Research in Home-Care Telemedicine: Challenges in Patient Recruitment

This study reports challenges in recruiting patients for a randomized controlled trial of homecare telemedicine. Descriptive statistics on patient eligibility for home-care telemedicine services and patient refusals for participation are provided. Frequency counts of reasons for study exclusion and participant refusal and Chi-square tests to compare race and age-related differences are given. Of 302 home-care patients reviewed, 197 (65.2%) did not meet inclusion criteria. The most common reasons for study exclusion were patients either needing 3 skilled nurse visits per week (n = 46, 23.4%). Of the eligible patients (n = 105), 79 persons (75.2%) refused participation. The most common reasons for refusals were lack of perceived addition benefit of telemedicine (n = 27, 34.2%), and that routine health care was sufficient (n = 23, 29.1%). Higher than expected proportions of patients did not meet chosen eligibility criteria or refused to participate. These results should be helpful in designing home-care telemedicine programs and clinical trials.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/63390/1/tmj.2004.10.155.pd

Accuracy of a Web-based System for Monitoring Chronic Wounds

This study evaluated the accuracy of a store-and-forward telemedicine system for assessing the status of chronic wounds, including those surgically repaired. Digital photos and other patient and wound data were collected by a nurse using a laptop and transmitted via the Internet to a database, which organized and posted the data onto a web page for access by the telemedicine physician. Two Veterans' Affairs (VA) medical centers and two specialties (plastic surgery, physical medicine and rehabilitation) participated in the study. Study patients included inpatients and outpatients with pressure ulcers of stage II, III, or IV, plus outpatients with diabetic foot ulcers or venous stasis ulcers. All patients were assessed both in-person (the "gold standard") and with the telemedicine system using yes/no responses and a 5-point scale, respectively, on four diagnostic questions concerning wound healing and infection, based on AHCPR guidelines. A total of 70 patients were enrolled, with data collected on 430 visits: up to 6 visits per wound. Percentage agreement for all visits ranged from 67.1 for "not healing" to 88.8 for "cellulitis present." Sensitivity ranged from 0.32 for cellulitis to 0.63 for necrosis; and specificity ranged from 0.80 for necrosis to 0.91 for cellulitis. Although agreement of the telemedicine system was not high, it was not significantly less than interphysician agreement on in-person assessments. A relatively inexpensive store-and-forward telemedicine system for monitoring the status of chronic wounds has the potential to improve access to specialty care for patients who are not currently receiving routine monitoring by specialized nurses or physicians.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/63181/1/153056203766437471.pd

science

Research article Fostering implementation of health services research findings into practice: a consolidated framework for advancing implementatio

Fidelity of implementation: development and testing of a measure

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Along with the increasing prevalence of chronic illness has been an increase in interventions, such as nurse case management programs, to improve outcomes for patients with chronic illness. Evidence supports the effectiveness of such interventions in reducing patient morbidity, mortality, and resource utilization, but other studies have produced equivocal results. Often, little is known about how implementation of an intervention actually occurs in clinical practice. While studies often assume that interventions are used in clinical practice exactly as originally designed, this may not be the case. Thus, fidelity of an intervention's implementation reflects how an intervention is, or is not, used in clinical practice and is an important factor in understanding intervention effectiveness and in replicating the intervention in dissemination efforts. The purpose of this paper is to contribute to the understanding of implementation science by (a) proposing a methodology for measuring fidelity of implementation (FOI) and (b) testing the measure by examining the association between FOI and intervention effectiveness.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We define and measure FOI based on organizational members' level of commitment to using the distinct components that make up an intervention as they were designed. Semistructured interviews were conducted among 18 organizational members in four medical centers, and the interviews were analyzed qualitatively to assess three dimensions of commitment to use--satisfaction, consistency, and quality--and to develop an overall rating of FOI. Mixed methods were used to explore the association between FOI and intervention effectiveness (inpatient resource utilization and mortality).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Predictive validity of the FOI measure was supported based on the statistical significance of FOI as a predictor of intervention effectiveness. The strongest relationship between FOI and intervention effectiveness was found when an alternative measure of FOI was utilized based on individual intervention components that had the greatest variation across medical centers.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>In addition to contextual factors, implementation research needs to consider FOI as an important factor in influencing intervention effectiveness. Our proposed methodology offers a systematic means for understanding organizational members' use of distinct intervention components, assessing the reasons for variation in use across components and organizations, and evaluating the impact of FOI on intervention effectiveness.</p

An observational study of the effectiveness of practice guideline implementation strategies examined according to physicians' cognitive styles

