An electronic family health history tool to identify and manage patients at increased risk for colorectal cancer: protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BackgroundColorectal cancer is the fourth most commonly diagnosed cancer in the United States. Approximately 3-10% of the population has an increased risk for colorectal cancer due to family history and warrants more frequent or intensive screening. Yet, < 50% of that high-risk population receives guideline-concordant care. Systematic collection of family health history and decision support may improve guideline-concordant screening for patients at increased risk of colorectal cancer. We seek to test the effectiveness of a web-based, systematic family health history collection tool and decision support platform (MeTree) to improve risk assessment and appropriate management of colorectal cancer risk among patients in the Department of Veterans Affairs primary care practices.MethodsIn this ongoing randomized controlled trial, primary care providers at the Durham Veterans Affairs Health Care System and the Madison VA Medical Center are randomized to immediate intervention or wait-list control. Veterans are eligible if assigned to enrolled providers, have an upcoming primary care appointment, and have no conditions that would place them at increased risk for colorectal cancer (such as personal history, adenomatous polyps, or inflammatory bowel disease). Those with a recent lower endoscopy (e.g. colonoscopy, sigmoidoscopy) are excluded. Immediate intervention patients put their family health history information into a web-based platform, MeTree, which provides both patient- and provider-facing decision support reports. Wait-list control patients access MeTree 12 months post-consent. The primary outcome is the risk-concordant colorectal cancer screening referral rate obtained via chart review. Secondary outcomes include patient completion of risk management recommendations (e.g. colonoscopy) and referral for genetic consultation. We will also conduct an economic analysis and an assessment of providers' experience with MeTree clinical decision support recommendations to inform future implementation efforts if the intervention is found to be effective.DiscussionThis trial will assess the feasibility and effectiveness of patient-collected family health history linked to decision support to promote risk-appropriate screening in a large healthcare system such as the Department of Veterans Affairs.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02247336 . Registered on 25 September 2014

Randomised controlled trials of complex interventions and large-scale transformation of services

Complex interventions and large-scale transformations of services are necessary to meet the health-care challenges of the 21st century. However, the evaluation of these types of interventions is challenging and requires methodological development. Innovations such as cluster randomised controlled trials, stepped-wedge designs, and non-randomised evaluations provide options to meet the needs of decision-makers. Adoption of theory and logic models can help clarify causal assumptions, and process evaluation can assist in understanding delivery in context. Issues of implementation must also be considered throughout intervention design and evaluation to ensure that results can be scaled for population benefit. Relevance requires evaluations conducted under real-world conditions, which in turn requires a pragmatic attitude to design. The increasing complexity of interventions and evaluations threatens the ability of researchers to meet the needs of decision-makers for rapid results. Improvements in efficiency are thus crucial, with electronic health records offering significant potential

Qualitative research within trials: developing a standard operating procedure for a clinical trials unit

<p>BACKGROUND: Qualitative research methods are increasingly used within clinical trials to address broader research questions than can be addressed by quantitative methods alone. These methods enable health professionals, service users, and other stakeholders to contribute their views and experiences to evaluation of healthcare treatments, interventions, or policies, and influence the design of trials. Qualitative data often contribute information that is better able to reform policy or influence design.</p> <p>METHODS: Health services researchers, including trialists, clinicians, and qualitative researchers, worked collaboratively to develop a comprehensive portfolio of standard operating procedures (SOPs) for the West Wales Organisation for Rigorous Trials in Health (WWORTH), a clinical trials unit (CTU) at Swansea University, which has recently achieved registration with the UK Clinical Research Collaboration (UKCRC). Although the UKCRC requires a total of 25 SOPs from registered CTUs, WWORTH chose to add an additional qualitative-methods SOP (QM-SOP).</p> <p>RESULTS: The qualitative methods SOP (QM-SOP) defines good practice in designing and implementing qualitative components of trials, while allowing flexibility of approach and method. Its basic principles are that: qualitative researchers should be contributors from the start of trials with qualitative potential; the qualitative component should have clear aims; and the main study publication should report on the qualitative component.</p> <p>CONCLUSIONS: We recommend that CTUs consider developing a QM-SOP to enhance the conduct of quantitative trials by adding qualitative data and analysis. We judge that this improves the value of quantitative trials, and contributes to the future development of multi-method trials.</p&gt

Bridging the gap between evidence and policy for infectious diseases: How models can aid public health decision-making.

The dominant approach to decision-making in public health policy for infectious diseases relies heavily on expert opinion, which often applies empirical evidence to policy questions in a manner that is neither systematic nor transparent. Although systematic reviews are frequently commissioned to inform specific components of policy (such as efficacy), the same process is rarely applied to the full decision-making process. Mathematical models provide a mechanism through which empirical evidence can be methodically and transparently integrated to address such questions. However, such models are often considered difficult to interpret. In addition, models provide estimates that need to be iteratively re-evaluated as new data or considerations arise. Using the case study of a novel diagnostic for tuberculosis, a framework for improved collaboration between public health decision-makers and mathematical modellers that could lead to more transparent and evidence-driven policy decisions for infectious diseases in the future is proposed. The framework proposes that policymakers should establish long-term collaborations with modellers to address key questions, and that modellers should strive to provide clear explanations of the uncertainty of model structure and outputs. Doing so will improve the applicability of models and clarify their limitations when used to inform real-world public health policy decisions

Eliciting Expertise

Since the last edition of this book there have been rapid developments in the use and exploitation of formally elicited knowledge. Previously, (Shadbolt and Burton, 1995) the emphasis was on eliciting knowledge for the purpose of building expert or knowledge-based systems. These systems are computer programs intended to solve real-world problems, achieving the same level of accuracy as human experts. Knowledge engineering is the discipline that has evolved to support the whole process of specifying, developing and deploying knowledge-based systems (Schreiber et al., 2000) This chapter will discuss the problem of knowledge elicitation for knowledge intensive systems in general

Annotated Bibliography: Understanding Ambulatory Care Practices in the Context of Patient Safety and Quality Improvement.

