Project description:The proposed ONE TEAM Study is an 18-month, cluster randomized controlled trial. This study will use a sequential multiple assignment randomized trial (SMART) design with a second randomization for the intervention group using a dynamic treatment regimen approach. The investigators propose to randomize 800 adults with newly-diagnosed selected cancers treated with curative intent (breast, prostate, colorectal, endometrial, non-small cell lung, and endometrial) and with >1 selected cardiovascular disease (CVD) comorbidity (hypertension, type 2 diabetes mellitus, hypercholesterolemia). Participants will be enrolled through Duke Cancer Institute and two community-based oncology practices, both settings serving socio-demographically diverse populations. The unit of randomization will be the PCP clinic; there will be ~80 PCP clinics across North Carolina involved in the study. The overarching goals of this study are to improve chronic disease management and communication among cancer survivors by engaging PCPs as active members of the cancer care team and reframing the message to cancer survivors and providers.
A diversity supplement with retrospective and qualitative components has been added to abstract older adults with solid tumors who underwent cancer surgery at DUHS. Aims include (1) to estimate the prevalence of cardiovascular complications ≤90 postoperative days among older adults with solid tumors undergoing surgery, and its association with care coordination between surgical providers and PCPs ; (2) to develop a risk index for cardiovascular complications ≤90 days of surgery among older adult patients with a solid tumor; and (3) to Assess experience and perceptions of PCPs on care coordination with surgical providers of older adults with a solid tumor following cancer surgery.
Project description:ObjectiveTo introduce the new Team-based care Evaluation and Adoption Model (TEAM) Framework.Quality of evidenceThe initial TEAM Framework was derived from a series of reviews and consultations with academic and clinical experts. In a parallel process, team-based primary and community care evaluation in Canada was assessed through a structured review of academic literature, followed by a review of policy literature of existing primary care evaluation frameworks.Main messageThe review of academic articles alongside an analysis of policy documents and existing evaluation frameworks in primary care resulted in the development of the 10-dimension TEAM Framework.ConclusionPrimary care transformation requires evaluation over time. The TEAM Framework provides a comprehensive framework for assessing evidence needed to support short- and long-term actionable improvements for team-based primary and community care in Canada. This framework will inform the development of an evaluation tool kit for primary care teams.
Project description:Purpose: This study describes (1) the current state of physiotherapy practice in team-based primary care organizations in Ontario, (2) the perceived barriers to and facilitators of providing physiotherapy services, and (3) recommendations for improving how these services are provided. Method: This was a cross-sectional, web-based survey. We analyzed the responses using descriptive statistics and summative content analysis. Results: A total of 66 responses were received, and 61 were included in the final analysis. The respondents reported that most of their practice was directed toward musculoskeletal care, followed by multi-system, neurological, and cardiorespiratory conditions, and that most of their direct patient care was focused on in-person, one-to-one assessment or follow-up. Frequently identified barriers to providing physiotherapy services included a lack of space, resources, time, and equipment. The most common facilitators were support from management, recognition and support from other health care providers about the value and role of physiotherapists, and appropriate referrals from other health care providers. The most common recommendation was to increase the physiotherapist-to-patient ratio at primary care sites. Conclusions: Physiotherapists provide care to diverse populations in team-based primary care, which is influenced by specific barriers and facilitators. Our results highlight opportunities for physiotherapists in this context, such as increasing the provision of first-contact care and group-based interventions.
Project description:BackgroundThe science of effective teams is well documented; far less is known, however, about how specific team configurations may impact primary care team effectiveness. Further, teams experiencing frequent personnel changes (perhaps as a consequence of poor implementation) may have difficulty delivering effective, continuous, well-coordinated care. This study aims to examine the extent to which primary care clinics in the Veterans Health Administration have implemented team configurations consistent with recommendations based on the Patient-Centered Medical Home model and the extent to which adherence to said recommendations, team stability, and role stability impact healthcare quality. Specifically, we expect to find better clinical outcomes in teams that adhere to recommended team configurations, teams whose membership and configuration are more stable over time, and teams whose clinical manager role is more stable over time.Methods/designWe will employ a combination of social network analysis and multilevel modeling to conduct a database review of variables extracted from the Veterans Health Administration's Team Assignments Report (TAR) (one of the largest, most diverse existing national samples of primary care teams (nteams > 7000)), as well as other employee and clinical data sources. To ensure the examination of appropriate clinical outcomes, we will enlist a team of subject matter experts to select a concise set of clear, prioritized primary care performance metrics. We will accomplish this using the Productivity Measurement and Enhancement System, an evidence-based methodology for developing and implementing performance measurement.DiscussionWe are unaware of other studies of healthcare teams that consider team size, composition, and configuration longitudinally or with sample sizes of this magnitude. Results from this study can inform primary care team implementation policy and practice in both private- and public-sector clinics, such that teams are configured optimally, with adequate staffing, and the right mix of roles within the team.Trial registrationNot applicable-this study does not involve interventions on human participants.