Abstract Background Reviews of guideline implementation recommend matching strategies to the specific setting, but provide little specific guidance about how to do so. We hypothesized that the highest level of guideline-concordant care would be achieved where implementation strategies fit well with physicians' cognitive styles. Methods We conducted an observational study of the implementation of guidelines for hypertension management among patients with diabetes at 43 Veterans' Health Administration medical center primary care clinics. Clinic leaders provided information about all implementation strategies employed at their sites. Guidelines implementation strategies were classified as education, motivation/incentive, or barrier reduction using a pre-specified system. Physician's cognitive styles were measured on three scales: evidence vs. experience as the basis of knowledge, sensitivity to pragmatic concerns, and conformity to local practices. Doctors' decisions were designated guideline-concordant if the patient's blood pressure was within goal range, or if the blood pressure was out of range and a dose change or medication change was initiated, or if the patient was already using medications from three classes. Results The final sample included 163 physicians and 1,174 patients. All of the participating sites used one or more educational approaches to implement the guidelines. Over 90% of the sites also provided group or individual feedback on physician performance on the guidelines, and over 75% implemented some type of reminder system. A minority of sites used monetary incentives, penalties, or barrier reduction. The only type of intervention that was associated with increased guideline-concordant care in a logistic model was barrier reduction (p < 0.02). The interaction between physicians' conformity scale scores and the effect of barrier reduction was significant (p < 0.05); physicians ranking lower on the conformity scale responded more to barrier reduction. Conclusion Guidelines implementation strategies that were designed to reduce physician time pressure and task complexity were the only ones that improved performance. Education may have been necessary but was clearly not sufficient, and more was not better. Incentives had no discernible effect. Measurable physician characteristics strongly affected response to implementation strategies.http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/112690/1/13012_2006_Article_70.pd

Adverse events among high-risk participants in a home-based walking study: a descriptive study

Abstract Background For high-risk individuals and their healthcare providers, finding the right balance between promoting physical activity and minimizing the risk of adverse events can be difficult. More information on the prevalence and influence of adverse events is needed to improve providers' ability to prescribe effective and safe exercise programs for their patients. Methods This study describes the type and severity of adverse events reported by participants with cardiovascular disease or at-risk for cardiovascular disease that occurred during an unsupervised, home-based walking study. This multi-site, randomized controlled trial tested the feasibility of a diet and lifestyle activity intervention over 1.5 years. At month 13, 274 eligible participants (male veterans) were recruited who were ambulatory, BMI > 28, and reporting one or more cardiovascular disease risk factors. All participants attended five, face-to-face dietitian-delivered counseling sessions during the six-month intervention. Participants were randomized to three study arms: 1) time-based walking goals, 2) simple pedometer-based walking goals, and 3) enhanced pedometer-based walking goals with Internet-mediated feedback. Two physicians verified adverse event symptom coding. Results Enrolled participants had an average of five medical comorbidities. During 1110 person months of observation, 87 of 274 participants reported 121 adverse events. One serious study-related adverse event (atrial fibrillation) was reported; the individual resumed study participation within three days. Non-serious, study related adverse events made up 12% of all symptoms – predominantly minor musculoskeletal events. Serious, non-study related adverse events represented 32% of all symptoms while non-serious, non-study related adverse events made up 56% of symptoms. Cardiovascular disease events represented over half of the non-study related adverse event symptoms followed by musculoskeletal complaints. Adverse events caused 50 temporary suspensions averaging 26 days in duration before physician medical clearance was obtained to resume walking. Conclusion Men at high risk for adverse cardiovascular events can safely be advised to start a progressive walking program. Results suggest that minor to serious medical problems unrelated to exercise are a major barrier to walking adherence. Helping individuals with chronic illness return to physical activity quickly but safely after an adverse event is an important component of any physical activity intervention targeting this population.http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/112714/1/12966_2007_Article_97.pd

The "State of Implementation" Progress Report (SIPREP): a pilot demonstration of a navigation system for implementation

