders in a large, integrated health care delivery system. STUDY DESIGN: Qualitative interview study. METHODS: We conducted semistructured interviews with 12 delivery system stakeholders. Data were analyzed following a thematic analysis approach. RESULTS: Stakeholders described systemic challenges to the implementation of Medicare DPP (MDPP), including inadequate reimbursement for the health care system, low awareness of MDPP among patients and providers, and challenges with utilizing third-party vendors to connect patients to CDC-recognized MDPPs. CONCLUSIONS: Although the reimbursement of DPP for Medicare beneficiaries was a landmark decision, the current structure and requirements make it difficult for health systems and community-based providers to implement and promote this benefit. This study highlights the challenges that even integrated health systems are facing to implement MDPP, as well as potential strategies to overcome these barriers and expand the reach of the program. Medicare should seek ways to increase the financial incentives and decrease the barriers associated with implementing MDPP.

Initiating and Implementing Social Determinants of Health Data Collection in Community Health Centers.

Successfully incorporating social determinants of health (SDH) screening into clinic workflows can help care teams provide targeted care, appropriate referrals, and other interventions to address patients' social risk factors. However, integrating SDH screening into clinical routines is known to be challenging. To achieve widespread adoption of SDH screening, we need to better understand the factors that can facilitate or hinder implementation of effective, sustainable SDH processes. The authors interviewed 43 health care staff and professionals at 8 safety net community health center (CHC) organizations in 5 states across the United States; these CHCs had adopted electronic health record (EHR)-based SDH screening without any external implementation support. Interviewees included staff in administrative, quality improvement, informatics, front desk, and clinical roles (providers, nurses, behavioral health staff), and community health workers. Interviews focused on how each organization integrated EHR-based SDH screening into clinic workflows, and factors that affected adoption of this practice change. Factors that facilitated effective integration of EHR-based SDH screening were: (1) external incentives and motivators that prompted introduction of this screening (eg, grant requirements, encouragement from professional associations); (2) presence of an SDH screening advocate; and (3) maintaining flexibility with regard to workflow approaches to optimally align them with clinic needs, interests, and resources. Results suggest that it is possible to purposefully create an environment conducive to successfully implementing EHR-based SDH screening. Approaching the task of implementing SDH screening into clinic workflows as understanding the interplay of context-dependent factors, rather than following a step-by-step process, may be critical to success in primary care settings.

Applying a scoping review approach for identifying effective implementation strategies in oral health settings.

Dental service providers have limited capacity to identify strategies to implement evidence-based practices (EBPs). We developed a rigorous yet parsimonious scoping review approach to identify, select, and rate implementation strategies based on an oral health system context. From 153 strategies identified, we selected the top 11 strategies, which had a moderate level of support of evidence and where managers were the main actors. The main actions were to educate, remind, structure, and influence. Targets included dentists, dental hygienists, and assistants and managers from a large prepaid dental care delivery system. This approach responds to calls for rapid and innovative methods to implement EBPs in oral health.

Developing a patient-driven chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) research agenda in the U.S.

BACKGROUND: To document a generalizable process for developing a patient-prioritized chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) research agenda and to provide an overview of domains that were developed in response to people living with COPD and caregivers' suggestions for research. METHODS: Adults with COPD and caregivers who are members of the COPD Patient-Powered Research Network (PPRN) provided suggestions for COPD-related research through a self-administered, online survey. These responses were analyzed with a content analysis approach: domains for categorizing all survey responses were created, then all responses were categorized independently by a group of researchers, then these categorizations were adjudicated, and finally a density map was created that represented the number of responses in each of the domains. RESULTS: At the time of analysis, 6157 adults had fully completed the baseline survey. Survey responses were categorized across seven domains as follows: 22.5% of all responses fell into the domain family/social/community research, 20.8% of all responses fell into the domain well-being, 15% of all responses fell into the domain curative research, 14.6% of all responses fell into the domain biomedical therapies, 10.5% of all responses fell into the domain policy concerns, 6% of all responses fell into the domain holistic therapies and 10.7% of all responses fell into the domain ambiguous comments that could not be translated into concrete research topics. CONCLUSION: Using qualitative open-ended survey responses from the COPD PPRN registrants, we were able to identify six key domains of research about COPD that are considered most important by patients. These domains differ in content from prior scientist-led efforts to develop priorities for COPD research, demonstrating the ongoing importance of involving patients and their caregivers in determining research priorities. The results suggest the field can more closely align research efforts to patient priorities by considering the identified domains.

The COPD Patient-Powered Research Network (PPRN) asked adults with COPD and their caregivers to suggest areas for future research on COPD. Researchers analyzed 7336 survey responses and created six research areas to reflect their suggestions: (1) family/social/community research, (2) well-being, (3) research on a cure for COPD, (4) new drugs and treatments, (5) policy concerns, and (6) natural therapies. Several research topics patients and their caregivers identified as important have received little attention from researchers in the past and could be valuable topics for researchers to explore.

Characterizing employment of colorectal cancer survivors using electronic health records.

OBJECTIVE: Although the value of collecting occupational data is well-established, these data are not systematically collected in clinical practice. We assessed the availability of electronic health record (EHR)-based occupation data within a large integrated health care system to determine the feasibility of its use in research. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We used a mixed-methods approach to extract EHR data and define employment status, employer, and employment industry of 1107 colorectal cancer survivors. This was a secondary analysis of a subset of the Patient Outcomes Research to Advance Learning (PORTAL) colorectal cancer cohort. RESULTS: We categorized the employment industry for 46% of the cohort. Employment status was available for 58% of the cohort. The employer was missing for over 95% of the cohort. CONCLUSION: By combining data from structured and free-text EHR fields, we identified employment status and industry for approximately half of our sample. Findings demonstrate limitations of EHR data and underscore the need for systematic collection of occupation data in clinical practice.