Age- and Sex-Specific Needs for Children Undergoing Inflammatory Bowel Disease Surgery: A Qualitative Study.

INTRODUCTION: The use of enhanced recovery protocols (ERP) is extending to pediatric surgical populations, such as patients with inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs). Given the variation in age- and sex-specific characteristics of pediatric IBD patients, it is important to understand the unique needs of subgroups, such as male versus female or preadolescent versus older patients, when implementing ERPs. We gathered clinician, patient, and caregiver perspectives on age- and sex-specific needs for children undergoing IBD surgery. METHODS: We used semistructured interviews and focus groups to assess ERP needs and perceived differences in needs between preadolescent (10-13 y), older (14-19 y), male, and female IBD patients. Participants included clinicians, patients who had recent IBD surgery, and patients' caregivers. RESULTS: Forty-eight clinicians, six patients, and eight caregivers participated. Three broad categories of themes emerged: concerns, needs, and experiences related to the (1) surgical care process; (2) continuum of IBD care; and (3) suggestions to make surgical care more patient centered. With regard to surgical care processes, stakeholders reported different communication needs for preadolescent and older children. Key themes about the continuum of IBD care were the need (1) for support from child life specialists and (b) to address young women's health issues. Suggestions to make surgical care more patient centered included providing older children with patient experiences that reflect their perspective as young adults. CONCLUSIONS: The findings highlight the need to adopt a patient-centered approach for ERP use that actively addresses age- and sex-specific factors while engaging patients and caregivers as partners with clinicians to improve surgical care for children with IBD.

A Mixed-Methods Evaluation of Clinician Education Modules on Reducing Surgical Opioid Prescribing.

BACKGROUND: In this study, we developed online interactive clinician education modules highlighting best practices to minimize opioid prescribing at discharge after surgery. The modules were implemented as part of a multicomponent quality improvement initiative across a six-hospital health system. This article describes the development and evaluation of this educational intervention. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Clinician education modules targeting surgical prescribers, nurses, and pharmacists were developed and implemented by an interdisciplinary team. Clinicians were invited to participate in an evaluation survey after completing the modules. Survey items assessed clinicians' rating of the module and intention to change clinical practice because of the module. Quantitative and qualitative survey responses were analyzed by the study team. RESULTS: A total of 2119 clinicians completed the module and 1831 of these clinicians (86.4%) completed the survey. Of clinicians completing the survey, 65.6% reported that they intend to change clinical practice after completing the module. Intended changes were related to increased knowledge and awareness, provider empowerment, opioid prescribing practices, nonopioid prescribing practices, and patient education. Many clinicians who indicated they do not intend to change practice reported that their clinical practices were already in line with module recommendations. Some clinicians did not perceive the module to be relevant to their role. CONCLUSIONS: Module completion was associated with the intention to improve clinical practice in areas related to provider empowerment, opioid prescribing, nonopioid prescribing, and patient education. Evaluation data will inform future module improvements. There is an opportunity to ensure that all clinicians, including those who are not prescribers, recognize their role in opioid stewardship.

Primary prevention of prescription opioid diversion: a systematic review of medication disposal interventions.

Background: In the U.S., 50-75% of nonmedical users of prescription opioids obtain their pills through diversion by friends or relatives. Increasing disposal of unused opioid prescriptions is a fundamental primary prevention strategy in combatting the opioid epidemic.Objectives: To identify interventions for disposal of unused opioid pills and assess the evidence of their effectiveness on disposal-related outcomes.Methods: A search of four electronic databases was conducted (October 2019). We included all empirical studies, systematic literature reviews, and meta-analyses about study medication disposal interventions in the U.S. Studies of disposal interventions that did not include opioids were excluded. We abstracted data for the selected articles to describe the study design, and outcomes. Further, we assessed the quality of each study using the NIH Study Quality Assessment Tools.Results: We identified 25 articles that met our inclusion criteria. None of the 13 studies on drug take-back events or the two studies on donation boxes could draw conclusions about their effectiveness. Although studies on educational interventions found positive effects on knowledge acquisition, they did not find differences in disposal rates. Two randomized controlled trials on drug disposal bags found higher opioid disposal rates in their intervention arms compared to the control arms (57.1% vs 28.6% and 33.3%, p = .01; and 85.7% vs 64.9%, p = .03).Conclusions: Peer-reviewed publications on opioid disposal interventions are limited and either do not address effectiveness or have conflicting findings. Future research should address these limitations and further evaluate implementation and cost-effectiveness.