Project description:BACKGROUND:Patients with mental illness are frequently treated in primary care, where Primary Care Providers (PCPs) report feeling ill-equipped to manage their care. Team-based models of care improve outcomes for patients with mental illness, but multiple barriers limit adoption. Barriers include practical issues and psychosocial factors associated with the reorganization of care. Practice facilitation can improve implementation, but does not directly address the psychosocial factors or gaps in PCP skills in managing mental illness. To address these gaps, we developed Relational Team Development (RELATED). METHODS:RELATED is an implementation strategy combining practice facilitation and psychology clinical supervision methodologies to improve implementation of team-based care. It includes PCP-level clinical coaching and a team-level practice change activity. We performed a preliminary assessment of RELATED with a convergent parallel mixed method study in 2 primary care clinics in an urban Federally Qualified Health Center in Southwest, USA, 2017-2018. Study participants included PCPs, clinic staff, and patient representatives. Clinic staff and patients were recruited for the practice change activity only. Primary outcomes were feasibility and acceptability. Feasibility was assessed as ease of recruitment and implementation. Acceptability was measured in surveys of PCPs and staff and focus groups. We conducted semi-structured focus groups with 3 participant groups in each clinic: PCPs; staff and patients; and leadership. Secondary outcomes were change in pre- post- intervention PCP self-efficacy in mental illness management and team-based care. We conducted qualitative observations to better understand clinic climate. RESULTS:We recruited 18 PCPs, 17 staff members, and 3 patient representatives. We ended recruitment early due to over recruitment. Both clinics developed and implemented practice change activities. The mean acceptability score was 3.7 (SD=0.3) on a 4-point Likert scale. PCPs had a statistically significant increase in their mental illness management self-efficacy [change = 0.9, p-value= <.01]. Focus group comments were largely positive, with PCPs requesting additional coaching. CONCLUSIONS:RELATED was feasible and highly acceptable. It led to positive changes in PCP self-efficacy in Mental Illness Management. If confirmed as an effective implementation strategy, RELATED has the potential to significantly impact implementation of evidence-based interventions for patients with mental illness in primary care.
Project description:BACKGROUND:It is unclear whether Medicare data can be used to identify type and degree of collaboration between primary care providers (PCPs) [medical doctors (MDs), nurse practitioners, and physician assistants] in a team care model. METHODS:We surveyed 63 primary care practices in Texas and linked the survey results to 2015 100% Medicare data. We identified PCP dyads of 2 providers in Medicare data and compared the results to those from our survey. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value (PPV) of dyads in Medicare data at different threshold numbers of shared patients were reported. We also identified PCPs who work in the same practice by Social Network Analysis (SNA) of Medicare data and compared the results to the surveys. RESULTS:With a cutoff of sharing at least 30 patients, the sensitivity of identifying dyads was 27.8%, specificity was 91.7%, and PPV 72.2%. The PPV was higher for MD-nurse practitioner/physician assistant pairs (84.4%) than for MD-MD pairs (61.5%). At the same cutoff, 90% of PCPs identified in a practice from the survey were also identified by SNA in the corresponding practice. In 5 of 8 surveyed practices with at least 3 PCPs, about ≤20% PCPs identified in the practices by SNA of Medicare data were not identified in the survey. CONCLUSIONS:Medicare data can be used to identify shared care with low sensitivity and high PPV. Community discovery from Medicare data provided good agreement in identifying members of practices. Adapting network analyses in different contexts needs more validation studies.
