Dataset Information

A patient-centered, coordinated care approach delivered by community and pediatric primary care providers to promote responsive parenting: pragmatic randomized clinical trial rationale and protocol.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Economically disadvantaged families receive care in both clinical and community settings, but this care is rarely coordinated and can result in conflicting educational messaging. WEE Baby Care is a pragmatic randomized clinical trial evaluating a patient-centered responsive parenting (RP) intervention that uses health information technology (HIT) strategies to coordinate care between pediatric primary care providers (PCPs) and the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infant and Children (WIC) community nutritionists to prevent rapid weight gain from birth to 6 months. It is hypothesized that data integration and coordination will improve consistency in RP messaging and parent self-efficacy, promoting shared decision making and infant self-regulation, to reduce infant rapid weight gain from birth to 6 months. METHODS/DESIGN:Two hundred and ninety mothers and their full-term newborns will be recruited and randomized to the "RP intervention" or "standard care control" groups. The RP intervention includes: 1) parenting and nutrition education developed using the American Academy of Pediatrics Healthy Active Living for Families curriculum in conjunction with portions of a previously tested RP curriculum delivered by trained pediatric PCPs and WIC nutritionists during regularly scheduled appointments; 2) parent-reported data using the Early Healthy Lifestyles (EHL) risk assessment tool; and 3) data integration into child's electronic health records with display and documentation features to inform counseling and coordinate care between pediatric PCPs and WIC nutritionists. The primary study outcome is rapid infant weight gain from birth to 6 months derived from sex-specific World Health Organization adjusted weight-for-age z-scores. Additional outcomes include care coordination, messaging consistency, parenting behaviors (e.g., food to soothe), self-efficacy, and infant sleep health. Infant temperament and parent depression will be explored as moderators of RP effects on infant outcomes. DISCUSSION:This pragmatic patient-centered RP intervention integrates and coordinates care across clinical and community sectors, potentially offering a fundamental change in the delivery of pediatric care for prevention and health promotion. Findings from this trial can inform large scale dissemination of obesity prevention programs. TRIAL REGISTRATION:Restrospective Clinical Trial Registration: NCT03482908 . Registered March 29, 2018.

SUBMITTER: Savage JS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6123992 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A patient-centered, coordinated care approach delivered by community and pediatric primary care providers to promote responsive parenting: pragmatic randomized clinical trial rationale and protocol.

Savage Jennifer S JS Kling Samantha M R SMR Cook Adam A Hess Lindsey L Lutcher Shawnee S Marini Michele M Mowery Jacob J Hayward Shannon S Hassink Sandra S Hosterman Jennifer Franceschelli JF Paul Ian M IM Seiler Chris C Bailey-Davis Lisa L

BMC pediatrics 20180904 1

<h4>Background</h4>Economically disadvantaged families receive care in both clinical and community settings, but this care is rarely coordinated and can result in conflicting educational messaging. WEE Baby Care is a pragmatic randomized clinical trial evaluating a patient-centered responsive parenting (RP) intervention that uses health information technology (HIT) strategies to coordinate care between pediatric primary care providers (PCPs) and the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Wom ...[more]

PMID: 30180831

Similar Datasets

Project description:Evidence-based preventive services offer profound health benefits, yet Americans receive only half of indicated care. A variety of government and specialty society policy initiatives are promoting the adoption of information technologies to engage patients in their care, such as personal health records, but current systems may not utilize the technology's full potential.Using a previously described model to make information technology more patient-centered, we developed an interactive preventive health record (IPHR) designed to more deeply engage patients in preventive care and health promotion. We recruited 14 primary care practices to promote the IPHR to all adult patients and sought practice and patient input in designing the IPHR to ensure its usability, salience, and generalizability. The input involved patient usability tests, practice workflow observations, learning collaboratives, and patient feedback. Use of the IPHR was measured using practice appointment and IPHR databases.The IPHR that emerged from this process generates tailored patient recommendations based on guidelines from the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force and other organizations. It extracts clinical data from the practices' electronic medical record and obtains health risk assessment information from patients. Clinical content is translated and explained in lay language. Recommendations review the benefits and uncertainties of services and possible actions for patients and clinicians. Embedded in recommendations are self management tools, risk calculators, decision aids, and community resources--selected to match patient's clinical circumstances. Within six months, practices had encouraged 14.4% of patients to use the IPHR (ranging from 1.5% to 28.3% across the 14 practices). Practices successfully incorporated the IPHR into workflow, using it to prepare patients for visits, augment health behavior counseling, explain test results, automatically issue patient reminders for overdue services, prompt clinicians about needed services, and formulate personalized prevention plans.The IPHR demonstrates that a patient-centered personal health record that interfaces with the electronic medical record can give patients a high level of individualized guidance and be successfully adopted by busy primary care practices. Further study and refinement are necessary to make information systems even more patient-centered and to demonstrate their impact on care.Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT00589173.