The association between the workload of general practitioners and patient experiences with care: results of a cross-sectional study in 33 countries.

BACKGROUND: The workload of general practitioners (GPs) and dissatisfaction with work have been increasing in various Western countries over the past decades. In this study, we evaluate the relation between the workload of GPs and patients' experiences with care. METHODS: We collected data through a cross-sectional survey among 7031 GPs and 67,873 patients in 33 countries. Dependent variables are the patient experiences on doctor-patient communication, accessibility, continuity, and comprehensiveness of care. Independent variables concern the workload measured as the GP-reported work hours per week, average consultation times, job satisfaction (an indicator of subjective workload), and the difference between the workload measures of every GP and the average in their own country. Finally, we evaluated interaction effects between workload measures and what patients find important in a country and the presence of a patient-list system. Relationships were determined through multilevel regression models. RESULTS: Patients of GPs who are happier with their work were found to experience better communication, continuity, access, and comprehensiveness. When GPs are more satisfied compared to others in their country, patients also experience better quality. When GPs work more hours per week, patients also experience better quality of care, but not in the area of accessibility. A longer consultation time, also when compared to the national average, is only related to more comprehensive care. There are no differences in the relationships between countries with and without a patient list system and in countries where patients find the different quality aspects more important. CONCLUSIONS: Patients experience better care when their GP has more work hours, longer consultation times, and especially, a higher job satisfaction.

Communication between general practitioners and medical specialists in the referral process: a cross-sectional survey in 34 countries.

BACKGROUND: The communication of relevant patient information between general practitioners (GPs) and medical specialists is important in order to avoid fragmentation of care thus achieving a higher quality of care and ensuring physicians' and patients' satisfaction. However, this communication is often not carried out properly. The objective of this study is to assess whether communication between GPs and medical specialists in the referral process is associated with the organisation of primary care within a country, the characteristics of the GPs, and the characteristics of the primary care practices themselves. METHODS: An analysis of a cross-sectional survey among GPs in 34 countries was conducted. The odds ratios of the features that were expected to relate to higher rates of referral letters sent and communications fed back to GPs were calculated using ordered logistic multilevel models. RESULTS: A total of 7183 GPs from 34 countries were surveyed. Variations between countries in referral letters sent and feedback communication received did occur. Little of the variance between countries could be explained. GPs stated that they send more referral letters, and receive more feedback communications from medical specialists, in countries where they act as gatekeepers, and when, in general, they interact more with specialists. GPs reported higher use of referral letters when they had a secretary and/or a nurse in their practice, used health information technologies, and had greater job satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS: There are large differences in communication between GPs and medical specialists. These differences can partly be explained by characteristics of the country, the GP and the primary care practice. Further studies should also take the organisation of secondary care into account.

Minimizing Opioid Prescribing in Surgery (MOPiS) Initiative: An Analysis of Implementation Barriers.

BACKGROUND: The United States is in the midst of an opioid epidemic. In response, our institution developed the Minimizing Opioid Prescribing in Surgery (MOPiS) initiative. MOPiS is a multicomponent intervention including: (1) patient education on opioid safety and pain management expectations; (2) clinician education on safe opioid prescribing; (3) prescribing data feedback; (4) patient risk screening to assess for addictive behavior; and (5) optimizations to the electronic health record (EHR). We conducted a preintervention formative evaluation to identify barriers and facilitators to implementation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted 22 semistructured interviews with key stakeholders (surgeons, nurses, pharmacists, and administrators) at six hospitals within a single health care system. Interviewees were asked about perceived barriers and facilitators to the components of the intervention. Responses were analyzed to identify common themes using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. RESULTS: We identified common themes of potential implementation barriers and classified them under 12 Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research domains and three intervention domains. Time and resource constraints (needs and resources), the modality of educational material (design quality and packaging), and prescribers' concern for patient satisfaction scores (external policy and incentives) were identified as the most significant structural barriers. Resident physicians, pharmacists, and pain specialists were identified as potential key facilitating actors to the intervention. CONCLUSIONS: We identified specific barriers to successful implementation of an opioid reduction initiative in a surgical setting. In our MOPiS initiative, a preintervention formative evaluation enabled the design of strategies that will overcome implementation barriers specific to the components of our initiative.

Patients' perception of communication at the interface between primary and secondary care: a cross-sectional survey in 34 countries.

BACKGROUND: Poor communication between general practitioners (GPs) and medical specialists can lead to poorer quality, and continuity, of care. Our study aims to assess patients' perceptions of communication at the interface between primary and secondary care in 34 countries. It will analyse, too, whether this communication is associated with the organisation of primary care within a country, and with the characteristics of GPs and their patients. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional survey among patients in 34 countries. Following a GP consultation, patients were asked two questions. Did they take to understand that their GP had informed medical specialists about their illness upon referral? And, secondly, did their GP know the results of the treatment by a medical specialist? We used multi-response logistic multilevel models to investigate the association of factors related to primary care, the GP, and the patient, with the patients' perceptions of communication at the interface between primary and secondary care. RESULTS: In total, 61,931 patients completed the questionnaire. We found large differences between countries, in both the patients' perceptions of information shared by GPs with medical specialists, and the patients' perceptions of the GPs' awareness of the results of treatment by medical specialists. Patients whose GPs stated that they 'seldom or never' send referral letters, also less frequently perceived that their GP communicated with their medical specialists about their illness. Patients with GPs indicating they 'seldom or never' receive feedback from medical specialists, indicated less frequently that their GP would know the results of treatment by a medical specialist. Moreover, patients with a personal doctor perceived higher rates of communication in both directions at the interface between primary and secondary care. CONCLUSION: Generally, patients perceive there to be high rates of communication at the interface between primary and secondary care, but there are large differences between countries. Policies aimed at stimulating personal doctor arrangements could, potentially, enhance the continuity of care between primary and secondary care.

Experiences of adult patients using primary care services in Poland - a cross-sectional study in QUALICOPC study framework.

BACKGROUND: Patients as real healthcare system users are important observers of primary care and are able to provide reliable information about the quality of care. The aim of this study was to explore the patients' experiences and their level of satisfaction with the process and outcomes of care provided by primary care physicians in Poland and to identify the characteristics of the patients, their physicians, and facilities associated with patient satisfaction. METHODS: The study is based on data from the Polish part of the Quality and Costs of Primary Care in Europe (QUALICOPC) cross-sectional, questionnaire-based study. In Poland, a nationally representative sample of 220 PC physicians and 1980 of their patients were recruited to take part in the study. As a study tool we used 3 out of 4 QUALICOPC questionnaires: "Patient Experience", "PC Physician" and "Fieldworker" questionnaires. RESULTS: The areas of the best quality perceived by Polish PC patients are: equity, accessibility of care and quality of service. Coordination and comprehensiveness of care are evaluated relatively worse. The patients' and their physicians' characteristics have a limited influence on patient satisfaction and experiences with Polish primary care. CONCLUSIONS: Primary health care in Poland is of good overall quality as perceived by the patients. Study participants were at most satisfied with accessibility and equity of care and less satisfied with coordination and comprehensiveness of care. Longer patient-doctor relationship and older age of patients were found as the most influential determinants of higher satisfaction. However, variables used in this study poorly explain the overall level of satisfaction. Further research is needed to identify the other determinants of patient satisfaction in the Polish population. Rural practices deserve additional attention due to highest proportions of both extremely satisfied and dissatisfied patients.

Two decades of change in European general practice service profiles: conditions associated with the developments in 28 countries between 1993 and 2012.

OBJECTIVE: Evidence regarding the benefits of strong primary care has influenced health policy and practice. This study focuses on changes in the breadth of services provided by general practitioners (GPs) in Europe between 1993 and 2012 and offers possible explanations for these changes. DESIGN: Data on the breadth of service profiles were used from two cross-sectional surveys in 28 countries: the 1993 European GP Task Profile study (6321 GPs) and the 2012 QUALICOPC study (6044 GPs). GPs' involvement in four areas of clinical activity (first contact care, treatment of diseases, medical procedures, and prevention) was established using ecometric analyses. The changes were measured by the relative increase in the breadth of service profiles. Associations between changes and national-level conditions were examined though regression analyses. Data on the national conditions were used from various other public databases including the World Databank and the PHAMEU (Primary Health care Activity Monitor) database. SETTING: A total of 28 European countries. SUBJECTS: GPs. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Changes in the breadth of GP service profiles. RESULTS: A general trend of increased involvement of European GPs in treatment of diseases and decreased involvement in preventive activities was observed. Conditions at the national level were associated with changes in the involvement of GPs in first contact care, treatment of diseases and, to a limited extent, prevention. Especially in countries with stronger growth of health care expenditures between 1993 and 2012 the service profiles have expanded. In countries where family values are more dominant the breadth in service profiles decreased. A stronger professional status of GPs was positively associated with the change in first contact care. CONCLUSIONS: GPs in former communist countries and Turkey have increased their involvement in the provision of services. Developments in Western Europe were less evident. The developments in the service profiles could only to a very limited extent be explained by national conditions. A main driver of reform seems to be the changes in health care expenditure, which may indicate a notion of urgency because there may be a pressure to curb the rising expenditures. KEY POINTS: Broad GP service profiles are an indicator of strong primary care in a country. It is expected that developments in the breadth of GP service profiles are influenced by various national conditions related to the urgency to reform, politics, and means. Between 1993 and 2012 the involvement of GPs in European countries in treatment of diseases increased and their involvement preventive activities decreased. The national conditions were found to be associated with changes in GPs' involvement as first contact of care, treatment of diseases, and, to a limited extent, prevention. More specifically, in countries with a stronger growth in health care expenditures, service profiles of European GPs have expanded more in the past decades.

Assessing the potential for improvement of primary care in 34 countries: a cross-sectional survey.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate patients' perceptions of improvement potential in primary care in 34 countries. METHODS: We did a cross-sectional survey of 69 201 patients who had just visited general practitioners at primary-care facilities. Patients rated five features of person-focused primary care - accessibility/availability, continuity, comprehensiveness, patient involvement and doctor-patient communication. One tenth of the patients ranked the importance of each feature on a scale of one to four, and nine tenths of patients scored their experiences of care received. We calculated the potential for improvement by multiplying the proportion of negative patient experiences with the mean importance score in each country. Scores were divided into low, medium and high improvement potential. Pair-wise correlations were made between improvement scores and three dimensions of the structure of primary care - governance, economic conditions and workforce development. FINDINGS: In 26 countries, one or more features of primary care had medium or high improvement potentials. Comprehensiveness of care had medium to high improvement potential in 23 of 34 countries. In all countries, doctor-patient communication had low improvement potential. An overall stronger structure of primary care was correlated with a lower potential for improvement of continuity and comprehensiveness of care. In countries with stronger primary care governance patients perceived less potential to improve the continuity of care. Countries with better economic conditions for primary care had less potential for improvement of all features of person-focused care. CONCLUSION: In countries with a stronger primary care structure, patients perceived that primary care had less potential for improvement.

Primary health care teams put to the test a cross-sectional study from Austria within the QUALICOPC project.

