Quality of Cardiovascular Disease Care in Small Urban Practices

Practice facilitation for scale up of clinical decision support for hypertension management: study protocol for a cluster randomized control trial

BACKGROUND

Only half of patients with hypertension have adequately controlled blood pressure. Clinical decision support (CDS) has the potential to overcome barriers to delivering guideline-recommended care and improve hypertension management. However, optimal strategies for scaling CDS have not been well established, particularly in small, independent primary care practices which often lack the resources to effectively change practice routines. Practice facilitation is an implementation strategy that has been shown to support process changes. Our objective is to evaluate whether practice facilitation provided with hypertension-focused CDS can lead to improvements in blood pressure control for patients seen in small primary care practices.

METHODS/DESIGN

We will conduct a cluster randomized control trial to compare the effect of hypertension-focused CDS plus practice facilitation on BP control, as compared to CDS alone. The practice facilitation intervention will include an initial training in the CDS and a review of current guidelines along with follow-up for coaching and integration support. We will randomize 46 small primary care practices in New York City who use the same electronic health record vendor to intervention or control. All patients with hypertension seen at these practices will be included in the evaluation. We will also assess implementation of CDS in all practices and practice facilitation in the intervention group.

DISCUSSION

The results of this study will inform optimal implementation of CDS into small primary care practices, where much of care delivery occurs in the U.S. Additionally, our assessment of barriers and facilitators to implementation will support future scaling of the intervention.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov Identifier: NCT05588466.

Facilitation of team-based care to improve HTN management and outcomes: a protocol for a randomized stepped wedge trial

BACKGROUND

There are well-established guidelines for treating hypertension (HTN), yet only half of patients with HTN meet the defined target of < 140/90. Team-based care (TBC) is an evidence-based strategy for improving blood pressure (BP) management and control. TBC is defined as the provision of health services by at least two health professionals "who work collaboratively with patients and their caregivers to accomplish shared goals to achieve coordinated, high-quality care". However, primary care practices experience challenges to implementing TBC principles and care processes; these are more pronounced in small independent practice settings (SIPs). Practice facilitation (PF) is an implementation strategy that may overcome barriers to adopting evidence-based TBC to improve HTN management in SIPs.

METHODS

Using a stepped wedge randomized controlled trial design, we will test the effect of PF on the adoption of TBC to improve HTN management in small practices (< 5 FTE clinicians) in New York City, and the impact on BP control compared with usual care. We will enroll 90 SIPs and randomize them into one of three 12-month intervention waves. Practice facilitators will support SIPs to adopt TBC principles to improve implementation of five HTN management strategies (i.e., panel management, population health, measuring BP, supporting medication adherence, self-management). The primary outcome is the adoption of TBC for HTN management measured at baseline and 12 months. Secondary outcomes include the rate of BP control and sustainability of TBC and BP outcomes at 18 months. Aggregated data on BP measures are collected every 6 months in all clusters so that each cluster provides data points in both the control and intervention conditions. Using a mixed methods approach, we will also explore factors that influence the effectiveness of PF at the organization and team level.

DISCUSSION

This study will provide much-needed guidance on how to optimize adoption and sustainability of TBC in independent primary care settings to reduce the burden of disease related to suboptimal BP control and advance understanding of how facilitation works to improve implementation of evidence-based interventions.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov; NCT05413252 .

Tailoring Implementation Strategies for Cardiovascular Disease Risk Calculator Adoption in Primary Care Clinics

INTRODUCTION

When implementing interventions in primary care, tailoring implementation strategies to practice barriers can be effective, but additional work is needed to understand how to best select these strategies. This study sought to identify clinicians' contributions to the process of tailoring implementation strategies to barriers in clinical settings.

METHODS

We conducted a modified nominal group exercise involving 8 implementation scientists and 26 primary care clinicians in the WWAMI region Practice and Research Network. Each group identified implementation strategies it felt would best address barriers to using a cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk calculator previously identified across 44 primary care clinics from the Healthy Hearts Northwest pragmatic trial (2015 to 2018). These barriers had been mapped beforehand to the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) domains. We examined similarities and differences in the strategies that 30% or more of each group identified (agreed-on strategies) for each barrier and for barriers in each CFIR domain. We used the results to demonstrate how strategies might be tailored to individual clinics.

RESULTS

Clinicians selected 23 implementation strategies to address 1 or more of the 13 barriers; implementation scientists selected 35. The 2 groups agreed on at least 1 strategy for barriers in each CFIR domain: Inner Setting, Outer Setting, Intervention Characteristics, Characteristics of Individuals, and Process. Conducting local needs assessment and assessing for readiness/identifying barriers and facilitators were the 2 most common implementation strategies chosen only by clinicians.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinician stakeholders identified implementation strategies that augmented those chosen by implementation scientists, suggesting that codesign of implementation processes between implementation scientists and clinicians may strengthen the process of tailoring strategies to overcome implementation barriers.