Project description:BackgroundGenomics will play an increasingly prominent role in clinical medicine.ObjectiveTo describe how primary care physicians (PCPs) discuss and make clinical recommendations about genome sequencing results.DesignQualitative analysis.ParticipantsPCPs and their generally healthy patients undergoing genome sequencing.ApproachPatients received clinical genome reports that included four categories of results: monogenic disease risk variants (if present), carrier status, five pharmacogenetics results, and polygenic risk estimates for eight cardiometabolic traits. Patients' office visits with their PCPs were audio-recorded, and summative content analysis was used to describe how PCPs discussed genomic results.Key resultsFor each genomic result discussed in 48 PCP-patient visits, we identified a "take-home" message (recommendation), categorized as continuing current management, further treatment, further evaluation, behavior change, remembering for future care, or sharing with family members. We analyzed how PCPs came to each recommendation by identifying 1) how they described the risk or importance of the given result and 2) the rationale they gave for translating that risk into a specific recommendation. Quantitative analysis showed that continuing current management was the most commonly coded recommendation across results overall (492/749, 66%) and for each individual result type except monogenic disease risk results. Pharmacogenetics was the most common result type to prompt a recommendation to remember for future care (94/119, 79%); carrier status was the most common type prompting a recommendation to share with family members (45/54, 83%); and polygenic results were the most common type prompting a behavior change recommendation (55/58, 95%). One-fifth of recommendation codes associated with monogenic results were for further evaluation (6/24, 25%). Rationales for these recommendations included patient context, family context, and scientific/clinical limitations of sequencing.ConclusionsPCPs distinguish substantive differences among categories of genome sequencing results and use clinical judgment to justify continuing current management in generally healthy patients with genomic results.

Project description:ObjectiveTo examine the impact of a 1-year pragmatic obesity trial on primary care providers' (PCPs) perspectives of treatment.MethodsPCPs from four intervention clinics (PCP-I) and five control clinics (PCP-C) completed pre- and postintervention surveys on weight-loss counseling, comfort discussing obesity treatments, and perceived effectiveness of interventions; questions were rated on 0 to 10 Likert scales. Only PCP-I received patient updates and education about obesity management.ResultsEighty PCPs completed preintervention surveys (pre: 71% female, 71% physicians); 82 PCPs completed postintervention surveys (post: 66% female, 70% physicians). PCPs were most comfortable discussing exercise before and after the trial (pre PCP-C: 8.22 [1.44], mean [standard deviation (SD)]; post PCP-C: 8.37 [1.24]; P = 0.8; pre/post PCP-I: 7.88 [1.51] vs. 7.80 [1.71]; P = 0.3). PCPs were initially least comfortable discussing phentermine/topiramate extended release (ER) but developed significantly more comfort after the trial, to a greater degree among PCP-I (pre/post PCP-C: 2.86 [2.66] vs. 3.73 [2.72], P < 0.001; pre/post PCP-I: 4.00 [2.57] vs. 6.17 [2.27], P < 0.001). After the trial, both PCPs rated exercise significantly less effective for weight loss, with a greater decrease in effectiveness rations among PCP-I (pre/post PCP-C: 7.73 [1.94] vs. 6.93 [2.35], P = 0.017; pre/post PCP-I: 6.27 [2.69] vs. 5.15 [2.31], P = 0.001). Both PCPs rated phentermine (pre/post PCP-C: 5.03 [2.05] vs. 5.50 [2.12], P = 0.002; pre/post PCP-I: 5.70 [1.64] vs. 6.83 [1.18], P = 0.001) and phentermine/topiramate ER (pre/post PCP-C: 3.91 [2.33] vs. 5.47 [2.54], P < 0.001; pre/post PCP-I: 5.58 [2.21] vs. 7.02 [1.47], P < 0.001) significantly more effective after the trial, though ratings were higher among PCP-I.ConclusionsPCPs initially overvalued exercise and undervalued weight-loss medications. PCPs exposed to education and experience gave higher comfort and effectiveness ratings to weight-loss medications.

Dataset Information

A patient-centered, coordinated care approach delivered by community and pediatric primary care providers to promote responsive parenting: pragmatic randomized clinical trial rationale and protocol.

Publications

A patient-centered, coordinated care approach delivered by community and pediatric primary care providers to promote responsive parenting: pragmatic randomized clinical trial rationale and protocol.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets