THE ASSOCIATION OF HOSPITAL AND PATIENT CHARACTERISTICS WITH TREATMENT INITIATION AMONG VETERANS WITH STAGE I, II, OR III LUNG, COLON OR RECTAL CANCER

Evidence suggests that underserved patients such as black patients and rural residents experience less timely, high quality cancer treatment resulting in increased upstaging, increased patient anxiety, and higher cancer-specific mortality. In addition to black race and rural residence, cancer treatment disparities have been associated with sociodemographic, clinical factors, and hospital-level factors. Recognizing the importance of hospital-level factors, the overall objective of this dissertation was to determine the extent to which race, rurality, and hospital-level factors influence the timing of treatment initiation for cancer patients. This dissertation used data from the Veterans Health Administration (VA): the Epidemiology of Cancer in Veterans database, linked with data from the VA Corporate Data Warehouse, the VA Central Cancer Registry and the 2009 VA Oncology Facilities Survey. Hospital-level factors evaluated included receiving cancer treatment at a hospital with the following resources: a colorectal and/or lung cancer-specific tumor board; a mechanism to track patients from diagnosis through posttreatment care; a measurement system to track the hospital’s adherence to guideline-based cancer care and timelines of care. In this dissertation, the outcome, timely cancer treatment, was defined as receipt of first course of treatment (evidence of surgical resection, chemotherapy, radiation, chemoradiation) within 10 weeks of diagnosis. Our results suggest a centralization of oncology-specific resources in urban areas, resulting in increased access to the resources evaluated in this study for black veterans who were more likely to live in urban areas. In contrast, rural veterans are vulnerable to this centralization due to fewer specialists living in rural areas and increased rural hospital closures. We also found that receiving treatment at facilities with differential hospital-level cancer resources is associated with racial disparities in cancer treatment: receiving treatment at a hospital with cancer-specific tracking was associated with increased odds of receiving timely treatment. Finally, we found evidence that receiving treatment in a hospital that tracks the timeliness and guideline concordance of its cancer care was associated with a 4-percentage point reduction in racial disparities in timely cancer treatment. The results of this dissertation suggest that access to hospital-level factors plays an important role in cancer treatment disparities.Doctor of Public Healt

Middle managers’ role in implementing evidence-based practices in healthcare: a systematic review

Abstract Background Middle managers are in a unique position to promote the implementation of evidence-based practices (EBPs) in healthcare organizations, yet knowledge of middle managers’ role in implementation and determinants (e.g., individual-, organizational-, and system-level factors) which influence their role remains fractured, spanning decades and disciplines. To synthesize understanding, we undertook a systematic review of studies of middle managers’ role in healthcare EBP implementation and determinants of that role. Methods We searched MEDLINE/PubMed and Business Source Complete (Ebsco) for literature on middle managers’ role in healthcare EBP implementation and its determinants. We abstracted data from records that met inclusion criteria (i.e., written in English, peer-reviewed, and reporting either a protocol or results of an empirical study) into a matrix for analysis. We summarized categorical variables using descriptive statistics. To analyze qualitative data, we used a priori codes and then allowed additional themes to emerge. Results One hundred five records, spanning across several countries and healthcare settings and relating to a range of EBPs, met our inclusion criteria. Studies of middle managers’ role in healthcare EBP implementation and its determinants substantially increased from 1996 to 2015. Results from included studies suggest that middle managers shape implementation climate in addition to fulfilling the four roles hypothesized in extant theory of middle managers’ role in implementation. However, extant studies offered little understanding of determinants of middle managers’ role. Conclusions Our findings suggest that middle managers may play an important role in facilitating EBP implementation. Included studies offered little understanding regarding the relative importance of various roles, potential moderators of the relationship between middle managers’ roles and EBP implementation, or determinants of middle managers’ role in EBP implementation. Future studies should seek to understand determinants and moderators of middle managers’ role. Clearer understanding may facilitate the translation of evidence into practice

Organizational theory for dissemination and implementation research

Abstract Background Even under optimal internal organizational conditions, implementation can be undermined by changes in organizations’ external environments, such as fluctuations in funding, adjustments in contracting practices, new technology, new legislation, changes in clinical practice guidelines and recommendations, or other environmental shifts. Internal organizational conditions are increasingly reflected in implementation frameworks, but nuanced explanations of how organizations’ external environments influence implementation success are lacking in implementation research. Organizational theories offer implementation researchers a host of existing, highly relevant, and heretofore largely untapped explanations of the complex interaction between organizations and their environment. In this paper, we demonstrate the utility of organizational theories for implementation research. Discussion We applied four well-known organizational theories (institutional theory, transaction cost economics, contingency theories, and resource dependency theory) to published descriptions of efforts to implement SafeCare, an evidence-based practice for preventing child abuse and neglect. Transaction cost economics theory explained how frequent, uncertain processes for contracting for SafeCare may have generated inefficiencies and thus compromised implementation among private child welfare organizations. Institutional theory explained how child welfare systems may have been motivated to implement SafeCare because doing so aligned with expectations of key stakeholders within child welfare systems’ professional communities. Contingency theories explained how efforts such as interagency collaborative teams promoted SafeCare implementation by facilitating adaptation to child welfare agencies’ internal and external contexts. Resource dependency theory (RDT) explained how interagency relationships, supported by contracts, memoranda of understanding, and negotiations, facilitated SafeCare implementation by balancing autonomy and dependence on funding agencies and SafeCare developers. Summary In addition to the retrospective application of organizational theories demonstrated above, we advocate for the proactive use of organizational theories to design implementation research. For example, implementation strategies should be selected to minimize transaction costs, promote and maintain congruence between organizations’ dynamic internal and external contexts over time, and simultaneously attend to organizations’ financial needs while preserving their autonomy. We describe implications of applying organizational theory in implementation research for implementation strategies, the evaluation of implementation efforts, measurement, research design, theory, and practice. We also offer guidance to implementation researchers for applying organizational theory

Sharing patient-generated data with healthcare providers: findings from a 2019 national survey.

OBJECTIVE: Our study estimates the prevalence and predictors of wearable device adoption and data sharing with healthcare providers in a nationally representative sample. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data were obtained from the 2019 Health Information National Trend Survey. We conducted multivariable logistic regression to examine predictors of device adoption and data sharing. RESULTS: The sample contained 4159 individuals, 29.9% of whom had adopted a wearable device in 2019. Among adopters, 46.3% had shared data with their provider. Individuals with diabetes (odds ratio [OR], 2.39; 95% CI, 1.66-3.45; P \u3c .0001), hypertension (OR, 2.80; 95% CI, 2.12-3.70; P \u3c .0001), and multiple chronic conditions (OR, 1.55; 95% CI, 1.03-2.32; P \u3c .0001) had significantly higher odds of wearable device adoption. Individuals with a usual source of care (OR, 2.44; 95% CI, 1.95-3.04; P \u3c .0001), diabetes (OR, 1.66; 95% CI, 1.32-2.08; P \u3c .0001), and hypertension (OR, 1.78; 95% CI, 1.44-2.20; P \u3c .0001) had significantly higher odds of sharing data with providers. DISCUSSION: A third of individuals adopted a wearable medical device and nearly 50% of individuals who owned a device shared data with a provider in 2019. Patients with certain conditions, such as diabetes and hypertension, were more likely to adopt devices and share data with providers. Social determinants of health, such as income and usual source of care, negatively affected wearable device adoption and data sharing, similarly to other consumer health technologies. CONCLUSIONS: Wearable device adoption and data sharing with providers may be more common than prior studies have reported; however, digital disparities were noted. Studies are needed that test implementation strategies to expand wearable device use and data sharing into care delivery

Middle managers’ role in implementing evidence-based practices in healthcare: a systematic review

Abstract Background Middle managers are in a unique position to promote the implementation of evidence-based practices (EBPs) in healthcare organizations, yet knowledge of middle managers’ role in implementation and determinants (e.g., individual-, organizational-, and system-level factors) which influence their role remains fractured, spanning decades and disciplines. To synthesize understanding, we undertook a systematic review of studies of middle managers’ role in healthcare EBP implementation and determinants of that role. Methods We searched MEDLINE/PubMed and Business Source Complete (Ebsco) for literature on middle managers’ role in healthcare EBP implementation and its determinants. We abstracted data from records that met inclusion criteria (i.e., written in English, peer-reviewed, and reporting either a protocol or results of an empirical study) into a matrix for analysis. We summarized categorical variables using descriptive statistics. To analyze qualitative data, we used a priori codes and then allowed additional themes to emerge. Results One hundred five records, spanning across several countries and healthcare settings and relating to a range of EBPs, met our inclusion criteria. Studies of middle managers’ role in healthcare EBP implementation and its determinants substantially increased from 1996 to 2015. Results from included studies suggest that middle managers shape implementation climate in addition to fulfilling the four roles hypothesized in extant theory of middle managers’ role in implementation. However, extant studies offered little understanding of determinants of middle managers’ role. Conclusions Our findings suggest that middle managers may play an important role in facilitating EBP implementation. Included studies offered little understanding regarding the relative importance of various roles, potential moderators of the relationship between middle managers’ roles and EBP implementation, or determinants of middle managers’ role in EBP implementation. Future studies should seek to understand determinants and moderators of middle managers’ role. Clearer understanding may facilitate the translation of evidence into practice

De-implementing low-value care in cancer care delivery: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Accumulating evidence suggests that interventions to de-implement low-value services are urgently needed. While medical societies and educational campaigns such as Choosing Wisely have developed several guidelines and recommendations pertaining to low-value care, little is known about interventions that exist to de-implement low-value care in oncology settings. We conducted this review to summarize the literature on interventions to de-implement low-value care in oncology settings. METHODS: We systematically reviewed the published literature in PubMed, Embase, CINAHL Plus, and Scopus from 1 January 1990 to 4 March 2021. We screened the retrieved abstracts for eligibility against inclusion criteria and conducted a full-text review of all eligible studies on de-implementation interventions in cancer care delivery. We used the framework analysis approach to summarize included studies\u27 key characteristics including design, type of cancer, outcome(s), objective(s), de-implementation interventions description, and determinants of the de-implementation interventions. To extract the data, pairs of authors placed text from included articles into the appropriate cells within our framework. We analyzed extracted data from each cell to describe the studies and findings of de-implementation interventions aiming to reduce low-value cancer care. RESULTS: Out of 2794 studies, 12 met our inclusion criteria. The studies covered several cancer types, including prostate cancer (n = 5), gastrointestinal cancer (n = 3), lung cancer (n = 2), breast cancer (n = 2), and hematologic cancers (n = 1). Most of the interventions (n = 10) were multifaceted. Auditing and providing feedback, having a clinical champion, educating clinicians through developing and disseminating new guidelines, and developing a decision support tool are the common components of the de-implementation interventions. Six of the de-implementation interventions were effective in reducing low-value care, five studies reported mixed results, and one study showed no difference across intervention arms. Eleven studies aimed to de-implement low-value care by changing providers\u27 behavior, and 1 de-implementation intervention focused on changing the patients\u27 behavior. Three studies had little risk of bias, five had moderate, and four had a high risk of bias. CONCLUSIONS: This review demonstrated a paucity of evidence in many areas of the de-implementation of low-value care including lack of studies in active de-implementation (i.e., healthcare organizations initiating de-implementation interventions purposefully aimed at reducing low-value care)

Psychometric assessment of three newly developed implementation outcome measures

Abstract Background Implementation outcome measures are essential for monitoring and evaluating the success of implementation efforts. Yet, currently available measures lack conceptual clarity and have largely unknown reliability and validity. This study developed and psychometrically assessed three new measures: the Acceptability of Intervention Measure (AIM), Intervention Appropriateness Measure (IAM), and Feasibility of Intervention Measure (FIM). Methods Thirty-six implementation scientists and 27 mental health professionals assigned 31 items to the constructs and rated their confidence in their assignments. The Wilcoxon one-sample signed rank test was used to assess substantive and discriminant content validity. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis (EFA and CFA) and Cronbach alphas were used to assess the validity of the conceptual model. Three hundred twenty-six mental health counselors read one of six randomly assigned vignettes depicting a therapist contemplating adopting an evidence-based practice (EBP). Participants used 15 items to rate the therapist’s perceptions of the acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility of adopting the EBP. CFA and Cronbach alphas were used to refine the scales, assess structural validity, and assess reliability. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to assess known-groups validity. Finally, half of the counselors were randomly assigned to receive the same vignette and the other half the opposite vignette; and all were asked to re-rate acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility. Pearson correlation coefficients were used to assess test-retest reliability and linear regression to assess sensitivity to change. Results All but five items exhibited substantive and discriminant content validity. A trimmed CFA with five items per construct exhibited acceptable model fit (CFI = 0.98, RMSEA = 0.08) and high factor loadings (0.79 to 0.94). The alphas for 5-item scales were between 0.87 and 0.89. Scale refinement based on measure-specific CFAs and Cronbach alphas using vignette data produced 4-item scales (α’s from 0.85 to 0.91). A three-factor CFA exhibited acceptable fit (CFI = 0.96, RMSEA = 0.08) and high factor loadings (0.75 to 0.89), indicating structural validity. ANOVA showed significant main effects, indicating known-groups validity. Test-retest reliability coefficients ranged from 0.73 to 0.88. Regression analysis indicated each measure was sensitive to change in both directions. Conclusions The AIM, IAM, and FIM demonstrate promising psychometric properties. Predictive validity assessment is planned

Additional file 2: of Psychometric assessment of three newly developed implementation outcome measures

Scale reliabilities and factor loadings from single-factor confirmatory factor analysis of structural validity vignette data, N = 326. This file includes factor loadings in the one-factor CFAs. (DOCX 16 kb

Additional file 3: of Psychometric assessment of three newly developed implementation outcome measures

Final version of the Acceptability of Intervention Measure (AIM), Intervention Appropriateness Measure (IAM), and Feasibility of Intervention Measure (FIM). (DOCX 16 kb