The ambulatory care setting is an increasingly important component of the patient safety conversation. Inpatient safety is the primary focus of the vast majority of safety research and interventions, but the ambulatory setting is actually where most medical care is administered. Recent attention has shifted toward examining ambulatory care in order to implement better health care quality and safety practices. This annotated bibliography was created to analyze and augment the current literature on ambulatory care practices with regard to patient safety and quality improvement. By providing a thorough examination of current practices, potential improvement strategies in ambulatory care health care settings can be suggested. A better understanding of the myriad factors that influence delivery of patient care will catalyze future health care system development and implementation in the ambulatory setting

Medication administration errors for older people in long-term residential care

Background Older people in long-term residential care are at increased risk of medication errors. The purpose of this study was to evaluate a computerised barcode medication management system designed to improve drug administrations in residential and nursing homes, including comparison of error rates and staff awareness in both settings. Methods All medication administrations were recorded prospectively for 345 older residents in thirteen care homes during a 3-month period using the computerised system. Staff were surveyed to identify their awareness of administration errors prior to system introduction. Overall, 188,249 attempts to administer medication were analysed to determine the prevalence of potential medication administration errors (MAEs). Error classifications included attempts to administer medication at the wrong time, to the wrong person or discontinued medication. Analysis compared data at residential and nursing home level and care and nursing staff groups. Results Typically each resident was exposed to 206 medication administration episodes every month and received nine different drugs. Administration episodes were more numerous (p < 0.01) in nursing homes (226.7 per resident) than in residential homes (198.7). Prior to technology introduction, only 12% of staff administering drugs reported they were aware of administration errors being averted in their care home. Following technology introduction, 2,289 potential MAEs were recorded over three months. The most common MAE was attempting to give medication at the wrong time. On average each resident was exposed to 6.6 potential errors. In total, 90% of residents were exposed to at least one MAE with over half (52%) exposed to serious errors such as attempts to give medication to the wrong resident. MAEs rates were significantly lower (p < 0.01) in residential homes than nursing homes. The level of non-compliance with system alerts was low in both settings (0.075% of administrations) demonstrating virtually complete error avoidance. Conclusion Potentially inappropriate administration of medication is a serious problem in long-term residential care. A computerised barcode system can accurately and automatically detect inappropriate attempts to administer drugs to residents. This tool can reliably be used by care staff as well as nurses to improve quality of care and patient safety

Ethnic Minorities and their Health Needs: Crisis of Perception and Behaviours

There is considerable evidence to suggest that racial and ethnic disparities exist in the provision of emergency and wider healthcare. The importance of collecting patient ethnic data has received attention in literature across the world and eliminating ethnic and racial health equalities is one of the primary aims of healthcare providers internationally. The poor health status of certain racial and ethnic groups has been well documented. The improvement of racial and ethnic disparities in healthcare is at the forefront of many public health agendas. This article addresses important policy, practice, and cultural issues confronted by the pre-hospital emergency care setup. This aspect of care plays a unique role in the healthcare safety net in providing a service to a very diverse population, including members of ethnic and racial minorities. Competent decision making by the emergency care practitioners requires patient-specific information and the health provider's prior medical knowledge and clinical training. The article reviews the current ethnicity trends in the UK along with international evidence linking ethnicity and health inequalities. The study argues that serious difficulties will arise between the health provider and the patient if they come from different backgrounds and therefore experience difficulties in cross-cultural communication. This adversely impacts on the quality of diagnostic and clinical decision making for minority patients. The article offers few strategies to address health inequalities in emergency care and concludes by arguing that much more needs to be done to ensure that we are hearing the voices of more diverse groups, groups who are often excluded from engagement through barriers such as language or mobility difficulties

Diagnosis and Decision-Making in Telemedicine

This article provides an analysis of the skills that health professionals and patients employ in reaching diagnosis and decision-making in telemedicine consultations. As governmental priorities continue to emphasize patient involvement in the management of their disease, there is an increasing need to accurately capture the provider–patient interactions in clinical encounters. Drawing on conversation analysis of 10 video-mediated consultations in 3 National Health Service settings in England, this study examines the interaction between patients, General Practitioner (GPs), nurses, and consultants during diagnosis and decision-making, with the aim to identify the range of skills that participants use in the process and capture the interprofessional communication and patient involvement in the diagnosis and decision-making phases of telemedicine consultations. The analysis shows that teleconsultations enhance collaborative working among professionals and enable GPs and nurses to develop their skills and actively participate in diagnosis and decision-making by contributing primary care–specific knowledge to the consultation. However, interprofessional interaction may result in limited patient involvement in decisionmaking. The findings of this study can be used to inform training programs in telemedicine that focus on the development of effective skills for professionals and the provision of information to patients