Improving evidence-based primary care for chronic kidney disease: study protocol for a cluster randomized control trial for translating evidence into practice (TRANSLATE CKD)

Virtual facilitation best practices and research priorities: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Facilitation is an implementation strategy that supports the uptake of evidence-based practices. Recently, use of virtual facilitation (VF), or the application of facilitation using primarily video-based conferencing technologies, has become more common, especially since the COVID-19 pandemic. Thorough assessment of the literature on VF, however, is lacking. This scoping review aimed to identify and describe conceptual definitions of VF, evaluate the consistency of terminology, and recommend "best" practices for its use as an implementation strategy.

METHODS

We conducted a scoping review to identify literature on VF following the PRISMA-ScR guidance. A search of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and CINAHL databases was conducted in June 2022 for English language articles published from January 2012 through May 2022 and repeated in May 2023 for articles published from January 2012 through April 2023. Identified articles, including studies and conference abstracts describing VF, were uploaded into Covidence and screened independently by two reviewers. Data extraction was done by two reviewers in Microsoft Excel; additionally, studies were evaluated based on the Proctor et al. (2013) reporting guidelines for specifying details of implementation strategies.

RESULTS

The search strategy identified 19 articles. After abstract and full-text screening, eight studies described by 10 articles/abstracts were included in analysis. Best practices summarized across studies included (1) stakeholder engagement, (2) understanding the recipient's organization, (3) facilitator training, (4) piloting, (5) evaluating facilitation, (6) use of group facilitation to encourage learning, and (7) integrating novel tools for virtual interaction. Three papers reported all or nearly all components of the Proctor et al. reporting guidelines; justification for use of VF was the most frequently omitted.

CONCLUSIONS

This scoping review evaluated available literature on use of VF as a primary implementation strategy and identified significant variability on how VF is reported, including inconsistent terminology, lack of details about how and why it was conducted, and limited adherence to published reporting guidelines. These inconsistencies impact generalizability of these methods by preventing replicability and full understanding of this emerging methodology. More work is needed to develop and evaluate best practices for effective VF to promote uptake of evidence-based interventions.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

N/A.

Protocol: Improving Access to Specialist Nephrology Care Among Rural/Remote Dwellers of Alberta: The Role of Electronic Consultation in Improving Care for Patients With Chronic Kidney Disease

Background:

As the burden of chronic kidney disease (CKD) continues to increase, many geographically dispersed Canadians have limited access to specialist nephrology care, which tends to be centralized in major urban areas. As a result, many rural/remote-dwellers in Canada experience poor quality of care and related adverse outcomes. It is imperative to develop alternative care delivery mechanisms to ensure optimal health outcomes for all Canadians.

Objective:

To investigate the feasibility and effectiveness of electronic consultation (eConsult) as a new model for interactions between specialists and primary care providers (PCPs) to improve access to care for patients with CKD.

Design:

This is a sequential, mixed methods study that will be conducted in 3 phases.

Setting:

The study will be conducted across the entire province of Alberta, supported by Alberta Kidney Care (formerly, Northern and Southern Alberta Renal Programs [NARP/SARP]).

Patients:

Patients suffering from CKD will be included in the study.

Measurements:

We will assess the barriers and enablers of implementation and adoption of an e-consultation protocol to facilitate access to care for patients with CKD in Alberta with a focus on rural/remote-dwellers with CKD. We will also evaluate the impact of the eConsult system (eg, improved access to specialist care, reduction in care gaps), assess the feasibility of province-wide implementation, and compare eConsult with practice facilitation versus eConsult alone in terms of access to specialist care, quality of care, and related outcomes.

Methods:

The study will be conducted in 3 phases. In phase 1, we will assess the perceptions of stakeholders (ie, PCPs, nephrologists, patients, policymakers, and other care providers) to improve CKD care delivery, quality, and outcomes in Alberta with focus groups and semistructured interviews. Phase 2 will engage specific family physicians for their input on key factors and logistical issues affecting the feasibility of implementing eConsult for the care of patients with CKD. Phase 3 will provide academic detailing including practice facilitation to clinics in Alberta to assess how eConsult with practice facilitation compares with eConsult alone in terms of access to specialist care, quality of care, and related outcomes.

Results:

We will assess stakeholder perceptions about potential barriers to and enablers of a new eConsult and decision support system strategy, focusing on elements that are most important for the design of a feasible and implementable intervention. We will develop, pilot test, and assess the impact of the eConsult model in improving access to specialist nephrology care and the feasibility of province-wide implementation. The final phase of the project will address key challenges for optimal care for patients with CKD living in rural, remote, and underserved areas of Alberta, particularly timely referral and disease management as well as the cost-effective benefits of eConsult.

Limitations:

Lack of high-speed Internet in many rural and remote areas of Alberta may lead to more time spent in completing the eConsult request online versus faxing a referral the traditional way. Allied health care staff (referral coordinators, administrative staff) require training to the eConsult system, and physicians at many remote sites do not have adequate staff to handle eConsult as an added task.

Conclusions:

Implementation of eConsult can favorably influence referral patterns, access to care, care quality, patient outcomes, and health care costs for people with CKD. Results of this study will inform the optimization of care for rural/remote-dwellers with CKD and will facilitate future partnerships with policymakers and provincial renal programs in Alberta to ensure optimal kidney health for all residents.

Trial registration:

Not required.

Effect of 2 Clinical Decision Support Strategies on Chronic Kidney Disease Outcomes in Primary Care: A Cluster Randomized Trial

IMPORTANCE

Information is needed about optimal strategies to improve evidence-based treatment of chronic kidney disease (CKD) in primary care.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether a multimodal intervention delays annualized loss of estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) in stages 3 and 4 CKD.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This pragmatic cluster randomized clinical trial enrolled 42 primary care practices located in nonhospital settings with electronic health record systems. Practices were recruited through the American Academy of Family Physicians National Research Network. The study was conducted January 2013 through January 2016.

INTERVENTIONS

Practices were randomized at the organization level to either the clinical decision support (CDS) plus practice facilitation (PF) group (n = 25) or CDS group (n = 17) using covariate constrained randomization. Both groups received point-of-care CDS to prompt screening, diagnosis, and treatment of CKD; the intervention group also received PF based on the 9-point TRANSLATE model (target, use point-of-care reminder systems, get administrative buy-in, network information systems using registries, site coordination, local physician champion, audit and feedback, team approach, and education).

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome measure was eGFR over time. Secondary outcome measures were systolic blood pressure over time, change in hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) over time, avoidance of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory medications, use of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor or angiotensin-renin blocker medication, early recognition and diagnosis of CKD, blood pressure control, and smoking cessation.

RESULTS

In this cluster randomized trial of 30 primary care practices comprising 6699 patients, there were 1685 patients in the control group (10 practices) and 5014 patients in the intervention group (20 practices). The final sample of practices differed from the original set of randomized practices owing to dropout. Patients in the practices were similar at baseline for age (mean [SD], 71.3 [9.6] years), sex (2716 male [40.5%]), and eGFR. There was a significant difference in eGFR slopes for patients in the intervention vs control group practices. The mean (SE) annualized loss of eGFR was 0.95 (0.19) in the control group in propensity-adjusted longitudinal analyses and 0.01 (0.12) in the intervention group (mean [SE] difference in slopes, 0.93 [0.23]; P < .001). Among patients with HbA1c measures, slopes differed significantly for patients in intervention vs control practices, with a mean (SE) annualized increase of 0.14 (0.03) in HbA1c for patients in control practices and a mean (SE) decline of 0.009 (0.02) for patients in intervention practices. There was a significant difference in HbA1c slopes for patients in the intervention compared with control group practices (control vs intervention, -0.14; P < .001), but no difference in the other secondary outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

A multimodal intervention in primary care, based on the TRANSLATE model, slowed annualized loss of eGFR. This study had several important strengths, weaknesses, and lessons learned regarding the implementation of pragmatic interventions in primary care to improve CKD outcomes.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01767883.

Recruiting primary care practices for practice-based research: a case study of a group-randomized study (TRANSLATE CKD) recruitment process

BACKGROUND

We assessed the challenging process of recruiting primary care practices in a practice-based research study.

METHODS

In this descriptive case study of recruitment data collected for a large practice-based study (TRANSLATE CKD), 48 single or multiple-site health care organizations in the USA with a total of 114 practices were invited to participate. We collected quantitative and qualitative measures of recruitment process and outcomes for the first 25 practices recruited. Information about 13 additional practices is not provided due to staff transitions and limited data collection resources.

RESULTS

Initial outreach was made to 114 practices (from 48 organizations, 41% small); 52 (45%) practices responded with interest. Practices enrolled in the study (n = 25) represented 22% of the total outreach number, or 48% of those initially interested. Average time to enroll was 71 calendar days (range 11-107). There was no difference in the number of days practices remained under recruitment, based on enrolled versus not enrolled (44.8 ± 30.4 versus 46.8 ± 25.4 days, P = 0.86) or by the organization size, i.e. large versus small (defined by having ≤4 distinct practices; 52 ± 23.6 versus 43.6 ± 27.8 days; P = 0.46). The most common recruitment barriers were administrative, e.g. lack of perceived direct organizational benefit, and were more prominent among large organizations.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the general belief that the research topic, invitation method, and interest in research may facilitate practice recruitment, our results suggest that most of the recruitment challenges represent managerial challenges. Future research projects may need to consider relevant methodologies from businesses administration and marketing fields.

Using the TRANSLATE Framework to Support Practice Transformation: Perspectives of a Practice Facilitator

BACKGROUND

In 2008, the Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) awarded Statewide Health Improvement Partnership (SHIP) funding to community health boards (CHBs), directing them to partner with schools, worksites, communities, and health care to address obesity and tobacco use/exposure.

METHODS

Each CHB selected one of two health care strategies: implement obesity and healthy lifestyle guidelines or connect clinics to community resources. The CHB in rural west-central Minnesota chose to champion clinical guideline implementation, assigning one of its own county-level public health nurses the role of practice facilitator (PF). This decision set the stage for a novel community partnership between public health, clinical guideline developers, and local providers of relevant clinical services.

LESSONS LEARNED

This community perspective describes how the PF organized support for clinical guideline implementation using the TRANSLATE framework, and explores the capacity of the TRANSLATE framework to accommodate particularities of clinical partners that is necessary in working to transform evidence-based knowledge into real-world practice.

Patient and provider perspectives on the design and implementation of an electronic consultation system for kidney care delivery in Canada: a focus group study

OBJECTIVES

We assessed stakeholder perceptions on the use of an electronic consultation system (e-Consult) to improve the delivery of kidney care in Alberta. We aim to identify acceptability, barriers and facilitators to the use of an e-Consult system for ambulatory kidney care delivery.

METHODS

This was a qualitative focus group study using a thematic analysis design. Eight focus groups were held in four locations in the province of Alberta, Canada. In total, there were 72 participants in two broad stakeholder categories: patients (including patients' relatives) and providers (including primary care physicians, nephrologists, other care providers and policymakers).

FINDINGS

The e-Consult system was generally acceptable across all stakeholder groups. The key barriers identified were length of time required for referring physicians to complete the e-Consult due to lack of integration with current electronic medical records, and concerns that increased numbers of requests might overwhelm nephrologists and lead to a delayed response or an unsustainable system. The key facilitators identified were potential improvement of care coordination, dissemination of best practice through an educational platform, comprehensive data to make decisions without the need for face-to-face consultation, timely feedback to primary care providers, timeliness/reduced delays for patients' rapid triage and identification of cases needing urgent care and improved access to information to facilitate decision-making in patient care.

CONCLUSIONS

Stakeholder perceptions regarding the e-Consult system were favourable, and the key barriers and facilitators identified will be considered in design and implementation of an acceptable and sustainable electronic consultation system for kidney care delivery.

Improving CKD Diagnosis and Blood Pressure Control in Primary Care: A Tailored Multifaceted Quality Improvement Programme

BACKGROUND

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a worldwide public health issue. From 2009 to 2014, the National Institute for Health Research Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care Greater Manchester (NIHR CLAHRC GM) in England ran 4 phased, 12-month quality improvement (QI) projects with 49 primary care practices in GM. Two measureable aims were set - halve undiagnosed CKD in participating practices using modelled estimates of prevalence; and optimise blood pressure (BP) control (<140/90 mm Hg in CKD patients without proteinuria; <130/80 mm Hg in CKD patients with proteinuria) for 75% of recorded cases of CKD. The 4 projects ran as follows: P1 = Project 1 with 19 practices (September 2009 to September 2010), P2 = Project 2 with 11 practices (March 2011 to March 2012), P3 = Project 3 with 12 practices (September 2012 to October 2013), and P4 = Project 4 with 7 practices (April 2013 to March 2014).

METHODS

Multifaceted intervention approaches were tailored based on a contextual analysis of practice support needs. Data were collected from practices by facilitators at baseline and again at project close, with self-reported data regularly requested from practices throughout the projects.

RESULTS

Halving undiagnosed CKD as per aim was exceeded in 3 of the 4 projects. The optimising BP aim was met in 2 projects. Total CKD cases after the programme increased by 2,347 (27%) from baseline to 10,968 in a total adult population (aged ≥18 years) of 231,568. The percentage of patients who managed to appropriate BP targets increased from 34 to 74% (P1), from 60 to 83% (P2), from 68 to 71% (P3), and from 63 to 76% (P4). In nonproteinuric CKD patients, 88, 90, 89, and 91%, respectively, achieved a target BP of <140/90 mm Hg. In proteinuric CKD patients, 69, 46, 48, and 45%, respectively, achieved a tighter target of <130/80 mm Hg. Analysis of national data over similar timeframes indicated that practices participating in the programme achieved higher CKD detection rates.

CONCLUSIONS

Participating practices identified large numbers of "missing" CKD patients with comparator data showing they outperformed non-QI practices locally and nationally over similar timeframes. Improved BP control also occurred through this intervention, but overall achievement of the tighter BP target in proteinuric patients was notably less.

Supportive Care: Time to Change Our Prognostic Tools and Their Use in CKD

In using a patient-centered approach, neither a clinician nor a prognostic score can predict with absolute certainty how well a patient will do or how long he will live; however, validated prognostic scores may improve accuracy of prognostic estimates, thereby enhancing the ability of the clinicians to appreciate the individual burden of disease and the prognosis of their patients and inform them accordingly. They may also facilitate nephrologist's recommendation of dialysis services to those who may benefit and proposal of alternative care pathways that might better respect patients' values and goals to those who are unlikely to benefit. The purpose of this article is to discuss the use as well as the limits and deficiencies of currently available prognostic tools. It will describe new predictors that could be integrated in future scores and the role of patients' priorities in development of new scores. Delivering patient-centered care requires an understanding of patients' priorities that are important and relevant to them. Because of limits of available scores, the contribution of new prognostic tools with specific markers of the trajectories for patients with CKD and patients' health reports should be evaluated in relation to their transportability to different clinical and cultural contexts and their potential for integration into the decision-making processes. The benefit of their use then needs to be quantified in clinical practice by outcome studies including health-related quality of life, patient and caregiver satisfaction, or utility for improving clinical management pathways and tailoring individualized patient-centered strategies of care. Future research also needs to incorporate qualitative methods involving patients and their caregivers to better understand the barriers and facilitators to use of these tools in the clinical setting. Information given to patients should be supported by a more realistic approach to what dialysis is likely to entail for the individual patient in terms of likely quality and quantity of life according to the patient's values and goals and not just the possibility of life prolongation.

Pragmatic Clinical Trials in CKD: Opportunities and Challenges

Randomized controlled trials in CKD lag in number behind those of other chronic diseases, despite the high morbidity and mortality experienced by patients with kidney disease and the exorbitant costs of their health care. Observational studies of CKD frequently yield seemingly paradoxic associations of traditional risk factors with outcomes, making it difficult to extrapolate the results of trials conducted in people with normal kidney function to patients with CKD. However, many completed trials in CKD have been limited by intermediate outcomes of unclear clinical significance or narrow eligibility criteria that limit external validity, and implementation of proven therapies remains a challenge. It is therefore imperative that the nephrology community capitalize on recent interest in novel approaches to trial design, such as pragmatic clinical trials. These trials are meant to promote research within real world settings to yield clinically relevant results with greater applicability than those of traditional trials, while maintaining many advantages, such as controlling for potential sources of bias. We provide a description of pragmatic clinical trials and a discussion of advantages, disadvantages, and practical challenges inherent to this study design, in the context of specific scientific questions relevant to patients with CKD.

The next generation of therapeutics for chronic kidney disease

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) represents a leading cause of death in the United States. There is no cure for this disease, with current treatment strategies relying on blood pressure control through blockade of the renin-angiotensin system. Such approaches only delay the development of end-stage kidney disease and can be associated with serious side effects. Recent identification of several novel mechanisms contributing to CKD development - including vascular changes, loss of podocytes and renal epithelial cells, matrix deposition, inflammation and metabolic dysregulation - has revealed new potential therapeutic approaches for CKD. This Review assesses emerging strategies and agents for CKD treatment, highlighting the associated challenges in their clinical development.

Clinical decision support improves physician guideline adherence for laboratory monitoring of chronic kidney disease: a matched cohort study

Background

Guidelines exist for chronic kidney disease (CKD) but are not well implemented in clinical practice. We evaluated the impact of a guideline-based clinical decision support system (CDSS) on laboratory monitoring and achievement of laboratory targets in stage 3–4 CKD patients.

Methods

We performed a matched cohort study of 12,353 stage 3–4 CKD patients whose physicians opted to receive an automated guideline-based CDSS with CKD-related lab results, and 42,996 matched controls whose physicians did not receive the CDSS. Physicians were from US community-based physician practices utilizing a large, commercial laboratory (LabCorp®).

We compared the percentage of laboratory tests obtained within guideline-recommended intervals and the percentage of results within guideline target ranges between CDSS and non-CDSS patients. Laboratory tests analyzed included estimated glomerular filtration rate, plasma parathyroid hormone, serum calcium, phosphorus, 25-hydroxy vitamin D (25-D), total carbon dioxide, transferrin saturation (TSAT), LDL cholesterol (LDL-C), blood hemoglobin, and urine protein measurements.

Results

Physicians who used the CDSS ordered all CKD-relevant testing more in accord with guidelines than those who did not use the system. Odds ratios favoring CDSS ranged from 1.29 (TSAT) to 1.88 (serum phosphorus) [CI, 1.20 to 2.01], p < 0.001 for all tests. The CDSS impact was greater for primary care physicians versus nephrologists. CDSS physicians met guideline targets for LDL-C and 25-D more often, but hemoglobin targets less often, than non-CDSS physicians. Use of CDSS did not impact guideline target achievement for the remaining tests.

Conclusions

Use of an automated laboratory-based CDSS may improve physician adherence to guidelines with respect to timely monitoring of CKD.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12882-015-0159-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Chronic Kidney Disease Guideline Implementation in Primary Care: A Qualitative Report from the TRANSLATE CKD Study

BACKGROUND

Primary care physicians (PCPs) are optimally situated to identify and manage early stage chronic kidney disease (CKD). Nonetheless, studies have documented suboptimal PCP understanding, awareness, and management of early CKD. The TRANSLATE CKD study is an ongoing national, mixed-methods, cluster randomized control trial that examines the implementation of evidence-based guidelines for CKD into primary care practice.

METHODS

As part of the mixed-methods process evaluation, semistructured interviews were conducted by phone with 27 providers participating in the study. Interviews were audio-taped and transcribed. Thematic content analysis was used to identify themes. Themes were categorized according to the 4 domains of Normalization Process Theory (NPT).

RESULTS

Identified themes illuminated the complex work undertaken to manage CKD in primary care practices. Barriers to guideline implementation were identified in each of the 4 NPT domains, including (1) lack of knowledge and understanding around CKD (coherence), (2) difficulties engaging providers and patients in CKD management (cognitive participation), (3) limited time and competing demands (collective action), and (4) challenges obtaining and using data to monitor progress (reflexive monitoring).

CONCLUSIONS

Addressing the barriers to implementation with concrete interventions at the levels at which they occur, informed by NPT, will ultimately improve the quality of CKD patient care.

Learning from marketing: Rapid development of medication messages that engage patients

OBJECTIVE

To adapt marketing approaches in a health services environment.

METHODS

Researchers and advertising professionals partnered in developing advertising-style messages designed to activate patients pre-identified as having chronic kidney disease to ask providers about recommended medications. We assessed feasibility of the development process by evaluating partnership structure, costs, and timeframe. We tested messages with patients and providers using preliminary surveys to refine initial messages and subsequent focus groups to identify the most persuasive ones.

