Challenges in Identifying Patients with Type 2 Diabetes for Quality-Improvement Interventions in Primary Care Settings and the Importance of Valid Disease Registries

Evaluating the use of systems thinking methods in healthcare: a RE-AIM analysis of AcciMap and Net-HARMS

There are increasing calls for the application of systems ergonomics methods in healthcare, although evidence for their utility and uptake is limited. In this study, 67 Australian healthcare workers participated in a six-month longitudinal study where they were trained to apply the AcciMap adverse event analysis and Net-HARMS risk assessment methods. Data were gathered in line with the RE-AIM (Reach, Efficacy, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance) evaluation framework, including rates of organisational uptake and method validity, perceived workload, usability, and barriers and facilitators to use in practice. Overall RE-AIM ratings for AcciMap were relatively high, and more moderate for Net-HARMS. Time constraints was the most frequently identified barrier to the use of both methods in practice, while there was more organisational resistance to Net-HARMS uptake. Facilitators for the use of both methods include providing quality training and mentorship, additional time and software resources, and dedicated job roles.

Providing a framework for evaluation disease registry and health outcomes Software: Updating the CIPROS checklist

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Properly designed and implemented registry systems play an important role in improving health outcomes and reducing care costs, and can provide a true representation of clinical practice, disease outcomes, safety, and efficacy. Therefore, the aim of this study was to redesign and develop a checklist with items for a patient registry software system (CIPROS) Checklist.

METHOD

The study is descriptive-cross-sectional. The extraction of the data elements of the checklist was first done through a comprehensive review of the texts in PubMed, Science Direct and Scopus databases and receiving articles related to the evaluation of registry systems. Based on the extracted data, a five-point Likert scale questionnaire was created and 30 experts in this field were asked for their opinions using the two-step Delphi method.

RESULTS

A total of 100 information items were determined as a registry software evaluation checklist. This checklist included 12 groups of software architecture factors, development, interfaces and interactivity, semantics and standardization, internationality, data management, data quality and usability, data analysis, security, privacy, organizational, education and public factors.

CONCLUSION

By using the results of this research, it is possible to identify the defects and possible strengths of the registry software and put it at the disposal of the relevant officials to make a decision in this field. In this way, among the designers and developers of these softwares, the best and most appropriate ones are selected with the needs of the registry programs.

Why Is the Electronic Health Record So Challenging for Research and Clinical Care?

BACKGROUND

 The electronic health record (EHR) has become increasingly ubiquitous. At the same time, health professionals have been turning to this resource for access to data that is needed for the delivery of health care and for clinical research. There is little doubt that the EHR has made both of these functions easier than earlier days when we relied on paper-based clinical records. Coupled with modern database and data warehouse systems, high-speed networks, and the ability to share clinical data with others are large number of challenges that arguably limit the optimal use of the EHR OBJECTIVES:  Our goal was to provide an exhaustive reference for those who use the EHR in clinical and research contexts, but also for health information systems professionals as they design, implement, and maintain EHR systems.

METHODS

 This study includes a panel of 24 biomedical informatics researchers, information technology professionals, and clinicians, all of whom have extensive experience in design, implementation, and maintenance of EHR systems, or in using the EHR as clinicians or researchers. All members of the panel are affiliated with Penn Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania and have experience with a variety of different EHR platforms and systems and how they have evolved over time.

RESULTS

 Each of the authors has shared their knowledge and experience in using the EHR in a suite of 20 short essays, each representing a specific challenge and classified according to a functional hierarchy of interlocking facets such as usability and usefulness, data quality, standards, governance, data integration, clinical care, and clinical research.

CONCLUSION

 We provide here a set of perspectives on the challenges posed by the EHR to clinical and research users.

