Dataset Information

Study protocol for evaluating Six Building Blocks for opioid management implementation in primary care practices.

ABSTRACT: Background:The Six Building Blocks for improving opioid management (6BBs) is a program for improving the management of patients in primary care practices who are on long-term opioid therapy for chronic pain. The 6BBs include building leadership and consensus; aligning policies, patient agreements, and workflows; tracking and monitoring patient care; conducting planned, patient-centered visits; tailoring care for complex patients; and measuring success. The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality funded the development of a 6BBs implementation guide: a step-by-step approach for independently implementing the 6BBs in a practice. This mixed-method study seeks to assess practices' use of the implementation guide to implement the 6BBs and the effectiveness of 6BBs implementation on opioid management processes of care among practices using the implementation guide. Methods:Data collection is guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, Proctor's taxonomy of implementation outcomes, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Guideline for Prescribing Opioids for Chronic Pain. A diverse group of health care organizations with primary care clinics across the USA will participate in the study over 15?months. Qualitative data collection will include semi-structured interviews with stakeholders at each organization at two time points, notes from routine check-in calls, and document review. These data will be used to understand practices' motivation for participation, history with opioid management efforts, barriers and facilitators to implementation, and implementation progress. Quantitative data collection will consist of a provider and staff survey, an implementation milestones assessment, and quarterly opioid prescribing quality measures. These data will supplement our understanding of implementation progress and will allow us to assess changes over time in providers' opioid prescribing practices, prescribing self-efficacy, challenges to providing guideline-driven care, and practices' opioid prescribing quality measures. Qualitative data will be coded and analyzed for emergent themes. Quantitative data will be analyzed using descriptive statistics and clustered multivariate regression. Discussion:This study contributes to the knowledge of the implementation and effectiveness of a team-based approach to opioid management in primary care practices. Information gleaned from this study can be used to inform efforts to curtail opioid prescribing and assist primary care practices considering implementing the 6BBs.

SUBMITTER: Shoemaker-Hunt SJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7427954 | biostudies-literature | 2020

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Study protocol for evaluating Six Building Blocks for opioid management implementation in primary care practices.

Shoemaker-Hunt Sarah J SJ Evans Leigh L Swan Holly H Bacon Olivia O Ike Brooke B Baldwin Laura-Mae LM Parchman Michael L ML

Implementation science communications 20200226

<h4>Background</h4>The Six Building Blocks for improving opioid management (6BBs) is a program for improving the management of patients in primary care practices who are on long-term opioid therapy for chronic pain. The 6BBs include building leadership and consensus; aligning policies, patient agreements, and workflows; tracking and monitoring patient care; conducting planned, patient-centered visits; tailoring care for complex patients; and measuring success. The Agency for Healthcare Research ...[more]

PMID: 32885178

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundMitigating the risks of adverse outcomes from opioids is critical. Thus, the Veterans Affairs (VA) Healthcare System developed the Stratification Tool for Opioid Risk Management (STORM), a dashboard to assist clinicians with opioid risk evaluation and mitigation. Updated daily, STORM calculates a "risk score" of adverse outcomes (e.g., suicide-related events, overdoses, overdose death) from variables in the VA medical record for all patients with an opioid prescription and displays this information along with documentation of recommended risk mitigation strategies and non-opioid pain treatments. In March 2018, the VA issued a policy notice requiring VA Medical Centers (VAMCs) to complete case reviews for patients whom STORM identifies as very high-risk (i.e., top 1% of STORM risk scores). Half of VAMCs were randomly assigned notices that also stated that additional support and oversight would be required for VAMCs that failed to meet an established percentage of case reviews. Using a stepped-wedge cluster randomized design, VAMCs will be further randomized to conduct case reviews for an expanded pool of patients (top 5% of STORM risk scores vs. 1%) starting either 9 or 15 months after the notice was released, creating four natural arms. VA commissioned an evaluation to understand the implementation strategies and factors associated with case review completion rates, whose protocol is described in this report.MethodsThis mixed-method study will include an online survey of all VAMCs to identify implementation strategies and interviews at a subset of facilities to identify implementation barriers and facilitators. The survey is based on the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) project, which engaged experts to create consensus on 73 implementation strategies. We will use regression models to compare the number and types of implementation strategies across arms and their association with case review completion rates. Using questions from the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, we will interview stakeholders at 40 VAMCs with the highest and lowest adherence to opioid therapy guidelines.DiscussionBy identifying which implementation strategies, barriers, and facilitators influence case reviews to reduce opioid-related adverse outcomes, this unique implementation evaluation will enable the VA to improve the design of future opioid safety initiatives.Trial registrationThis project is registered at the ISRCTN Registry with number ISRCTN16012111 . The trial was first registered on 5/3/2017.

