Perceived benefits and challenges of coordinated approaches to chronic disease prevention in state health departments

INTRODUCTION: Chronic disease prevention efforts have historically been funded categorically according to disease or risk factor. Federal agencies are now progressively starting to fund combined programs to address common risk. The purpose of this study was to inform transitions to coordinated chronic disease prevention by learning views on perceived benefits and challenges of a coordinated approach to funding. METHODS: A national survey on evidence-based public health was conducted from March through May 2013 among state health department employees working in chronic disease prevention (N = 865). Participants were asked to rank the top 3 benefits and top 3 challenges in coordinating chronic disease approaches from provided lists and could provide additional responses. Descriptive analyses, χ(2) tests, and analysis of variance were conducted. RESULTS: The most common perceived benefits of coordinated approaches to chronic disease prevention were improved health outcomes, common risk factors better addressed, and reduced duplication of program efforts. The most common perceived challenges were funding restrictions, such as disease-specific performance measures; competing priorities; lack of communication across programs; funding might be reduced; agency not structured for program coordination; and loss of disease-specific partner support. Rankings of benefits and challenges were similar across states and participant roles; the perceived challenges “lack of communication across programs” (P = .02) and “funding might be reduced” differed by program area (P < .001). CONCLUSION: Findings can be used by funding agencies and state health departments for planning, training, and technical assistance. The information on perceived challenges demonstrates the need to improve communication across programs, enhance organizational support for coordinated approaches, and create benefits for organizational partners

VARIABILITY STUDY TO DETERMINE THE SOLUBILITY OF IMPURITIES IN PLUTONIUM-BEARING, LANTHANIDE BOROSILICATE GLASS

This study focuses on the development of a compositional envelope that describes the retention of various impurities in lanthanide borosilicate (LaBS) glass for vitrification and immobilization of excess, defense-related plutonium. A limited amount of impurity data for the various plutonium sources is available and projections were made through analysis of the available information. These projections were used to define types and concentrations of impurities in the LaBS glass compositions to be fabricated and tested. Sixty surrogate glass compositions were developed through a statistically designed approach to cover the anticipated ranges of concentrations for several impurity species expected in the plutonium feeds. An additional four glass compositions containing actual plutonium oxide were selected based on their targeted concentrations of metals and anions. The glasses were fabricated and characterized in the laboratory and shielded cells facility to determine the degree of retention of the impurity components, the impact of the impurities on the durability of each glass, and the degree of crystallization that occurred, both upon quenching and slow cooling. Overall, the LaBS glass system appears to be very tolerant of most of the impurity types and concentrations projected in the plutonium waste stream. For the surrogate glasses, the measured CuO, Ga{sub 2}O{sub 3}, Na{sub 2}O, NiO, and Ta{sub 2}O{sub 5} concentrations fell very close to their target values across the ranges of concentrations targeted in this study for each of these components. The measured CaO and PbO concentrations were consistently higher than the targeted values. The measured Cr{sub 2}O{sub 3} and Fe{sub 2}O{sub 3} concentrations were very close to the targets except for the one highest targeted value for each of these components. A solubility limit may have been approached in this glass system for K{sub 2}O and MgO. The measured Cl{sup -}, F{sup -}, SeO{sub 2} and SO{sub 4}{sup 2-} concentrations were well below their target values for all of the study glasses. This is likely due to volatilization of these species during melting of the glass batch. Note that the degree of volatilization that occurred in this crucible-scale study may differ from the full-scale melter. The measured HfO{sub 2} concentrations were below their target values for all of the surrogate glasses. It is likely that for HfO{sub 2}, the solubility limit in the glass was exceeded and some of the HfO{sub 2} batch material remained in the bottom of the crucibles after pouring the glasses. X-ray diffraction and scanning electron microscopy (SEM) results indicated that some crystalline HfO2 remained in some of the surrogate glasses with the lowest concentration of impurities. No other crystalline phases were identified. The Product Consistency Test (PCT) results showed that all 60 of the surrogate glass compositions tested were very durable, regardless of thermal history, with the highest normalized release for boron being 0.041 g/L. The pH of the leachate solutions was generally lower than that of conventional waste glasses due to the lack of alkali in the LaBS glass, which likely impacted the PCT results. The normalized release rates for the elements measured were generally too small to attempt to correlate the results with the compositions of the test glasses. The Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure results showed that no hazardous metals were leached from the surrogate glasses in any measurable concentration. A plutonium-containing crystalline phase with a cross-shaped morphology was identified via SEM in the glasses fabricated with plutonium oxide. This phase was identified in a previous study of plutonium-bearing LaBS glasses and may provide an opportunity to intentionally crystallize some of the plutonium oxide into a highly insoluble form with an intrinsic neutron absorber. Additional work is necessary to better characterize the influence that this phase has on durability of the glass. The PCT results for the plutonium-containing LaBS glasses with impurities were similar to previous tests conducted on PuO{sub 2}-containing glasses without impurities added. The highest normalized release for boron was 0.02 g/L, which bounded the highest normalized release for plutonium of 0.01 g/L

Challenges of diabetes prevention in the real world : results and lessons from the Melbourne diabetes prevention study

OBJECTIVE: To assess effectiveness and implementability of the public health programme Life! Taking action on diabetes in Australian people at risk of developing type 2 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Melbourne Diabetes Prevention Study (MDPS) was a unique study assessing effectiveness of Life! that used a randomized controlled trial design. Intervention participants with AUSDRISK score &ge;15 received 1 individual and 5 structured 90 min group sessions. Controls received usual care. Outcome measures were obtained for all participants at baseline and 12 months and, additionally, for intervention participants at 3 months. Per protocol set (PPS) and intention to treat (ITT) analyses were performed. RESULTS: PPS analyses were considered more informative from our study. In PPS analyses, intervention participants significantly improved in weight (-1.13 kg, p=0.016), waist circumference (-1.35 cm, p=0.044), systolic (-5.2 mm Hg, p=0.028) and diastolic blood pressure (-3.2 mm Hg, p=0.030) compared with controls. Based on observed weight change, estimated risk of developing diabetes reduced by 9.6% in the intervention and increased by 3.3% in control participants. Absolute 5-year cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk reduced significantly for intervention participants by 0.97 percentage points from 9.35% (10.4% relative risk reduction). In control participants, the risk increased by 0.11 percentage points (1.3% relative risk increase). The net effect for the change in CVD risk was -1.08 percentage points of absolute risk (p=0.013). CONCLUSIONS: MDPS effectively reduced the risk of diabetes and CVD, but the intervention effect on weight and waist reduction was modest due to the challenges in recruiting high-risk individuals and the abbreviated intervention

Updated standardized definitions for efficacy endpoints in adjuvant breast cancer clinical trials: STEEP Version 2.0

Purpose The Standardized Definitions for Efficacy End Points (STEEP) criteria, established in 2007, provide standardized definitions of adjuvant breast cancer clinical trial end points. Given the evolution of breast cancer clinical trials and improvements in outcomes, a panel of experts reviewed the STEEP criteria to determine whether modifications are needed.Methods We conducted systematic searches of ClinicalTrials.gov for adjuvant systemic and local-regional therapy trials for breast cancer to investigate if the primary end points reported met STEEP criteria. On the basis of common STEEP deviations, we performed a series of simulations to evaluate the effect of excluding non-breast cancer deaths and new nonbreast primary cancers from the invasive disease-free survival end point.Results Among 11 phase III breast cancer trials with primary efficacy end points, three had primary end points that followed STEEP criteria, four used STEEP definitions but not the corresponding end point names, and four used end points that were not included in the original STEEP manuscript. Simulation modeling demonstrated that inclusion of second nonbreast primary cancer can increase the probability of incorrect inferences, can decrease power to detect clinically relevant efficacy effects, and may mask differences in recurrence rates, especially when recurrence rates are low.Conclusion We recommend an additional end point, invasive breast cancer-free survival, which includes all invasive disease-free survival events except second nonbreast primary cancers. This end point should be considered for trials in which the toxicities of agents are well-known and where the risk of second primary cancer is small. Additionally, we provide end point recommendations for local therapy trials, low-risk populations, noninferiority trials, and trials incorporating patient-reported outcomes

Proceedings of the 3rd Biennial Conference of the Society for Implementation Research Collaboration (SIRC) 2015: advancing efficient methodologies through community partnerships and team science : Seattle, WA, USA. 24-26 September 2015.