Bridging the evidence-to-practice gap: a stepped-wedge cluster randomized controlled trial evaluating practice facilitation as a strategy to accelerate translation of a multi-level adherence intervention into safety net practices

Background

Poor adherence to antihypertensive medications is a significant contributor to the racial gap in rates of blood pressure (BP) control among Latino adults, as compared to Black and White adults. While multi-level interventions (e.g., those aiming to influence practice, providers, and patients) have been efficacious in improving medication adherence in underserved patients with uncontrolled hypertension, the translation of these interventions into routine practice within “real world” safety-net primary care settings has been inadequate and slow. This study will fill this evidence-to-practice gap by evaluating the effectiveness of practice facilitation (PF) as a practical and tailored strategy for implementing Advancing Medication Adherence for Latinos with Hypertension through a Team-based Care Approach (ALTA), a multi-level approach to improving medication adherence and BP control in 10 safety-net practices in New York that serve Latino patients.

Methods and design

We will conduct this study in two phases: (1) a pre-implementation phase where we will refine the PF strategy, informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, to facilitate the implementation of ALTA into routine care at the practices; and (2) an implementation phase during which we will evaluate, in a stepped-wedge cluster randomized controlled trial, the effect of the PF strategy on ALTA implementation fidelity (primary outcome), as well as on clinical outcomes (secondary outcomes) at 12 months. Implementation fidelity will be assessed using a mixed methods approach based on the five core dimensions outlined by Proctor’s Implementation Outcomes Framework. Clinical outcome measures include BP control (defined as BP< 130/80 mmHg) and medication adherence (assessed using the proportion of days covered via pharmacy records).

Discussion

The study protocol applies rigorous research methods to identify how implementation strategies such as PF may work to expedite the translation process for implementing evidence-based approaches into routine care at safety-net practices to improve health outcomes in Latino patients with hypertension, who suffer disproportionately from poor BP control. By examining the barriers and facilitators that affect implementation, this study will contribute knowledge that will increase the generalizability of its findings to other safety-net practices and guide effective scale-up across primary care practices nationally.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03713515, date of registration: October 19, 2018.

A practice facilitation-guided intervention in primary care settings to reduce cardiovascular disease risk: a cost analysis

Background

A stepped-wedge, cluster randomized controlled trial assessed the effectiveness of practice facilitation (PF) for adoption of guidelines for prevention and treatment of cardiovascular disease risk factors. This study estimated the associated cost of PF for guideline adoption in small, private primary care practices.

Methods

The cost analysis included categories for start-up costs, intervention costs, and practice staff costs for the implemented PF-guided intervention. We estimated the total 1-year costs to operate the program and calculated the mean and range of the cost-per-practice by quarter of the intervention. We estimated the lower and upper bounds for all salary expenses, rounding to the nearest $100.

Results

Total 1-year intervention costs for all 261 practices ranged from $7,900,000 to $10,200,000, with program and practice salaries comprising $6,600,000–$8,400,000 of the total. Start-up costs were a small proportion (3%) of the total 1-year costs. Excluding start-up costs, quarter 1 cost-per-practice was the most expensive at $20,400–$26,700, and quarter 4 was the least expensive at about $10,000. Practice staff time (compared with program staff time) was the majority of the staffing costs at 75–84%.

Conclusions

The PF strategy costs approximately $10,000 per practice per quarter for program and practice costs, once implemented and running at highest efficiency. Whether this program is “worth it” to the decision-maker depends on the relative costs and effectiveness of their other options for improving cardiovascular risk reduction.

Trial registration

This study is retrospectively registered on January 5, 2016, at www.clinicaltrials.gov as NCT02646488.

Using a Customer Relationship Management System to Manage a Quality Improvement Intervention

HealthyHearts New York City (HHNYC), one of 7 cooperatives funded through the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality's EvidenceNOW initiative, evaluated the impact of practice facilitation on implementation of the Million Hearts guidelines for cardiovascular disease prevention and treatment. Tracking the intervention required a system to facilitate process data collection that was also user-friendly and flexible. Coupled with protocols and training, a strategically planned and customizable customer relationship management system (CRMS) was implemented to support the quality improvement intervention with 257 small independent practices. Features of the CRMS and implementation protocols were customized to optimize program management, practice facilitation tracking and supervision, and data collection for performance feedback to practices and research. The CRMS was a valuable tool for tracking and managing the intervention systematically. Successful implementation of the HHNYC protocol also required an articulated implementation plan and adoption process.

Cardiovascular Disease Guideline Adherence: An RCT Using Practice Facilitation

INTRODUCTION

Practice facilitation is a promising practice transformation strategy, but further examination of its effectiveness in improving adoption of guidelines for multiple cardiovascular disease risk factors is needed. The objective of the study is to determine whether practice facilitation is effective in increasing the proportion of patients meeting the Million Hearts ABCS outcomes: (A) aspirin when indicated, (B) blood pressure control, (C) cholesterol management, and (S) smoking screening and cessation intervention.

STUDY DESIGN

The study used a stepped-wedge cluster RCT design with 4 intervention waves. Data were extracted for 13 quarters between January 1, 2015 and March 31, 2018, which encompassed the control, intervention, and follow-up periods for all waves, and analyzed in 2019.

SETTING/PARTICIPANTS

A total of 257 small independent primary care practices in New York City were randomized into 1 of 4 waves.

INTERVENTION

The intervention consisted of practice facilitators conducting at least 13 practice visits over 1 year, focused on capacity building and implementing system and workflow changes to meet cardiovascular disease care guidelines.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The main outcomes were the Million Hearts' ABCS measures. Two additional measures were created: (1) proportion of tobacco users who received a cessation intervention (smokers counseled) and (2) a composite measure that assessed the proportion of patients meeting treatment targets for A, B, and C (ABC composite).

RESULTS

The S measure improved when comparing follow-up with the control period (incidence rate ratio=1.152, 95% CI=1.072, 1.238, p<0.001) and when comparing follow-up with intervention (incidence rate ratio=1.060, 95% CI=1.013, 1.109, p=0.007). Smokers counseled improved when comparing the intervention period with control (incidence rate ratio=1.121, 95% CI=1.037, 1.211, p=0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

Increasing the impact of practice facilitation programs that target multiple risk factors may require a longer, more intense intervention and greater attention to external policy and practice context.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study is registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov NCT02646488.

Clinician Perspectives on the Benefits of Practice Facilitation for Small Primary Care Practices

PURPOSE

Small independent primary care practices (SIPs) often lack the resources to implement system changes. HealthyHearts NYC, funded through the EvidenceNOW initiative of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, studied the effectiveness of practice facilitation to improve cardiovascular disease- related care in 257 SIPs. We sought to understand SIP clinicians' perspectives on the benefits of practice facilitation.

METHODS

We conducted in-depth interviews with 19 SIP clinicians enrolled in HealthyHearts NYC. Interviews were transcribed and coded using deductive and inductive approaches. To understand whether the perceived benefits of practice facilitation differ based on the availability of internal staff for quality improvement (QI), we compared themes pertaining to benefits between practices with 3 or fewer office staff vs more than 3 office staff.

RESULTS

Clinicians perceived 2 main benefits of practice facilitation. First, facilitators served as a connection to the external health care environment for SIPs, often through teaching and information sharing. Second, facilitators provided electronic health record (EHR)/data expertise, often by teaching functionality and completing technical assistance and tasks. SIPs with more than 3 office staff felt that facilitators provided benefits primarily through teaching, whereas SIPs with 3 or fewer staff felt that facilitators also provided hands-on support. At the intersections of these benefits, there emerged 3 central practice facilitation benefits: (1) creating awareness of quality gaps, (2) connecting practices to information, resources, and strategies, and (3) optimizing the EHR for QI goals.

CONCLUSIONS

SIP clinicians perceived practice facilitation to be an important resource for connecting their practice to the external health care environment and resources, and helping their practice build QI capacity through teaching, hands-on support, and EHR-driven solutions.

Assessing quality improvement capacity in primary care practices

BACKGROUND

Healthy Hearts Northwest (H2N) is a study of external support strategies to build quality improvement (QI) capacity in primary care with a focus on cardiovascular risk factors: appropriate aspirin use, blood pressure control, and tobacco screening/cessation.

METHODS

To guide practice facilitator support, experts in practice transformation identified seven domains of QI capacity and mapped items from a previously validated medical home assessment tool to them. A practice facilitator (PF) met with clinicians and staff in each practice to discuss each item on the Quality Improvement Capacity Assessment (QICA) resulting in a practice-level response to each item. We examined the association between the QICA total and sub-scale scores, practice characteristics, a measure of prior experience with managing practice change, and performance on clinical quality measures (CQMs) for the three cardiovascular risk factors.

RESULTS

The QICA score was associated with prior experience managing change and moderately associated with two of the three CQMs: aspirin use (r = 0.16, p = 0.049) and blood pressure control (r = 0.18, p = 0.013). Rural practices and those with 2-5 clinicians had lower QICA scores..

CONCLUSIONS

The QICA is useful for assessing QI capacity within a practice and may serve as a guide for both facilitators and primary care practices in efforts to build this capacity and improve measures of clinical quality.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This trial is registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov Identifier# NCT02839382, retrospectively registered on July 21, 2016.