BACKGROUND: Multidisciplinary Primary Health Care Teams (PHCT) provide a comprehensive approach to address the social and health needs of communities. It was the aim of this analysis to assess the number of PHCT in Austria, a country with a weak PHC system, and to compare preventive activities, psychosocial care, and work satisfaction between GPs who work and those who do not work in PHCT. METHOD: Within the QUALICOPC study, data collection was performed between November 2011 and May 2012, utilizing a standardized questionnaire for GPs. A stratified sample of GPs from across Austria was invited. Statistical analyses included descriptive statistics and tests. RESULTS: Data from 171 GPs questionnaires were used for this analysis. Of these, 61.1 % (n = 113) had a mono-disciplinary office, 26.3 % (n = 45) worked in an office consisting of GP, receptionist and one additional primary care profession, and 7.6 % (n = 13) worked in a larger PHCT. GPs that worked in larger PHCT were younger and more involved in psychosocial and preventive care. No differences were found with regard to work satisfaction or workload. CONCLUSIONS: This study gives insight into the structures of PHC in Austria. The results indicate a low number of PHCT; however, the overall return rate in our sample was low with more male GPs, more GPs from urban areas and more GPs working in offices together with other physicians than the national average. Younger GPs demonstrate a greater tendency to implement this primary care practice model in their practices, which seems to be associated with an emphasis in psychosocial and preventive care. If Austria is to increase the number of PHC teams, the country should embrace the work of young GPs and should offer relevant support for PHCT. Future developments could be guided by considering effective models of good practice and governmental support as in other countries.

Stressed and overworked? A cross-sectional study of the working situation of urban and rural general practitioners in Austria in the framework of the QUALICOPC project.

AIM: To assess the workload of general practitioners (GPs) in Austria, with a focus on identifying the differences between GPs working in urban and rural areas. METHODS: Within the framework of the Quality and Costs of Primary Care in Europe (QUALICOPC) study, data were collected from a stratified sample of GPs using a standardized questionnaire between November 2011 and May 2012. Data analysis included descriptive statistics and regression analysis. RESULTS: The analysis included data from 173 GPs. GPs in rural areas reported an average of 49.3 working hours per week, plus 23.7 on-call duties per 3 months and 26.2 out-of-office care services per week. Compared to GPs working in urban areas, even in the fully adjusted regression model, rural GPs had significantly more working hours (B 7.00; P=0.002) and on-call duties (B 18.91; P<0.001). 65.8% of all GPs perceived their level of stress as high and 84.6% felt they were required to do unnecessary administrative work. CONCLUSION: Our findings show a high workload among Austrian GPs, particularly those working in rural areas. Since physicians show a diminishing interest to work as GPs, there is an imperative to improve this situation.

Learning from the implementation of a surgical opioid reduction initiative in an integrated health system: a qualitative study among providers and patients.

BACKGROUND: Surgical opioid overprescribing can result in long-term use or misuse. Between July 2018 and March 2019, the multicomponent intervention, Minimizing Opioid Prescribing in Surgery (MOPiS) was implemented in the general surgery clinics of five hospitals and successfully reduced opioid prescribing. To date, various studies have shown a positive outcome of similar reduction initiatives. However, in addition to evaluating the impact on clinical outcomes, it is important to understand the implementation process of an intervention to extend sustainability of interventions and allow for dissemination of the intervention into other contexts. This study aims to evaluate the contextual factors impacting intervention implementation. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative study with semi-structured interviews held with providers and patients of the general surgery clinics of five hospitals of a single health system between March and November of 2019. Interview questions focused on how contextual factors affected implementation of the intervention. We coded interview transcripts deductively, using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to identify the relevant contextual factors. Content analyses were conducted using a constant comparative approach to identify overarching themes. RESULTS: We interviewed 15 clinicians (e.g., surgeons, nurses), 1 quality representative, 1 scheduler, and 28 adult patients and identified 3 key themes. First, we found high variability in the responses of clinicians and patients to the intervention. There was a strong need for intervention components to be locally adaptable, particularly for the format and content of the patient and clinician education materials. Second, surgical pain management should be recognized as a team effort. We identified specific gaps in the engagement of team members, including nurses. We also found that the hierarchical relationships between surgical residents and attendings impacted implementation. Finally, we found that established patient and clinician views on opioid prescribing were an important facilitator to effective implementation. CONCLUSION: Successful implementation of a complex set of opioid reduction interventions in surgery requires locally adaptable elements of the intervention, a team-centric approach, and an understanding of patient and clinician views regarding changes being proposed.