Introduction to the 3rd Biennial Conference of the Society for Implementation Research Collaboration: advancing efficient methodologies through team science and community partnerships Cara Lewis, Doyanne Darnell, Suzanne Kerns, Maria Monroe-DeVita, Sara J. Landes, Aaron R. Lyon, Cameo Stanick, Shannon Dorsey, Jill Locke, Brigid Marriott, Ajeng Puspitasari, Caitlin Dorsey, Karin Hendricks, Andria Pierson, Phil Fizur, Katherine A. Comtois A1: A behavioral economic perspective on adoption, implementation, and sustainment of evidence-based interventions Lawrence A. Palinkas A2: Towards making scale up of evidence-based practices in child welfare systems more efficient and affordable Patricia Chamberlain A3: Mixed method examination of strategic leadership for evidence-based practice implementation Gregory A. Aarons, Amy E. Green, Mark. G. Ehrhart, Elise M. Trott, Cathleen E. Willging A4: Implementing practice change in Federally Qualified Health Centers: Learning from leaders’ experiences Maria E. Fernandez, Nicholas H. Woolf, Shuting (Lily) Liang, Natalia I. Heredia, Michelle Kegler, Betsy Risendal, Andrea Dwyer, Vicki Young, Dayna Campbell, Michelle Carvalho, Yvonne Kellar-Guenther A3: Mixed method examination of strategic leadership for evidence-based practice implementation Gregory A. Aarons, Amy E. Green, Mark. G. Ehrhart, Elise M. Trott, Cathleen E. Willging A4: Implementing practice change in Federally Qualified Health Centers: Learning from leaders’ experiences Maria E. Fernandez, Nicholas H. Woolf, Shuting (Lily) Liang, Natalia I. Heredia, Michelle Kegler, Betsy Risendal, Andrea Dwyer, Vicki Young, Dayna Campbell, Michelle Carvalho, Yvonne Kellar-Guenther A5: Efficient synthesis: Using qualitative comparative analysis and the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research across diverse studies Laura J. Damschroder, Julie C. Lowery A6: Establishing a veterans engagement group to empower patients and inform Veterans Affairs (VA) health services research Sarah S. Ono, Kathleen F. Carlson, Erika K. Cottrell, Maya E. O’Neil, Travis L. Lovejoy A7: Building patient-practitioner partnerships in community oncology settings to implement behavioral interventions for anxious and depressed cancer survivors Joanna J. Arch, Jill L. Mitchell A8: Tailoring a Cognitive Behavioral Therapy implementation protocol using mixed methods, conjoint analysis, and implementation teams Cara C. Lewis, Brigid R. Marriott, Kelli Scott A9: Wraparound Structured Assessment and Review (WrapSTAR): An efficient, yet comprehensive approach to Wraparound implementation evaluation Jennifer Schurer Coldiron, Eric J. Bruns, Alyssa N. Hook A10: Improving the efficiency of standardized patient assessment of clinician fidelity: A comparison of automated actor-based and manual clinician-based ratings Benjamin C. Graham, Katelin Jordan A11: Measuring fidelity on the cheap Rochelle F. Hanson, Angela Moreland, Benjamin E. Saunders, Heidi S. Resnick A12: Leveraging routine clinical materials to assess fidelity to an evidence-based psychotherapy Shannon Wiltsey Stirman, Cassidy A. Gutner, Jennifer Gamarra, Dawne Vogt, Michael Suvak, Jennifer Schuster Wachen, Katherine Dondanville, Jeffrey S. Yarvis, Jim Mintz, Alan L. Peterson, Elisa V. Borah, Brett T. Litz, Alma Molino, Stacey Young McCaughanPatricia A. Resick A13: The video vignette survey: An efficient process for gathering diverse community opinions to inform an intervention Nancy Pandhi, Nora Jacobson, Neftali Serrano, Armando Hernandez, Elizabeth Zeidler- Schreiter, Natalie Wietfeldt, Zaher Karp A14: Using integrated administrative data to evaluate implementation of a behavioral health and trauma screening for children and youth in foster care Michael D. Pullmann, Barbara Lucenko, Bridget Pavelle, Jacqueline A. Uomoto, Andrea Negrete, Molly Cevasco, Suzanne E. U. Kerns A15: Intermediary organizations as a vehicle to promote efficiency and speed of implementation Robert P. Franks, Christopher Bory A16: Applying the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research constructs directly to qualitative data: The power of implementation science in action Edward J. Miech, Teresa M. Damush A17: Efficient and effective scaling-up, screening, brief interventions, and referrals to treatment (SBIRT) training: a snowball implementation model Jason Satterfield, Derek Satre, Maria Wamsley, Patrick Yuan, Patricia O’Sullivan A18: Matching models of implementation to system needs and capacities: addressing the human factor Helen Best, Susan Velasquez A19: Agency characteristics that facilitate efficient and successful implementation efforts Miya Barnett, Lauren Brookman-Frazee, Jennifer Regan, Nicole Stadnick, Alison Hamilton, Anna Lau A20: Rapid assessment process: Application to the Prevention and Early Intervention transformation in Los Angeles County Jennifer Regan, Alison Hamilton, Nicole Stadnick, Miya Barnett, Anna Lau, Lauren Brookman-Frazee A21: The development of the Evidence-Based Practice-Concordant Care Assessment: An assessment tool to examine treatment strategies across practices Nicole Stadnick, Anna Lau, Miya Barnett, Jennifer Regan, Scott Roesch, Lauren Brookman-Frazee A22: Refining a compilation of discrete implementation strategies and determining their importance and feasibility Byron J. Powell, Thomas J. Waltz, Matthew J. Chinman, Laura Damschroder, Jeffrey L. Smith, Monica M. Matthieu, Enola K. Proctor, JoAnn E. Kirchner A23: Structuring complex recommendations: Methods and general findings Thomas J. Waltz, Byron J. Powell, Matthew J. Chinman, Laura J. Damschroder, Jeffrey L. Smith, Monica J. Matthieu, Enola K. Proctor, JoAnn E. Kirchner A24: Implementing prolonged exposure for post-traumatic stress disorder in the Department of Veterans Affairs: Expert recommendations from the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) project Monica M. Matthieu, Craig S. Rosen, Thomas J. Waltz, Byron J. Powell, Matthew J. Chinman, Laura J. Damschroder, Jeffrey L. Smith, Enola K. Proctor, JoAnn E. Kirchner A25: When readiness is a luxury: Co-designing a risk assessment and quality assurance process with violence prevention frontline workers in