Developing and Pilot Testing a Spanish Translation of CollaboRATE for Use in the United States

Background/Aim Given the need for access to patient-facing materials in multiple languages, this study aimed to develop and pilot test an accurate and understandable translation of CollaboRATE, a three-item patient-reported measure of shared decision-making, for Spanish-speaking patients in the United States (US). Method We followed the Translate, Review, Adjudicate, Pre-test, Document (TRAPD) survey translation protocol. Cognitive interviews were conducted with Spanish-speaking adults within an urban Massachusetts internal medicine clinic. For the pilot test, all patients with weekday appointments between May 1 and May 29, 2015 were invited to complete CollaboRATE in either English or Spanish upon exit. We calculated the proportion of respondents giving the best score possible on CollaboRATE and compared scores across key patient subgroups. Results: Four rounds of cognitive interviews with 26 people were completed between January and April 2015. Extensive, iterative refinements to survey items between interview rounds led to final items that were generally understood by participants with diverse educational backgrounds. Pilot data collection achieved an overall response rate of 73 percent, with 606 (49%) patients completing Spanish CollaboRATE questionnaires and 624 (51%) patients completing English CollaboRATE questionnaires. The proportion of respondents giving the best score possible on CollaboRATE was the same (86%) for both the English and Spanish versions of the instrument. Discussion Our translation method, guided by emerging best practices in survey and health measurement translation, encompassed multiple levels of review. By conducting four rounds of cognitive interviews with iterative item refinement between each round, we arrived at a Spanish language version of CollaboRATE that was understandable to a majority of cognitive interview participants and was completed by more than 600 pilot questionnaire respondents

The rehabilitation enhancing aging through connected health (REACH) study: study protocol for a quasi-experimental clinical trial

Background: Mobility limitations among older adults increase the risk for disability and healthcare utilization. Rehabilitative care is identified as the most efficacious treatment for maintaining physical function. However, there is insufficient evidence identifying a healthcare model that targets prevention of mobility decline among older adults. The objective of this study is to evaluate the preliminary effectiveness of a physical therapy program, augmented with mobile tele-health technology, on mobility function and healthcare utilization among older adults. Methods: This is a quasi-experimental 12-month clinical trial conducted within a metropolitan-based healthcare system in the northeastern United States. It is in parallel with an existing longitudinal cohort study evaluating mobility decline among community-dwelling older adult primary care patients over one year. Seventy-five older adults (≥ 65–95 years) are being recruited using identical inclusion/exclusion criteria to the cohort study. Three aims will be evaluated: the effect of our program on 1) physical function, 2) healthcare utilization, and 3) healthcare costs. Changes in patient-reported function over 1 year in those receiving the intervention (aim 1) will be compared to propensity score matched controls (N = 150) from the cohort study. For aims 2 and 3, propensity scores, derived from logistic regression model that includes demographic and diagnostic information available through claims and enrollment information, will be used to match treatment and control patients in a ratio of 1:2 or 1:3 from a Medicare Claims Registry derived from the same geographic region. The intervention consists of a one-year physical therapy program that is divided between a combination of outpatient and home visits (6–10 total visits) and is augmented on a computerized tablet using of a commercially available application to deliver a progressive home-based exercise program emphasizing lower-extremity function and a walking program. Discussion Incorporating mobile health into current healthcare models of rehabilitative care has the potential to decrease hospital visits and provide a longer duration of care. If the hypotheses are supported and demonstrate improved mobility and reduced healthcare utilization, this innovative care model would be applicable for optimizing the maintenance of functional independence among community-dwelling older adults. Trial registration ClinicalTrial.gov Identifier: NCT02580409 (Date of registration October 14, 2015)

A Novel Approach to Identifying Trajectories of Mobility Change in Older Adults

Objectives: To validate trajectories of late-life mobility change using a novel approach designed to overcome the constraints of modest sample size and few follow-up time points. Methods: Using clinical reasoning and distribution-based methodology, we identified trajectories of mobility change (Late Life Function and Disability Instrument) across 2 years in 391 participants age ≥65 years from a prospective cohort study designed to identify modifiable impairments predictive of mobility in late-life. We validated our approach using model fit indices and comparing baseline mobility-related factors between trajectories. Results: Model fit indices confirmed that the optimal number of trajectories were between 4 and 6. Mobility-related factors varied across trajectories with the most unfavorable values in poor mobility trajectories and the most favorable in high mobility trajectories. These factors included leg strength, trunk extension endurance, knee flexion range of motion, limb velocity, physical performance measures, and the number and prevalence of medical conditions including osteoarthritis and back pain. Conclusions: Our findings support the validity of this approach and may facilitate the investigation of a broader scope of research questions within aging populations of varied sizes and traits

Using CollaboRATE, a brief patient‐reported measure of shared decision making: Results from three clinical settings in the United States

Abstract Introduction: CollaboRATE is a brief patient survey focused on shared decision making. This paper aims to (i) provide insight on facilitators and challenges to implementing a real‐time patient survey and (ii) evaluate CollaboRATE scores and response rates across multiple clinical settings with varied patient populations. Method All adult patients at three United States primary care practices were eligible to complete CollaboRATE post‐visit. To inform key learnings, we aggregated all mentions of unanticipated decisions, problems and administration errors from field notes and email communications. Mixed‐effects logistic regression evaluated the impact of site, clinician, patient age and patient gender on the CollaboRATE score. Results: While CollaboRATE score increased only slightly with increasing patient age (OR 1.018, 95% CI 1.014‐1.021), female patient gender was associated with significantly higher CollaboRATE scores (OR 1.224, 95% CI 1.073‐1.397). Clinician also predicts CollaboRATE score (random effect variance 0.146). Site‐specific factors such as clinical workflow and checkout procedures play a key role in successful in‐clinic implementation and are significantly related to CollaboRATE scores, with Site 3 scoring significantly higher than Site 1 (OR 1.759, 95% CI 1.216 to 2.545) or Site 2 (z=−2.71, 95% CI −1.114 to −0.178). Discussion This study demonstrates that CollaboRATE can be used in diverse primary care settings. A clinic's workflow plays a crucial role in implementation. Patient experience measurement risks becoming a burden to both patients and administrators. Episodic use of short measurement tools could reduce this burden

No-Show to Primary Care Appointments

Background: Missed primary care appointments lead to poor disease control and later presentation to care. No-show rates are higher in clinics caring for underserved populations and may contribute to poorer health outcomes in this group. The objective of this study was to determine who were the patients not showing to primary care appointments and their reasons to no-show. Methods: A retrospective study was conducted at a community health center serving a predominantly Latino, immigrant, low-income population. Adult patients >18 years old who did not show to primary care appointments during a 5-month period were called by a bilingual (English and Spanish) patient service coordinator. The patients’ reported reason for missing the appointment was documented. Two-sided t test of proportions was used to compare demographic characteristics of the patients that showed to their appointments to patients that did not. Results: Of 7508 scheduled appointments, 5604 were included in the analysis and 927 (16.5%) no-showed. There were 735 (79%) calls made to the patients who missed their appointments and 273 (37%) were reached. The 2 most common reasons for missing an appointment were forgetting (n = 97, 35.5%) and miscommunication (n = 86, 31.5%). When compared with patients who came to their appointments, patients who no-showed were younger ( P < .0001), more likely to be black ( P = .0423) or Hispanic ( P = .0001), and to have Medicaid ( P < .0001). Conclusions: No-show rates interfere with quality primary care. Interventions designed to target reasons for no-show are needed to help reduce the no-show rate, improve access and decrease health disparities in underserved patient populations

Perspectives on Preventive Health Care and Barriers to Breast Cancer Screening Among Iraqi Women Refugees

Since the Iraq war began in 2003, over 4 million Iraqis have been displaced. Little is known about preventive cancer care in this population, but stark disparities have been documented. The purpose of this study was to assess the perspectives of Iraqi women refugees on preventive care and perceived barriers to breast cancer screening. Interviews were conducted in Arabic with twenty Iraqi refugee women by a bilingual (English/Arabic) medical student, transcribed, translated and coded according to established qualitative content and thematic analysis procedures. Psychosocial barriers, culturally mediated beliefs, and health consequences of war were identified as major themes, ultimately showing what factors, alone and collectively, have impeded Iraqi refugee women’s ability and motivation to obtain breast cancer screening. To improve cancer prevention and decrease disparities in care in this most vulnerable population, culturally appropriate health education and outreach programs, as well as further community-level targeted studies, are needed

Bosnian, Iraqi, and Somali Refugee Women Speak: A Comparative Qualitative Study of Refugee Health Beliefs on Preventive Health and Breast Cancer Screening

INTRODUCTION: The low uptake of preventive services in disadvantaged communities is a continuing challenge to public health. Women refugee communities are particularly vulnerable populations, and disparities in both preventive care and breast cancer screening have been documented sparsely. The objective of this qualitative study was to explore Bosnian, Iraqi, and Somali women refugees\u27 beliefs about preventive care and breast cancer screening to inform future community interventions and best practices. METHODS: In an urban community health center, 57 interviews with Bosnian, Somali, and Iraqi women refugees were conducted by native language speakers. Interview transcripts were coded and analyzed according to best practices for thematic and content analysis. The responses of three groups were compared. FINDINGS: Similarities across participants included barriers to care such as fear of pain and diagnosis, modesty, and work and childcare commitments; facilitative factors such as outreach efforts, appointment reminders, and personal contact from health providers; perceptions of how the American medical infrastructure compared with inadequacies in their home countries; and positive attitude toward U.S. health professionals. Differences that emerged among groups were: varying degrees of medical exposure to doctors in home countries, the impact of war on health systems; and understanding preventive breast care. CONCLUSION: Taken together, duration of time in United States and prior exposure to Western medicine account for differences in refugee women\u27s knowledge of preventive care. Understanding population-specific health beliefs, health information, and behavior are crucial for designing tailored prevention programs for refugee women

Long-Term Impact of a Culturally Tailored Patient Navigation Program on Disparities in Breast Cancer Screening in Refugee Women After the Program's End

Purpose: To examine the long-term effects of a patient navigation (PN) program for mammography screening tailored to refugee women and to assess screening utilization among these women after PN ended. Methods: We assessed the proportion of patients completing mammography screening during the prior 2 years during 2012–2016 for refugee women who had previously received PN compared with that of English-speaking women cared for at the same health center during the same period, both overall and stratifying by age. We used logistic regression to compare screening completion between refugees and English speakers, adjusting for age, race, insurance status, number of clinic visits, and clustering by primary care physician and to test trends in screening over time. Results: In 2012, the year when the funding for PN ceased, among 126 refugee women eligible for breast cancer screening, mammography screening rates were significantly higher among refugees (90.5%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 83.5–94.7%) than among English speakers (81.9%, 95% CI: 76.2–86.5%, p=0.006). By 2016, screening rates decreased among refugee women (76.5%, 95% CI: 61.6–86.9%, p=0.023) but were not statistically significantly different from those among English-speaking women (80.5%, 95% CI: 74.4–85.3%, p=0.460). Screening prevalence for refugee women remained above the pre-PN program screening levels, and considerably so in women &lt;50 years. Conclusion: The culturally and language-tailored PN program for refugee women appeared to have persistent effects, with refugee women maintaining similar levels of mammography screening to English-speaking patients 5 years after the PN program's end

Developing and Pilot Testing a Spanish Translation of CollaboRATE for Use in the United States

Background/Aim Given the need for access to patient-facing materials in multiple languages, this study aimed to develop and pilot test an accurate and understandable translation of CollaboRATE, a three-item patient-reported measure of shared decision-making, for Spanish-speaking patients in the United States (US). Method We followed the Translate, Review, Adjudicate, Pre-test, Document (TRAPD) survey translation protocol. Cognitive interviews were conducted with Spanish-speaking adults within an urban Massachusetts internal medicine clinic. For the pilot test, all patients with weekday appointments between May 1 and May 29, 2015 were invited to complete CollaboRATE in either English or Spanish upon exit. We calculated the proportion of respondents giving the best score possible on CollaboRATE and compared scores across key patient subgroups. Results Four rounds of cognitive interviews with 26 people were completed between January and April 2015. Extensive, iterative refinements to survey items between interview rounds led to final items that were generally understood by participants with diverse educational backgrounds. Pilot data collection achieved an overall response rate of 73 percent, with 606 (49%) patients completing Spanish CollaboRATE questionnaires and 624 (51%) patients completing English CollaboRATE questionnaires. The proportion of respondents giving the best score possible on CollaboRATE was the same (86%) for both the English and Spanish versions of the instrument. Discussion Our translation method, guided by emerging best practices in survey and health measurement translation, encompassed multiple levels of review. By conducting four rounds of cognitive interviews with iterative item refinement between each round, we arrived at a Spanish language version of CollaboRATE that was understandable to a majority of cognitive interview participants and was completed by more than 600 pilot questionnaire respondents