RESULTS

The partnership achieved an efficient structure, $14,550 total costs, and 4-month timeframe. The advertising team developed 11 initial messages. The research team conducted surveys and focus groups with a total of 13 patients and 8 providers to identify three messages as most activating. Focus group themes suggested the general approach of using advertising-style messages was acceptable if it supported patient-provider relationships and had a credible evidence base. Individual messages were more motivating if they elicited personal identification with imagery, particular emotions, active patient role, and message clarity.

CONCLUSION

We demonstrated feasibility of a research-advertising partnership and acceptability and likely impact of advertising-style messages on patient medication-seeking behavior.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Healthcare systems may want to replicate our adaptation of marketing approaches to patients with chronic conditions.

How to build and evaluate an integrated health care system for chronic patients: study design of a clustered randomised controlled trial in rural China

Background

While integrated health care system has been proved an effective way to help improving patient health and system efficiency, the exact behaviour model and motivation approach are not so clear in poor rural areas where health human resources and continuous service provision are urgently needed. To gather solid evidence, we initiated a comprehensive intervention project in Qianjiang District, southwest part of rural China in 2012. And after one-year's pilot, we developed an intervention package of team service, comprehensive pathway and prospective- and performance-based payment system.

Methods

To testify the potential influence of payment interventions, we use clustered randomised controlled trial, 60 clusters are grouped into two treatment groups and one control group to compare the time and group differences. Difference-in-differences model and structural equation modelling will be used to analyse the intervention effects and pathway. The outcomes are: quality of care, disease burden, supplier cooperative behaviour and patient utilisation behaviour and system efficiency. Repeated multivariate variance analysis will be used to statistically examine the outcome differences.

Discussion

This is the first trial of its kind to prove the effects and efficiency of integrated care. Though we adopted randomised controlled trial to gather the highest rank of evidence, still the fully randomisation was hard to realise in health policy reform experiment. To compensate, the designer should take efforts on control for the potential confounders as much as possible. With this trial, we assume the effects will come from: (1) improvement on the quality of life through risk factors control and lifestyles change on patient's behaviours; (2) improvement on quality of care through continuous care and coordinated supplier behaviours; (3) improvement on the system efficiency through active interaction between suppliers and patients.

Conclusion

The integrated care system needs collaborative work from different levels of caregivers. So it is extremely important to consider the supplier cooperative behaviour. In this trial, we introduced payment system to help the delivery system integration through providing financial incentives to motivate people to play their roles. Also, the multidisciplinary team, the multi-institutional pathway and system global budget and pay-for-performance payment system could afford as a solution.

Payment models to support population health management

PURPOSE

To survey the policy-driven financial controls currently being used to drive physician change in the care of populations.

DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH

This paper offers a review of current health care payment models and discusses the impact of each on the potential success of PHM initiatives. We present the benefits of a multi-part model, combining visit-based fee-for-service reimbursement with a monthly "care coordination payment" and a performance-based payment system.

FINDINGS

A multi-part model removes volume-based incentives and promotes efficiency. However, it is predicated on a pay-for-performance framework that requires standardized measurement. Application of this model is limited due to the current lack of standardized measurement of quality goals that are linked to payment incentives.

PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

Financial models dictated by health system payers are inextricably linked to the organization and management of health care.

ORIGINALITY/VALUE

There is a need for better measurements and realistic targets as part of a comprehensive system of measurement assessment that focuses on practice redesign, with the goal of standardizing measurement of the structure and process of redesign. Payment reform is a necessary component of an accurate measure of the associations between practice transformation and outcomes important to both patients and society.

The DARTNet Institute: Seeking a Sustainable Support Mechanism for Electronic Data Enabled Research Networks

CONTEXT

Clinical data research networks require large investments in infrastructure support to maintain their abilities to extract, transform, and load data from varied data sources, expand electronic data sources and develop learning communities.

CASE DESCRIPTION

This paper outlines a sustainable business model of ongoing infrastructure support for clinical data research activities. The DARTNet Institute is a not-for-profit 501(c)(3) organization that serves as a support entity for multiple practice-based research networks. Several clinical data research networks working closely with a professional society began collaborating to support shared goals in 2008. This loose affiliation called itself the "DARTNet Collaborative." In 2011, the DARTNet Institute incorporated as an independent, not-for-profit entity. The business structure allows DARTNet to advocate for all partners without operating its own practice-based research network, serve as a legal voice for activities that overlap multiple partners, share personnel resources through service contracts between partners, and purchase low-cost (nonprofit rate) software.