Seattle, WA Sarah C. Walker, Asia S. Bishop, Mariko Lockhart A26: Implementation potential of structured recidivism risk assessments with justice- involved veterans: Qualitative perspectives from providers Allison L. Rodriguez, Luisa Manfredi, Andrea Nevedal, Joel Rosenthal, Daniel M. Blonigen A27: Developing empirically informed readiness measures for providers and agencies for the Family Check-Up using a mixed methods approach Anne M. Mauricio, Thomas D. Dishion, Jenna Rudo-Stern, Justin D. Smith A28: Pebbles, rocks, and boulders: The implementation of a school-based social engagement intervention for children with autism Jill Locke, Courtney Benjamin Wolk, Colleen Harker, Anne Olsen, Travis Shingledecker, Frances Barg, David Mandell, Rinad S. Beidas A29: Problem Solving Teletherapy (PST.Net): A stakeholder analysis examining the feasibility and acceptability of teletherapy in community based aging services Marissa C. Hansen, Maria P. Aranda, Isabel Torres-Vigil A30: A case of collaborative intervention design eventuating in behavior therapy sustainment and diffusion Bryan Hartzler A31: Implementation of suicide risk prevention in an integrated delivery system: Mental health specialty services Bradley Steinfeld, Tory Gildred, Zandrea Harlin, Fredric Shephard A32: Implementation team, checklist, evaluation, and feedback (ICED): A step-by-step approach to Dialectical Behavior Therapy program implementation Matthew S. Ditty, Andrea Doyle, John A. Bickel III, Katharine Cristaudo A33: The challenges in implementing muliple evidence-based practices in a community mental health setting Dan Fox, Sonia Combs A34: Using electronic health record technology to promote and support evidence-based practice assessment and treatment intervention David H. Lischner A35: Are existing frameworks adequate for measuring implementation outcomes? Results from a new simulation methodology Richard A. Van Dorn, Stephen J. Tueller, Jesse M. Hinde, Georgia T. Karuntzos A36: Taking global local: Evaluating training of Washington State clinicians in a modularized cogntive behavioral therapy approach designed for low-resource settings Maria Monroe-DeVita, Roselyn Peterson, Doyanne Darnell, Lucy Berliner, Shannon Dorsey, Laura K. Murray A37: Attitudes toward evidence-based practices across therapeutic orientations Yevgeny Botanov, Beverly Kikuta, Tianying Chen, Marivi Navarro-Haro, Anthony DuBose, Kathryn E. Korslund, Marsha M. Linehan A38: Predicting the use of an evidence-based intervention for autism in birth-to-three programs Colleen M. Harker, Elizabeth A. Karp, Sarah R. Edmunds, Lisa V. Ibañez, Wendy L. Stone A39: Supervision practices and improved fidelity across evidence-based practices: A literature review Mimi Choy-Brown A40: Beyond symptom tracking: clinician perceptions of a hybrid measurement feedback system for monitoring treatment fidelity and client progress Jack H. Andrews, Benjamin D. Johnides, Estee M. Hausman, Kristin M. Hawley A41: A guideline decision support tool: From creation to implementation Beth Prusaczyk, Alex Ramsey, Ana Baumann, Graham Colditz, Enola K. Proctor A42: Dabblers, bedazzlers, or total makeovers: Clinician modification of a common elements cognitive behavioral therapy approach Rosemary D. Meza, Shannon Dorsey, Shannon Wiltsey-Stirman, Georganna Sedlar, Leah Lucid A43: Characterization of context and its role in implementation: The impact of structure, infrastructure, and metastructure Caitlin Dorsey, Brigid Marriott, Nelson Zounlome, Cara Lewis A44: Effects of consultation method on implementation of cognitive processing therapy for post-traumatic stress disorder Cassidy A. Gutner, Candice M. Monson, Norman Shields, Marta Mastlej, Meredith SH Landy, Jeanine Lane, Shannon Wiltsey Stirman A45: Cross-validation of the Implementation Leadership Scale factor structure in child welfare service organizations Natalie K. Finn, Elisa M. Torres, Mark. G. Ehrhart, Gregory A. Aarons A46: Sustainability of integrated smoking cessation care in Veterans Affairs posttraumatic stress disorder clinics: A qualitative analysis of focus group data from learning collaborative participants Carol A. Malte, Aline Lott, Andrew J. Saxon A47: Key characteristics of effective mental health trainers: The creation of the Measure of Effective Attributes of Trainers (MEAT) Meredith Boyd, Kelli Scott, Cara C. Lewis A48: Coaching to improve teacher implementation of evidence-based practices (EBPs) Jennifer D. Pierce A49: Factors influencing the implementation of peer-led health promotion programs targeting seniors: A literature review Agathe Lorthios-Guilledroit, Lucie Richard, Johanne Filiatrault A50: Developing treatment fidelity rating systems for psychotherapy research: Recommendations and lessons learned Kevin Hallgren, Shirley Crotwell, Rosa Muñoz, Becky Gius, Benjamin Ladd, Barbara McCrady, Elizabeth Epstein A51: Rapid translation of alcohol prevention science John D. Clapp, Danielle E. Ruderman A52: Factors implicated in successful implementation: evidence to inform improved implementation from high and low-income countries Melanie Barwick, Raluca Barac, Stanley Zlotkin, Laila Salim, Marnie Davidson A53: Tracking implementation strategies prospectively: A practical approach Alicia C. Bunger, Byron J. Powell, Hillary A. Robertson A54: Trained but not implementing: the need for effective implementation planning tools Christopher Botsko A55: Evidence, context, and facilitation variables related to implementation of Dialectical Behavior Therapy: Qualitative results from a mixed methods inquiry in the Department of Veterans Affairs Sara J. Landes, Brandy N. Smith, Allison L. Rodriguez, Lindsay R. Trent, Monica M. Matthieu A56: Learning from implementation as usual in children’s mental health Byron J. Powell, Enola K. Proctor A57: Rates and predictors of implementation after Dialectical Behavior Therapy Intensive Training Melanie S. Harned, Marivi Navarro-Haro, Kathryn E. Korslund, Tianying Chen, Anthony DuBose, André Ivanoff, Marsha M. Linehan A58: Socio-contextual determinants of research evidence use in public-youth systems of care Antonio R. Garcia, Minseop Kim, Lawrence A. Palinkas, Lonnie Snowden, John Landsverk A59: Community resource mapping to integrate evidence-based depression treatment in primary care in Brazil: A pilot project Annika C. Sweetland, Maria Jose Fernandes, Edilson Santos, Cristiane Duarte, Afrânio Kritski, Noa Krawczyk, Caitlin Nelligan, Milton L. Wainberg A60: The use of concept mapping to efficiently identify determinants of implementation in the National Institute of Health--President’s Emergent Plan for AIDS Relief Prevention of Mother to Child HIV Transmission Implementation Science Alliance Gregory A. Aarons, David H. Sommerfeld, Benjamin Chi, Echezona Ezeanolue, Rachel Sturke, Lydia Kline, Laura Guay, George Siberry A61: Longitudinal remote consultation for implementing collaborative care for depression Ian M. Bennett, Rinad Beidas, Rachel Gold, Johnny Mao, Diane Powers, Mindy Vredevoogd, Jurgen Unutzer A62: Integrating a peer coach model to support program implementation and ensure long- term sustainability of the Incredible Years in community-based settings Jennifer Schroeder, Lane Volpe, Julie Steffen A63: Efficient sustainability: Existing community based supervisors as evidence-based treatment supports Shannon Dorsey, Michael D Pullmann, Suzanne E. U. Kerns, Nathaniel Jungbluth, Lucy Berliner, Kelly Thompson, Eliza Segell A64: Establishment of a national practice-based implementation network to accelerate adoption of evidence-based and best practices Pearl McGee-Vincent, Nancy Liu, Robyn Walser, Jennifer Runnals, R. Keith Shaw, Sara J. Landes, Craig Rosen, Janet Schmidt, Patrick Calhoun A65: Facilitation as a mechanism of implementation in a practice-based implementation network: Improving care in a Department of Veterans Affairs post-traumatic stress disorder outpatient clinic Ruth L. Varkovitzky, Sara J. Landes A66: The ACT SMART Toolkit: An implementation strategy for community-based organizations providing services to children with autism spectrum disorder Amy Drahota, Jonathan I. Martinez, Brigitte Brikho, Rosemary Meza, Aubyn C. Stahmer, Gregory A. Aarons A67: Supporting Policy In Health with Research: An intervention trial (SPIRIT) - protocol and early findings Anna Williamson A68: From evidence based practice initiatives to infrastructure: Lessons learned from a public behavioral health system’s efforts to promote evidence based practices Ronnie M. Rubin, Byron J. Powell, Matthew O. Hurford, Shawna L. Weaver, Rinad S. Beidas, David S. Mandell, Arthur C. Evans A69: Applying the policy ecology model to Philadelphia’s behavioral health transformation efforts Byron J. Powell, Rinad S. Beidas, Ronnie M. Rubin, Rebecca E. Stewart, Courtney Benjamin Wolk, Samantha L. Matlin, Shawna Weaver, Matthew O. Hurford, Arthur C. Evans, Trevor R. Hadley, David S. Mandell A70: A model for providing methodological expertise to advance dissemination and implementation of health discoveries in Clinical and Translational Science Award institutions Donald R. Gerke, Beth Prusaczyk, Ana Baumann, Ericka M. Lewis, Enola K. Proctor A71: Establishing a research agenda for the Triple P Implementation Framework Jenna McWilliam, Jacquie Brown, Michelle Tucker A72: Cheap and fast, but what is “best?”: Examining implementation outcomes across sites in a state-wide scaled-up evidence-based walking program, Walk With Ease Kathleen P Conte A73: Measurement feedback systems in mental health: Initial review of capabilities and characteristics Aaron R. Lyon, Meredith Boyd, Abigail Melvin, Cara C. Lewis, Freda Liu, Nathaniel Jungbluth A74: A qualitative investigation of case managers’ attitudes toward implementation of a measurement feedback system in a public mental health system for youth Amelia Kotte, Kaitlin A. Hill, Albert C. Mah, Priya A. Korathu-Larson, Janelle R. Au, Sonia Izmirian, Scott Keir, Brad J. Nakamura, Charmaine K. Higa-McMillan A75: Multiple pathways to sustainability: Using Qualitative Comparative Analysis to uncover the necessary and sufficient conditions for successful community-based implementation Brittany Rhoades Cooper, Angie Funaiole, Eleanor Dizon A76: Prescribers’ perspectives on opioids and benzodiazepines and medication alerts to reduce co-prescribing of these medications Eric J. Hawkins, Carol A. Malte, Hildi J. Hagedorn, Douglas Berger, Anissa Frank, Aline Lott, Carol E. Achtmeyer, Anthony J. Mariano, Andrew J. Saxon A77: Adaptation of Coordinated Anxiety Learning and Management for comorbid anxiety and substance use disorders: Delivery of evidence-based treatment for anxiety in addictions treatment centers Kate Wolitzky-Taylor, Richard Rawson, Richard Ries, Peter Roy-Byrne, Michelle Craske A78: Opportunities and challenges of measuring program implementation with online surveys Dena Simmons, Catalina Torrente, Lori Nathanson, Grace Carroll A79: Observational assessment of fidelity to a family-centered prevention program: Effectiveness and efficiency Justin D. Smith, Kimbree Brown, Karina Ramos, Nicole Thornton, Thomas J. Dishion, Elizabeth A. Stormshak, Daniel S. Shaw, Melvin N. Wilson A80: Strategies and challenges in housing first fidelity: A multistate qualitative analysis Mimi Choy-Brown, Emmy Tiderington, Bikki Tran Smith, Deborah K. Padgett A81: Procurement and contracting as an implementation strategy: Getting To Outcomes® contracting Ronnie M. Rubin, Marilyn L. Ray, Abraham Wandersman, Andrea Lamont, Gordon Hannah, Kassandra A. Alia, Matthew O. Hurford, Arthur C. Evans A82: Web-based feedback to aid successful implementation: The interactive Stages of Implementation Completion (SIC)TM tool Lisa Saldana, Holle Schaper, Mark Campbell, Patricia Chamberlain A83: Efficient methodologies for monitoring fidelity in routine implementation: Lessons from the Allentown Social Emotional Learning Initiative Valerie B. Shapiro, B.K. Elizabeth Kim, Jennifer L. Fleming, Paul A. LeBuffe A84: The Society for Implementation Research Collaboration (SIRC) implementation development workshop: Results from a new methodology for enhancing implementation science proposals Sara J. Landes, Cara C. Lewis, Allison L. Rodriguez, Brigid R. Marriott, Katherine Anne Comtois A85: An update on the Society for Implementation Research Collaboration (SIRC) Instrument Review Projec

The Comprehensive Assessment of Neurodegeneration and Dementia: Canadian Cohort Study.

BackgroundThe Comprehensive Assessment of Neurodegeneration and Dementia (COMPASS-ND) cohort study of the Canadian Consortium on Neurodegeneration in Aging (CCNA) is a national initiative to catalyze research on dementia, set up to support the research agendas of CCNA teams. This cross-country longitudinal cohort of 2310 deeply phenotyped subjects with various forms of dementia and mild memory loss or concerns, along with cognitively intact elderly subjects, will test hypotheses generated by these teams.MethodsThe COMPASS-ND protocol, initial grant proposal for funding, fifth semi-annual CCNA Progress Report submitted to the Canadian Institutes of Health Research December 2017, and other documents supplemented by modifications made and lessons learned after implementation were used by the authors to create the description of the study provided here.ResultsThe CCNA COMPASS-ND cohort includes participants from across Canada with various cognitive conditions associated with or at risk of neurodegenerative diseases. They will undergo a wide range of experimental, clinical, imaging, and genetic investigation to specifically address the causes, diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of these conditions in the aging population. Data derived from clinical and cognitive assessments, biospecimens, brain imaging, genetics, and brain donations will be used to test hypotheses generated by CCNA research teams and other Canadian researchers. The study is the most comprehensive and ambitious Canadian study of dementia. Initial data posting occurred in 2018, with the full cohort to be accrued by 2020.ConclusionAvailability of data from the COMPASS-ND study will provide a major stimulus for dementia research in Canada in the coming years