Working towards a better understanding of type 2 diabetes care organization with First Nations communities: a qualitative assessment

Background

Diabetes care is suboptimal in First Nations populations. Innovative and culturally-relevant approaches are needed to promote proactive organization of diabetes care for diabetes patients on-reserve in Canada. The Reorganizing the Approach to Diabetes care through the Application of Registries (RADAR) model is one strategy to improve care: an integrated disease registry and electronic health record for community healthcare workers with centralized care coordination. The aim of this study was to qualitatively assess the organization of type 2 diabetes care in participating communities in Alberta, Canada, at baseline prior to implementing RADAR.

Methods

Using qualitative description, we purposefully sampled healthcare workers involved in diabetes care at each health center. We used the 5Rs framework (i.e., Recognize, Register, Resource, Relay, Recall) to inform the baseline assessment and conducted group interviews in 6 communities with 16 healthcare workers. Detailed notes were taken and validated by participants. Data was managed using ATLAS.ti 8 and analyzed using content analysis.

Results

We found strong commitment and effort by local healthcare workers to support people living with type 2 diabetes in their communities. However, healthcare workers were limited in their ability to identify (i.e., recognize), track (i.e., register and relay) and manage (i.e., resource and recall) people with type 2 diabetes as proposed by the 5Rs framework. The organization of diabetes care was often reactive and dependent on patients’ abilities to navigate the health system. Interestingly, participants talked about the 5Rs in relationship to one another, not in a linear or isolated manner.

Conclusions

Overall, the organization of diabetes care in participating communities did not align with the recommended approach of the 5Rs framework. In addition, we propose “reimagining” the 5Rs to reflect the interdependence and mediation of components situated within human and financial resources. This will better equip healthcare workers to assess, plan and execute organized and proactive diabetes care. However, the onus on people living with type 2 diabetes to engage with healthcare services remains a concern.

Trial registration

ISRCTN.com, ISRCTN14359671.

Interventions using pediatric diabetes registry data for quality improvement: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Diabetes registries contain vast amounts of data that can be used for quality improvement (QI) and are foundational elements of learning health systems; infrastructure to share data, create knowledge rapidly and inform decisions to improve health outcomes. QI interventions using adult diabetes registries are associated with improved glycemic control, complication screening rates, and reduced hospitalizations; pediatric data are limited.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effects of QI strategies that use pediatric diabetes registry data on care processes, organization of care, and patient outcomes.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Google, Google Scholar, Directory of Open Access Journals, and diabetes registry websites for studies that evaluated the impact of QI interventions on diabetes care processes, care organization, or patient outcomes, using pediatric diabetes registry data. Two reviewers independently assessed eligibility, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias.

RESULTS

Twelve studies were included. Most interventions targeted health-care providers and evaluated effects on patient outcomes. Five of nine studies that evaluated hemoglobin A1c found improvements of 0.26% to 0.85% (2.8-9.3 mmol/mol) while four found no difference. Many report positive effects on care processes or organization. Study data could not be combined because of variable study design and outcome measures. Included studies represent a minority of existing registries.

CONCLUSIONS

Pediatric diabetes registries are underused for QI and may facilitate improved care and outcomes. Existing vast amount of pediatric registry data could be used to foster the development of learning health systems and to improve diabetes care and outcomes.

A qualitative study examining healthcare managers and providers' perspectives on participating in primary care implementation research

BACKGROUND

Primary care reforms should be supported by high-quality evidence across the entire life cycle of research. Front-line healthcare providers play an increasing role in implementation research. We recently evaluated two interventions for people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) in partnership with four Primary Care Networks (PCNs) in Alberta, Canada. Here, we report healthcare professionals perspectives on participating in primary care implementation research.

METHODS

Guided by the RE-AIM framework, we collected qualitative data before, during, and after both interventions. We conducted 34 in-person or telephone interviews with 17 individual PCN professionals. We used content analysis to identify emerging codes and concepts.

RESULTS

Two major themes emerged from the data. First, healthcare managers were eager to conduct implementation research in a primary care setting. Second, regardless of willingness to conduct research, there were challenges to implementing experimental study designs for both interventions. PCN professionals presumed the interventions were better than usual care, expressed role conflict, and reported administrative burdens related to research participation. Perceptions of patient vulnerability and an obligation to intervene exacerbated these issues.