BACKGROUND: Implementation of new clinical programs across diverse facilities in national healthcare systems like the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) can be extraordinarily complex. Implementation is a dynamic process, influenced heavily by local organizational context and the individual staff at each medical center. It is not always clear in the midst of implementation what issues are most important to whom or how to address them. In recognition of these challenges, implementation researchers within VHA developed a new systemic approach to map the implementation work required at different stages and provide ongoing, detailed, and nuanced feedback about implementation progress. METHODS: This observational pilot demonstration project details how a novel approach to monitoring implementation progress was applied across two different national VHA initiatives. Stage-specific grids organized the implementation work into columns, rows, and cells, identifying specific implementation activities at the site level to be completed along with who was responsible for completing each implementation activity. As implementation advanced, item-level checkboxes were crossed off and cells changed colors, offering a visual representation of implementation progress within and across sites across the various stages of implementation. RESULTS: Applied across two different national initiatives, the SIPREP provided a novel navigation system to guide and inform ongoing implementation within and across facilities. The SIPREP addressed different needs of different audiences, both described and explained how to implement the program, made ample use of visualizations, and revealed both what was happening and not happening within and across sites. The final SIPREP product spanned distinct stages of implementation. CONCLUSIONS: The SIPREP made the work of implementation explicit at the facility level (i.e., who does what, and when) and provided a new common way for all stakeholders to monitor implementation progress and to help keep implementation moving forward. This approach could be adapted to a wide range of settings and interventions and is planned to be integrated into the national deployment of two additional VHA initiatives within the next 12 months

Correction to: The “State of Implementation” Progress Report (SIPREP): a pilot demonstration of a navigation system for implementation

Following publication of the original article [1], it was reported that the incorrect version of a reviewer’s comments were published. The correct version has now been uploaded and the original article has been corrected

The use of telehealth for diabetes management: a qualitative study of telehealth provider perceptions

BACKGROUND: Monitoring and Messaging Devices (MMDs) are telehealth systems used by patients in their homes, and are designed to promote patient self-management, patient education, and clinical monitoring and follow-up activities. Although these systems have been widely promoted by health care systems, including the Veterans Health Administration, very little information is available on factors that facilitate use of the MMD system, or on barriers to use. METHODS: We conducted in-depth qualitative interviews with clinicians using MMD-based telehealth programs at two Veterans Affairs Medical Centers in the Midwestern United States. RESULTS: Findings suggest that MMD program enrollment is limited by both clinical and non-clinical factors, and that patients have varying levels of program participation and system use. Telehealth providers see MMDs as a useful tool for monitoring patients who are interested in working on management of their disease, but are concerned with technical challenges and the time commitment required to use MMDs. CONCLUSION: Telehealth includes a rapidly evolving and potentially promising range of technologies for meeting the growing number of patients and clinicians who face the challenges of diabetes care, and future research should explore the most effective means of ensuring successful program implementation

Fostering implementation of health services research findings into practice: a consolidated framework for advancing implementation science

Abstract Background Many interventions found to be effective in health services research studies fail to translate into meaningful patient care outcomes across multiple contexts. Health services researchers recognize the need to evaluate not only summative outcomes but also formative outcomes to assess the extent to which implementation is effective in a specific setting, prolongs sustainability, and promotes dissemination into other settings. Many implementation theories have been published to help promote effective implementation. However, they overlap considerably in the constructs included in individual theories, and a comparison of theories reveals that each is missing important constructs included in other theories. In addition, terminology and definitions are not consistent across theories. We describe the Consolidated Framework For Implementation Research (CFIR) that offers an overarching typology to promote implementation theory development and verification about what works where and why across multiple contexts. Methods We used a snowball sampling approach to identify published theories that were evaluated to identify constructs based on strength of conceptual or empirical support for influence on implementation, consistency in definitions, alignment with our own findings, and potential for measurement. We combined constructs across published theories that had different labels but were redundant or overlapping in definition, and we parsed apart constructs that conflated underlying concepts. Results The CFIR is composed of five major domains: intervention characteristics, outer setting, inner setting, characteristics of the individuals involved, and the process of implementation. Eight constructs were identified related to the intervention (e.g., evidence strength and quality), four constructs were identified related to outer setting (e.g., patient needs and resources), 12 constructs were identified related to inner setting (e.g., culture, leadership engagement), five constructs were identified related to individual characteristics, and eight constructs were identified related to process (e.g., plan, evaluate, and reflect). We present explicit definitions for each construct. Conclusion The CFIR provides a pragmatic structure for approaching complex, interacting, multi-level, and transient states of constructs in the real world by embracing, consolidating, and unifying key constructs from published implementation theories. It can be used to guide formative evaluations and build the implementation knowledge base across multiple studies and settings.http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/78272/1/1748-5908-4-50.xmlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/78272/2/1748-5908-4-50-S1.PDFhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/78272/3/1748-5908-4-50-S3.PDFhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/78272/4/1748-5908-4-50-S4.PDFhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/78272/5/1748-5908-4-50.pdfhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/78272/6/1748-5908-4-50-S2.PDFPeer Reviewe