Preconception maternal iodine status is associated with IQ but not with measures of executive function in childhood

Background: adverse effects of severe maternal iodine deficiency in pregnancy on fetal brain development are wellestablished, but the effects of milder deficiency are uncertain. Most studies examine iodine status in pregnancy; less is known about iodine nutrition before conception. Objective: we examined relations between maternal preconception iodine status and offspring cognitive function, within a prospective mother-offspring cohort. Methods: maternal iodine status was assessed through the use of the ratio of iodine:creatinine concentrations (I/Cr) in spot urine samples [median (IQR) period before conception 3.3 y (2.2-4.7 y)]. Childhood cognitive function was assessed at age 6-7 y. Full-scale IQ was assessed via the Wechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence, and executive function through the use of tests from the Cambridge Neuropsychological Test Automated Battery (CANTAB). Analyses (n = 654 mother-child dyads) were adjusted for potential confounders including maternal intelligence, education, and breastfeeding duration. Results: the median (IQR) urinary iodine concentration was 108.4 μg/L (62.2-167.8 μg/L) and the I/Cr ratio 114 μg/g (76- 164 μg/g). The preconception I/Cr ratio was positively associated with child IQ, before and after adjustment for potential confounding influences [β = 0.13 (95% CI: 0.04, 0.21)/SD, P = 0.003]. 8.9% of women had a preconception urinary I/Cr ratio &lt; 50 μg/g; compared with those with an I/Cr ratio ≥150 μg/g, the IQ of their offspring was 0.49 (95% CI: 0.79, 0.18) SD lower. There were no associations with the executive function outcomes assessed via CANTAB, before or after adjustment for confounders. Conclusions: the positive association between iodine status before conception and child IQ provides some support for demonstrated links between low maternal iodine status in pregnancy and poorer cognitive function reported in other studies. However, given the negative effects on school performance previously observed in children born to iodine-deficient mothers, the lack of associations with measures of executive function in the present study was unexpected. Further data are needed to establish the public health importance of low preconception iodine status.</p

CHronic hypERtension and L-citRulline studY (CHERRY): an Early-Phase Randomised Controlled Trial in Pregnancy.

Oral supplementation with L-citrulline, which is sequentially converted to L-arginine then nitric oxide, improves vascular biomarkers and reduces blood pressure in non-pregnant, hypertensive human cohorts and pregnant mice with a pre-eclampsia-like syndrome. This early-phase randomised feasibility trial assessed the acceptability of L-citrulline supplementation to pregnant women with chronic hypertension and its effects on maternal BP and other vascular outcomes. Pregnant women with chronic hypertension were randomised at 12-16 weeks to receive 3-g L-citrulline twice daily (n = 24) or placebo (n = 12) for 8 weeks. Pregnant women reported high acceptability of oral L-citrulline. Treatment increased maternal plasma levels of citrulline, arginine and the arginine:asymmetric dimethylarginine ratio, particularly in women reporting good compliance. L-citrulline had no effect on diastolic BP (L-citrulline: - 1.82 95% CI (- 5.86, 2.22) vs placebo: - 5.00 95% CI (- 12.76, 2.76)), uterine artery Doppler or angiogenic biomarkers. Although there was no effect on BP, retrospectively, this study was underpowered to detect BP changes < 9 mmHg, limiting the conclusions about biological effects. The increase in arginine:asymmetric dimethylarginine ratio was less than in non-pregnant populations, which likely reflects altered pharmacokinetics of pregnancy, and further pharmacokinetic assessment of L-citrulline in pregnancy is advised.Trial Registration EudraCT 2015-005792-25 (2017-12-22) and ISRCTN12695929 (2018-09-20) In pregnant women with chronic hypertension, L-citrulline is an acceptable intervention which increased plasma L-citrulline bioavailability but did not affect BP, potentially due to altered pharmacokinetics of pregnancy

Etravirine pharmacokinetics in HIV-infected pregnant women

__Background__ The study goal was to describe etravirine pharmacokinetics during pregnancy and postpartum in HIV-infected women. __Methods__ IMPAACT P1026s and PANNA are on-going, non-randomized, open-label, parallel-group, multi-center phase-IV prospective studies in HIV-infected pregnant women. Intensive steady-state 12-h pharmacokinetic profiles were performed from 2nd trimester through postpartum. Etravirine was measured at two labs using validated ultra performance liquid chromatography (detection limits: 0.020 and 0.026 mcg/mL). __Results__ Fifteen women took etravirine 200 mg twice-daily. Etravirine AUC0-12 was higher in the 3rd trimester compared to paired postpartum data by 34% (median 8.3 vs. 5.3 mcg*h/mL, p = 0.068). Etravirine apparent oral clearance was significantly lower in the 3rd trimester of pregnancy compared to paired postpartum data by 52% (median 24 vs. 38 L/h, p = 0.025). The median ratio of cord blood to maternal plasma concentration at delivery was 0.52 (range: 0.19-4.25) and no perinatal transmission occurred. __Conclusion__ Etravirine apparent oral clearance is reduced and exposure increased during the third trimester of pregnancy. Based on prior dose-ranging and safety data, no dose adjustment is necessary for maternal health but the effects of etravirine in utero are unknown. Maternal health and infant outcomes should be closely monitored until further infant safety data are available. __Clinical Trial registration:__ The IMPAACT protocol P1026s and PANNA study are registered at ClinicalTrials.gov under NCT00042289 and NCT00825929