Project description:Chronic non-communicable diseases (NCDs), such as diabetes and cardiovascular diseases, have reached epidemic proportions worldwide. Health systems, especially those in low- and middle-income countries, such as India, struggle to deliver quality chronic care. A reorganization of healthcare service delivery is needed to strengthen care for chronic conditions. In this study, we evaluated the implementation of a package of tailored interventions to reorganize care, which were identified following a detailed analysis of gaps in delivering quality NCD care at the primary care level in India. Interventions included a redesign of the workflow at primary care clinics, a redistribution of tasks, the introduction of patient information records and the involvement of community health workers in the follow-up of patients with NCDs. An experimental case study design was chosen to study the implementation of the quality improvement measures. Three public primary care facilities in rural South India were selected. Qualitative methods were used to gain an in-depth understanding of the implementation process and outcomes of implementation. Observations, field notes and semi-structured interviews with staff at these facilities (n = 15) were thematically analysed to identify contextual factors that influenced implementation. Only one of the primary health centres implemented all components of the intervention by the end of 9 months. The main barriers to implementation were hierarchical arrangements that inhibited team-based care, the amount of time required for counselling and staff transfers. Team cohesion, additional staff and staff motivation seem to have facilitated implementation. This quality improvement research highlights the importance of building relational leadership to enable team-based care at primary care clinics in India. Redesigned organization of care and task redistribution is important solutions to deliver quality chronic care. However, implementing these will require capacity building of local primary care teams.
Project description:BackgroundMeasuring team factors in evaluations of Continuous Quality Improvement (CQI) may provide important information for enhancing CQI processes and outcomes; however, the large number of potentially relevant factors and associated measurement instruments makes inclusion of such measures challenging. This review aims to provide guidance on the selection of instruments for measuring team-level factors by systematically collating, categorizing, and reviewing quantitative self-report instruments.MethodsData sourcesWe searched MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Health and Psychosocial Instruments; reference lists of systematic reviews; and citations and references of the main report of instruments.Study selectionTo determine the scope of the review, we developed and used a conceptual framework designed to capture factors relevant to evaluating CQI in primary care (the InQuIRe framework). We included papers reporting development or use of an instrument measuring factors relevant to teamwork. Data extracted included instrument purpose; theoretical basis, constructs measured and definitions; development methods and assessment of measurement properties. Analysis and synthesis: We used qualitative analysis of instrument content and our initial framework to develop a taxonomy for summarizing and comparing instruments. Instrument content was categorized using the taxonomy, illustrating coverage of the InQuIRe framework. Methods of development and evidence of measurement properties were reviewed for instruments with potential for use in primary care.ResultsWe identified 192 potentially relevant instruments, 170 of which were analyzed to develop the taxonomy. Eighty-one instruments measured constructs relevant to CQI teams in primary care, with content covering teamwork context (45 instruments measured enabling conditions or attitudes to teamwork), team process (57 instruments measured teamwork behaviors), and team outcomes (59 instruments measured perceptions of the team or its effectiveness). Forty instruments were included for full review, many with a strong theoretical basis. Evidence supporting measurement properties was limited.ConclusionsExisting instruments cover many of the factors hypothesized to contribute to QI success. With further testing, use of these instruments measuring team factors in evaluations could aid our understanding of the influence of teamwork on CQI outcomes. Greater consistency in the factors measured and choice of measurement instruments is required to enable synthesis of findings for informing policy and practice.
Project description:Multiple randomized controlled trials have demonstrated that mailed fecal testing programs are effective in increasing colorectal cancer screening participation. However, few healthcare organization in the US have Implemented such programs. Stakeholders from one clinic in an integrated healthcare system in Washington State initiated collaboration with researchers with expertise in CRC screening, aiming to increase screening rates at their clinic. Age-eligible individuals who were overdue for CRC screening and had previously completed a fecal test were randomized to receive mailed fecal immunochemical test kits (FIT) at the start of the project (Early) or 6 months later (Late). Outcomes included comparing FIT completion at 6 months by randomization group, and overall CRC screening rates at 12 months. We also assessed implementation facilitators and challenges. Overall 2,421 FIT tests were mailed at a cost of $10,739. At 6 months, FIT completion was significantly higher among the Early compared to the Late group (62% vs.47%, p <0.001). By 12 months, after both groups had received mailings, 71% in each group had completed a FIT. The clinic's overall CRC screening rate was 75.1% at baseline and 78.0% 12 months later. Key constructs associated with successful program implementation included strong stakeholder involvement, use of evidence-based strategies, simplicity, and low cost. Challenges included lack of a plan for maintaining the program. Collaboration between clinic stakeholders and researchers led to a successful project that rapidly increased CRC screening rates. However, institutional normalization of the program would be required to maintain it.