MAJOR THEMES

DARTNet's business model relies upon four diverse sources of revenue: (1) DARTNet licenses and provides access to a propriety software system that extracts, transforms, and loads data from all major electronic health records (EHRs) utilized in the United States, and which also provides clinical decision support for research studies; (2) DARTNet operates a recognized, national professional-society-quality improvement registry that enables organizations to fulfill Meaningful Use 2 criteria; (3) DARTNet provides access to data for research activities that are funded by direct research dollars, provided at prices that generate excess revenue; and (4) DARTNet provides access to large primary care datasets for observational studies and pregrant analyses such as for sample size development. The ability of the system to support pragmatic trials will be described.

CONCLUSION

The DARTNet model facilitates the use of direct grant dollars to generate revenue to support the overall enterprise through a purchased services arrangement. Other services provided through subcontracting provide facilities and administration fees as well as direct dollars to support the system. The flexibility of the business model overcomes the complicated financial arrangements and governance requirements of many professional associations and academic medical centers.

The interdisciplinary team: the whole is larger than the parts

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is an emerging global health problem. Caring for CKD patients is a medical and financial challenge currently placing a significant burden on our health-care system. This creates an impetus to explore nontraditional models of care. In this article, we explore the role of interdisciplinary care clinics in managing the complex and multifaceted aspects of CKD. By having different providers work seamlessly in a synergistic and collaborative environment, there is less risk of fragmentation of care. In this patient-centered model of care, patients are empowered and engaged to achieve therapeutic targets, make lifestyle changes, and participate in decision-making. Timely referral and education delivered by advanced practitioners are 2 of the crucial elements central to the success of the interdisciplinary model. Further studies are needed to identify other key elements that would enhance the interdisciplinary approach to ensure that guideline-based therapeutic targets are reached and to define the subset of patients that would benefit the most. Innovative information technology solutions that could enhance the implementation of interdisciplinary clinics and expand their reach should be exploited. Lastly, for the paradigm shift to occur, the integrative approach should prove to be cost-effective.

Primary care physicians' familiarity, beliefs, and perceived barriers to practice guidelines in non-diabetic CKD: a survey study

BACKGROUND

Most non-dialysis dependent chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients are cared for by their primary care physicians (PCPs). Studies suggest many CKD patients receive suboptimal care. Recently, CKD clinical practice guidelines were updated with additional emphasis on albuminuria.

METHODS

We performed an internet-based, cross-sectional survey of active PCPs in the United States using the American Medical Association Physician Masterfile. We explored CKD guideline familiarity, self-reported practice behaviors, and attitudinal and external barriers to implementing guideline recommendations, including albuminuria testing.

RESULTS

Of 12,034 PCPs targeted, 848 opened a study email, 165 (19.5%) responded. Most respondents (88%) spent ≥50% of their time in clinical care. Respondents were generally in private practice (46%). Most PCPs (96%) felt that eGFR values were helpful. Approximately, 75% and 91% of PCPs reported testing for albuminuria in non-diabetic hypertensive patients with an eGFR > 60 ml/min/1.73 m2 and < 60 ml/min/1.73 m2, respectively. Barriers to albuminuria testing included a lack of effect on management, limited time, and the perceived absence of guidelines recommending testing. While PCPs expressed high levels of agreement with the definition of CKD, 30% were concerned with overdiagnosis in older adults with an eGFR in the CKD stage 3a range. Most PCPs felt that angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEi)/ angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) improved outcomes in CKD, though agreement was lower with severe vs. moderate albuminuria (78% vs. 85%, respectively, p = 0.03). Many PCPs (51%) reported being unfamiliar with CKD guidelines, but were receptive to systematic interventions to improve their CKD care.

CONCLUSIONS

PCPs generally agree with CKD clinical practice guidelines regarding CKD definition and albuminuria testing. However, future interventions are necessary to improve PCPs' familiarity with CKD guidelines, overcome barriers to albuminuria testing and, assist PCPs in targeting ACEi/ARBs to the patients most likely to benefit.