Improving quality and patient safety in surgical care through standardisation and harmonisation of perioperative care (SAFEST project): A research protocol for a mixed methods study.

INTRODUCTION: Adverse events in health care affect 8% to 12% of patients admitted to hospitals in the European Union (EU), with surgical adverse events being the most common types reported. AIM: SAFEST project aims to enhance perioperative care quality and patient safety by establishing and implementing widely supported evidence-based perioperative patient safety practices to reduce surgical adverse events. METHODS: We will conduct a mixed-methods hybrid type III implementation study supporting the development and adoption of evidence-based practices through a Quality Improvement Learning Collaborative (QILC) in co-creation with stakeholders. The project will be conducted in 10 hospitals and related healthcare facilities of 5 European countries. We will assess the level of adherence to the standardised practices, as well as surgical complications incidence, patient-reported outcomes, contextual factors influencing the implementation of the patient safety practices, and sustainability. The project will consist of six components: 1) Development of patient safety standardised practices in perioperative care; 2) Guided self-evaluation of the standardised practices; 3) Identification of priorities and actions plans; 4) Implementation of a QILC strategy; 5) Evaluation of the strategy effectiveness; 6) Patient empowerment for patient safety. Sustainability of the project will be ensured by systematic assessment of sustainability factors and business plans. Towards the end of the project, a call for participation will be launched to allow other hospitals to conduct the self-evaluation of the standardized practices. DISCUSSION: The SAFEST project will promote patient safety standardized practices in the continuum of care for adult patients undergoing surgery. This project will result in a broad implementation of evidence-based practices for perioperative care, spanning from the care provided before hospital admission to post-operative recovery at home or outpatient facilities. Different implementation challenges will be faced in the application of the evidence-based practices, which will be mitigated by developing context-specific implementation strategies. Results will be disseminated in peer-reviewed publications and will be available in an online platform.

Measures of quality, costs and equity in primary health care instruments developed to analyse and compare primary care in 35 countries.

BACKGROUND: The Quality and Costs of Primary Care in Europe (QUALICOPC) study aims to analyse and compare how primary health care systems in 35 countries perform in terms of quality, costs and equity. This article answers the question 'How can the organisation and delivery of primary health care and its outcomes be measured through surveys of general practitioners (GPs) and patients?' It will also deal with the process of pooling questions and the subsequent development and application of exclusion criteria to arrive at a set of appropriate questions for a broad international comparative study. METHODS: The development of the questionnaires consisted of four phases: a search for existing validated questionnaires, the classification and selection of relevant questions, shortening of the questionnaires in three consensus rounds and the pilot survey. Consensus was reached on the basis of exclusion criteria (e.g. the applicability for international comparison). Based on the pilot survey, comprehensibility increased and the number of questions was further restricted, as the questionnaires were too long. RESULTS: Four questionnaires were developed: one for GPs, one for patients about their experiences with their GP, another for patients about what they consider important, and a practice questionnaire. The GP questionnaire mainly focused on the structural aspects (e.g. economic conditions) and care processes (e.g. comprehensiveness of services of primary care). The patient experiences questionnaire focused on the care processes and outcomes (e.g. how do patients experience access to care?). The questionnaire about what patients consider important was complementary to the experiences questionnaire, as it enabled weighing the answers from the latter. Finally, the practice questionnaire included questions on practice characteristics. DISCUSSION: The QUALICOPC researchers have developed four questionnaires to characterise the organisation and delivery of primary health care and to compare and analyse the outcomes. Data collected with these instruments will allow us not only to show in detail the variation in process and outcomes of primary health care, but also to explain the differences from features of the (primary) health care system.

