Clinical Considerations for Routine Auditory and Vestibular Monitoring in Patients with Cystic Fibrosis

Purpose Specific classes of antibiotics, such as aminoglycosides, have well-established adverse events producing permanent hearing loss, tinnitus, and balance and/or vestibular problems (i.e., ototoxicity). Although these antibiotics are frequently used to treat pseudomonas and other bacterial infections in patients with cystic fibrosis (CF), there are no formalized recommendations describing approaches to implementation of guideline adherent ototoxicity monitoring as part of CF clinical care. Method This consensus statement was developed by the International Ototoxicity Management Working Group (IOMG) Ad Hoc Committee on Aminoglycoside Antibiotics to address the clinical need for ototoxicity management in CF patients treated with known ototoxic medications. These clinical protocol considerations were created using consensus opinion from a community of international experts and available evidence specific to patients with CF, as well as published national and international guidelines on ototoxicity monitoring. Results The IOMG advocates four clinical recommendations for implementing routine and guideline adherent ototoxicity management in patients with CF. These are (a) including questions about hearing, tinnitus, and balance/vestibular problems as part of the routine CF case history for all patients; (b) utilizing timely point-of-care measures; (c) establishing a baseline and conducting posttreatment evaluations for each course of intravenous ototoxic drug treatment; and (d) repeating annual hearing and vestibular evaluations for all patients with a history of ototoxic antibiotic exposure. Conclusion Increased efforts for implementation of an ototoxicity management program in the CF care team model will improve identification of ototoxicity signs and symptoms, allow for timely therapeutic follow-up, and provide the clinician and patient an opportunity to make an informed decision about potential treatment modifications to minimize adverse events

Using Health Information Technology to Bring Social Determinants of Health into Primary Care: A Conceptual Framework to Guide Research

Several recent national initiatives have called for increased efforts to integrate social determinants of health (SDH) into health care settings using health information technology (HIT). However, there is limited evidence to guide the implementation of these recommendations in practice. Research is needed to understand what SDH information is most important to collect, how SDH information can be used to inform clinical care and referrals, and ultimately, whether and how integrating SDH screening and action into primary care affects individual and population health. We recently proposed a conceptual framework to illustrate how HIT can be used to bring SDH information into primary care. In this paper, we describe how we are putting this conceptual model into practice within the OCHIN network of community health centers by highlighting examples of ongoing research, identifying knowledge gaps, and outlining a roadmap of future research to move the field forward

Designing health information technology tools for behavioral health clinicians integrated within a primary care team

Background: Electronic health records (EHRs) are a key tool for primary care practice. However, EHR functionality is not keeping pace with the evolving informational and decision-support needs of behavioral health clinicians (BHCs) working on integrated teams. Objective: Describe workflows and tasks of BHCs working with integrated teams, identify their health information technology needs, and develop EHR tools to address them. Method: A mixed-methods, comparative-case study of six community health centers (CHCs) in Oregon, each with at least one BHC integrated in their primary care team. We observed clinical work and conducted interviews to understand workflows and clinical tasks, aiming to identify how effectively current EHRs supported integrated care delivery, including transitions, documentation, information sharing, and decision making. We analyzed these data and employed a user-centered design process to develop EHR tools addressing the identified needs. Results: BHCs used the primary care EHR for documentation and communication with other team members, but the EHR lacked the functionality to fully support integrated care. Needs include the ability to: (1) automate and track paper-based screening; (2) document behavioral health history; (3) access patient social and medical history relevant to behavioral health issues, and (4) rapidly document and track progress on goals. To meet these needs, we engaged users and developed a set of EHR tools called the BH e-Suite. Conclusion: Integrated primary care teams, and particularly BHCs, have unique information needs, workflows and tasks. These needs can be met and supported by the EHR with a moderate level of modification

Understanding Care Integration from the Ground Up: Five Organizing Constructs that Shape Integrated Practices.

PURPOSE: To provide empirical evidence on key organizing constructs shaping practical, real-world integration of behavior health and primary care to comprehensively address patients\u27 medical, emotional, and behavioral health needs. METHODS: In a comparative case study using an immersion-crystallization approach, a multidisciplinary team analyzed data from observations of practice operations, interviews, and surveys of practice members, and implementation diaries. Practices were drawn from 2 studies of practices attempting to integrate behavioral health and primary care: Advancing Care Together, a demonstration project of 11 practices located in Colorado, and the Integration Workforce Study, a study of 8 practices across the United States. RESULTS: We identified 5 key organizing constructs influencing integration of primary care and behavioral health: 1) Integration REACH (the extent to which the integration program was delivered to the identified target population), 2) establishment of continuum of care pathways addressing the location of care across the range of patient\u27s severity of illness, 3) approach to patient transitions: referrals or warm handoffs, 4) location of the integration workforce, and 5) participants\u27 mental model for integration. These constructs intertwine within an organization\u27s historic and social context to produce locally adapted approaches to integrating care. Contextual factors, particularly practice type, influenced whether specialty mental health and substance use services were colocated within an organization. CONCLUSION: Interaction among 5 organizing constructs and practice context produces diverse expressions of integrated care. These constructs provide a framework for understanding how primary care and behavioral health services can be integrated in routine practice