CONCLUSIONS

Healthcare professionals with limited practical research experience might not foresee the challenges in implementing experimental study designs in primary care settings to generate high-quality evidence. These issues are intensified when healthcare professionals perceive target patient populations as vulnerable and in need of intervention based on the presenting illness. Possible solutions include further research training, involving healthcare professionals in study design development, and using non-clinical staff to conduct research activities, particularly among acutely unwell patient populations.

Contextualizing the Proven Effectiveness of a Lifestyle Intervention for Type 2 Diabetes in Primary Care: A Qualitative Assessment Based on the RE-AIM Framework

OBJECTIVE

The Healthy Eating and Active Living for Diabetes in Primary Care Networks (HEALD) intervention proved effective in increasing daily physical activity among people with type 2 diabetes in 4 community-based primary care networks (PCNs) in Alberta. Here, we contextualize its effectiveness by describing implementation fidelity and PCN staff's perceptions of its success in improving diabetes management.

METHODS

We used the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation and Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework to evaluate the HEALD intervention. Qualitative methods used to collect data related to the RE-AIM dimensions of implementation and effectiveness included interviews with PCN staff (n=24), research team reflections (n=4) and systematic documentation. We used content analysis, and data were imported into and managed using Nvivo 10.

RESULTS

HEALD was implemented as intended with adequate fidelity across all 4 PCNs. Identified implementation facilitators included appropriate human resources, the training provided, ongoing support, the provision of space and the simplicity of the intervention. However, PCN staff reported varying opinions regarding its potential for improving diabetes management among patients. Rationales for their views included intervention "dose" inadequacy; that the quality of usual care for people with diabetes was already good; patients were already managing their diabetes well; and the potential for cointervention. Recommended improvements to HEALD included increasing the dose of the intervention, expanding it to other modes of exercise and incorporating a medical clearance process.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the high degree of fidelity, the demonstrated effectiveness of HEALD in improving physical activity among patients was a result of sound implementation of an efficacious intervention. Increasing the dose of HEALD could result in additional improvements for patients.

Contextualizing the Effectiveness of a Collaborative Care Model for Primary Care Patients with Diabetes and Depression (Teamcare): A Qualitative Assessment Using RE-AIM

OBJECTIVE

We evaluated the implementation of an efficacious collaborative care model for patients with diabetes and depression in a controlled trial in 4 community-based primary care networks (PCNs) in Alberta, Canada. Similar to previous randomized trials, the nurse care manager-led TeamCare intervention demonstrated statistically significant improvements in depressive symptoms compared with usual care. We contextualized TeamCare's effectiveness by describing implementation fidelity at the organizational and patient levels.

METHODS

We used the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation and Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework to evaluate TeamCare. Qualitative methods used to collect data regarding the RE-AIM dimensions of Implementation and Effectiveness included interviews with PCN staff and specialists (n=36), research team reflections (n=4) and systematic documentation. We used content analysis, and Nvivo 10 for data management.

RESULTS

TeamCare was implemented as intended but with suboptimal fidelity. Deviations from the model included limited degrees of collaborative care practised within the PCNs, including varying physician participation, limited comfort in practising collaborative care and discontinuity of care managers. Despite suboptimal fidelity, respondents identified several implementation facilitators at the organizational level: training, ongoing implementation support, professional and personal qualities of the care manager and pre-existing relationships. Without knowledge of the effectiveness of the intervention in our controlled trial, respondents anticipated improved patient outcomes due to the main intervention components, including active patient follow up, specialist consultation and treat-to-target principles.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite suboptimal implementation in Alberta's primary care context, TeamCare resulted in improved outcomes similar to those demonstrated in previous randomized trials. A stronger culture of collaborative care would likely have yielded greater implementation fidelity and possibly better outcomes.