Implementation science for quality improvement in pediatric surgery.

Despite the widespread integration of quality improvement principles into pediatric surgical practice, the actual adoption of evidence-based practices continues to be a challenge. The field of pediatric surgery, in particular, has been slow to adopt clinical pathways and protocols that lead to decreased practice variation and improved clinical outcomes. This manuscript provides an introduction to how implementation science principles into quality improvement efforts may optimize uptake of evidence-based practices, ensure success of these endeavors, and help assess the effectiveness of the interventions. Examples of implementation science application to pediatric surgical quality improvement endeavors are explored.

The development of a safe opioid use agreement for surgical care using a modified Delphi method.

BACKGROUND: Opioids prescribed to treat postsurgical pain have contributed to the ongoing opioid epidemic. While opioid prescribing practices have improved, most patients do not use all their pills and do not safely dispose of leftovers, which creates a risk for unsafe use and diversion. We aimed to generate consensus on the content of a "safe opioid use agreement" for the perioperative settings to improve patients' safe use, storage, and disposal of opioids. METHODS: We conducted a modified three-round Delphi study with clinicians across surgical specialties, quality improvement (QI) experts, and patients. In Round 1, participants completed a survey rating the importance and comprehensibility of 10 items on a 5-point Likert scale and provided comments. In Round 2, a sub-sample of participants attended a focus group to discuss items with the lowest agreement. In Round 3, the survey was repeated with the updated items. Quantitative values from the Likert scale and qualitative responses were summarized. RESULTS: Thirty-six experts (26 clinicians, seven patients/patient advocates, and three QI experts) participated in the study. In Round 1, >75% of respondents rated at least four out of five on the importance of nine items and on the comprehensibility of six items. In Round 2, participants provided feedback on the comprehensibility, formatting, importance, and purpose of the agreement, including a desire for more specificity and patient education. In Round 3, >75% of respondents rated at least four out of five for comprehensibility and importance of all 10 updated item. The final agreement included seven items on safe use, two items on safe storage, and one item on safe disposal. CONCLUSION: The expert panel reached consensus on the importance and comprehensibility of the content for an opioid use agreement and identified additional patient education needs. The agreement should be used as a tool to supplement rather than replace existing, tailored education.

Association of Multimodal Pain Control with Patient-Reported Outcomes in Children Undergoing Surgery.

INTRODUCTION: Our aim was to describe practices in multimodal pain management at US children's hospitals and evaluate the association between non-opioid pain management strategies and pediatric patient-reported outcomes (PROs). METHODS: Data were collected as part of the 18-hospital ENhanced Recovery In CHildren Undergoing Surgery (ENRICH-US) clinical trial. Non-opioid pain management strategies included use of preoperative and postoperative non-opioid analgesics, regional anesthetic blocks, and a biobehavioral intervention. PROs included perioperative nervousness, pain-related functional disability, health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Associations were analyzed using multinomial logistic regression models. RESULTS: Among 186 patients, 62 (33%) received preoperative analgesics, 186 (100%) postoperative analgesics, 81 (44%) regional anesthetic block, and 135 (73%) used a biobehavioral intervention. Patients were less likely to report worsened as compared to stable nervousness following regional anesthetic block (relative risk ratio [RRR]:0.31, 95% confidence interval [CI]:0.11-0.85), use of a biobehavioral technique (RRR:0.26, 95% CI:0.10-0.70), and both in combination (RRR:0.08, 95% CI:0.02-0.34). There were no associations of non-opioid pain control modalities with pain-related functional disability or HRQoL. CONCLUSION: Use of postoperative non-opioid analgesics have been largely adopted, while preoperative non-opioid analgesics and regional anesthetic blocks are used less frequently. Regional anesthetic blocks and biobehavioral interventions may mitigate postoperative nervousness in children. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

A mixed-method approach to generate and deliver rapid-cycle evaluation feedback: lessons learned from a multicenter implementation trial in pediatric surgery.

BACKGROUND: Rapid-cycle feedback loops provide timely information and actionable feedback to healthcare organizations to accelerate implementation of interventions. We aimed to (1) describe a mixed-method approach for generating and delivering rapid-cycle feedback and (2) explore key lessons learned while implementing an enhanced recovery protocol (ERP) across 18 pediatric surgery centers. METHODS: All centers are members of the Pediatric Surgery Research Collaborative (PedSRC, www.pedsrc.org ), participating in the ENhanced Recovery In CHildren Undergoing Surgery (ENRICH-US) trial. To assess implementation efforts, we conducted a mixed-method sequential explanatory study, administering surveys and follow-up interviews with each center's implementation team 6 and 12 months following implementation. Along with detailed notetaking and iterative discussion within our team, we used these data to generate and deliver a center-specific implementation report card to each center. Report cards used a traffic light approach to quickly visualize implementation status (green = excellent; yellow = needs improvement; red = needs significant improvement) and summarized strengths and opportunities at each timepoint. RESULTS: We identified several benefits, challenges, and practical considerations for assessing implementation and using rapid-cycle feedback among pediatric surgery centers. Regarding potential benefits, this approach enabled us to quickly understand variation in implementation and corresponding needs across centers. It allowed us to efficiently provide actionable feedback to centers about implementation. Engaging consistently with center-specific implementation teams also helped facilitate partnerships between centers and the research team. Regarding potential challenges, research teams must still allocate substantial resources to provide feedback rapidly. Additionally, discussions and consensus are needed across team members about the content of center-specific feedback. Practical considerations include carefully balancing timeliness and comprehensiveness when delivering rapid-cycle feedback. In pediatric surgery, moreover, it is essential to actively engage all key stakeholders (including physicians, nurses, patients, caregivers, etc.) and adopt an iterative, reflexive approach in providing feedback. CONCLUSION: From a methodological perspective, we identified three key lessons: (1) using a rapid, mixed method evaluation approach is feasible in pediatric surgery and (2) can be beneficial, particularly in quickly understanding variation in implementation across centers; however, (3) there is a need to address several methodological challenges and considerations, particularly in balancing the timeliness and comprehensiveness of feedback. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NIH National Library of Medicine Clinical Trials. CLINICALTRIALS: gov Identifier: NCT04060303. Registered August 7, 2019, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04060303.

A Missing Piece of the Puzzle: Patient and Provider Perspectives on Pain Management Needs and Opioid Prescribing in Inflammatory Bowel Disease Care.

Background: Recent data have shown high rates of opioid misuse among inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients. We conducted a qualitative study to explore IBD patient and provider perceptions and experiences with pain management and opioid prescribing. Methods: We conducted a focus group with IBD patients and semistructured interviews with IBD-focused physicians and nurses. We used an inductive approach for analysis and the constant comparison method to develop and refine codes and identify prominent themes. We analyzed interview and focus group data concurrently to triangulate themes. Results: Nine patients and 10 providers participated. We grouped themes into 3 categories: (1) current practices to manage pain; (2) perceived pain management challenges; and (3) suggestions to optimize pain management. In the first category (current practices), both patients and providers reported building long-term patient-provider relationships and the importance of exploring nonpharmacologic pain management strategies. Patients reported proactively trying remedies infrequently recommended by IBD providers. In the second category (pain management challenges), patients and providers reported concerns about opioid use and having limited options to treat pain safely. Patients discussed chronic pain and having few solutions to manage it. In the third category, providers shared suggestions for improvement such as increasing use of nonpharmacologic pain management strategies and enhancing care coordination. Conclusions: Despite some common themes between the 2 groups, we identified some pain management needs (eg, addressing chronic pain) that matter to patients but were seldom discussed by IBD providers. Addressing these areas of potential disconnect is essential to optimize pain management safety in IBD care.