Project description:BackgroundMost people with opioid use disorder (OUD) never receive treatment. Medication treatment of OUD in primary care is recommended as an approach to increase access to care. The PRimary Care Opioid Use Disorders treatment (PROUD) trial tests whether implementation of a collaborative care model (Massachusetts Model) using a nurse care manager (NCM) to support medication treatment of OUD in primary care increases OUD treatment and improves outcomes. Specifically, it tests whether implementation of collaborative care, compared to usual primary care, increases the number of days of medication for OUD (implementation objective) and reduces acute health care utilization (effectiveness objective). The protocol for the PROUD trial is presented here.MethodsPROUD is a hybrid type III cluster-randomized implementation trial in six health care systems. The intervention consists of three implementation strategies: salary for a full-time NCM, training and technical assistance for the NCM, and requiring that three primary care providers have DEA waivers to prescribe buprenorphine. Within each health system, two primary care clinics are randomized: one to the intervention and one to Usual Primary Care. The sample includes all patients age 16-90 who visited the randomized primary care clinics from 3 years before to 2 years after randomization (anticipated to be > 170,000). Quantitative data are derived from existing health system administrative data, electronic medical records, and/or health insurance claims ("electronic health records," [EHRs]). Anonymous staff surveys, stakeholder debriefs, and observations from site visits, trainings and technical assistance provide qualitative data to assess barriers and facilitators to implementation. The outcome for the implementation objective (primary outcome) is a clinic-level measure of the number of patient days of medication treatment of OUD over the 2 years post-randomization. The patient-level outcome for the effectiveness objective (secondary outcome) is days of acute care utilization [e.g. urgent care, emergency department (ED) and/or hospitalizations] over 2 years post-randomization among patients with documented OUD prior to randomization.DiscussionThe PROUD trial provides information for clinical leaders and policy makers regarding potential benefits for patients and health systems of a collaborative care model for management of OUD in primary care, tested in real-world diverse primary care settings. Trial registration # NCT03407638 (February 28, 2018); CTN-0074 https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03407638?term=CTN-0074&draw=2&rank=1.

Project description:BACKGROUND:In Malawi, early retention in HIV care remains challenging. Depression is strongly associated with reduced anti-retroviral therapy (ART) adherence and viral suppression. Appropriate depression care for people initiating ART is likely to be supportive of early and continued engagement in the HIV care continuum. This paper aims to provide an overview of a task-shifting program that integrates depression screening and treatment into HIV care and the strategy used to evaluate this program, describes the implementation process, and discusses key challenges and lessons learned in the first phase of program implementation. METHODS:We are implementing a program integrating depression screening and treatment into HIV care initiation at two clinics in Lilongwe District, Malawi. The program's effect on patients' depression and HIV outcomes will be evaluated using a multiple baseline pre-post study. In this manuscript, we draw from our experiences as program implementers and some of the quantitative data to describe the process of implementation and key lessons learned. RESULTS:We successfully implemented the screening phase of this program at both clinics; 88.3 and 93.2% of newly diagnosed patients have been screened for depression at each clinic respectively. 25% of enrolled patients reported symptoms of mild-to-severe depression and only 6% reported symptoms of moderate-to-severe depression. Key lessons learned from the process show the importance of utilizing existing processes and infrastructure and focusing on iterative and collaborative learning. We continued to face challenges around establishing a sense of program ownership among providers, developing capacity to diagnose and manage depression, and ensuring the availability of appropriate medication. Our efforts to address these challenges provide insight into the technical and managerial support needed to prepare for, roll out, and sustain integrated models of mental health and HIV care. CONCLUSIONS:This activity demonstrates how a depression screening program can successfully be integrated into HIV care within the public health system in Malawi. While this program focuses on integrating depression management into HIV care, most of the lessons learned could apply to integration of mental health into any non-psychiatric specialist setting. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov ID [ NCT03555669 ]. Retrospectively registered on 13 June 2018.

Project description:BackgroundIn recent years, healthcare has faced many different crises around the world such as HIV-, Ebola- or H1N1-outbrakes, opioid addiction, natural disasters and terrorism attacks). In particular, the current pandemic of Covid-19 has challenged the resilience of health systems. In many healthcare systems, primary care practices play a crucial role in the management of crises as they are often the first point of contact and main health care provider for patients. Therefore, this study explored which situations are perceived as crises by primary care practice teams and potential strategies for crisis management.MethodsA qualitative observational study was conducted. Data were collected in interviews and focus groups with experts from primary care practices and stakeholders focusing on primary care practices in Germany such as physicians, medical assistants, practice managers, quality managers, hygiene managers and institutions on health system level (politics, research and health insurance). All interviews and focus groups were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. A qualitative content analysis was performed using a rapid qualitative analysis approach first, followed by a thematic analysis.ResultsTwo focus groups and 26 interviews including 40 participating experts were conducted. Many different situations were perceived as crises, varying from issues in the practice organization to problems on health system level and international disasters. Distinct aspects associated with the perception of a crisis situation by interviewees were the presence of emotional reactions, a need for organizational changes and a lack of necessary resources. A broad spectrum of possible strategies was discussed that could help to cope with or even prevent the emergence of an actual crisis. In particular, strengthening communication within practice teams and resilience among employees was perceived to be fundamental for improving responses to crises or preventing them.ConclusionsThe study provides perspectives of primary health care workers on crises in health, that could inform health policy regarding prevention and management of future crises in primary care facilities.

Project description:IntroductionAsthma is the most common chronic disease among children worldwide, with 80% of asthma-related deaths occurring in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). While evidence-based guidelines exist for asthma treatment and management, adoption of guideline-based practices is low in high-income country and LMIC settings alike. While asthma prevalence among children and adolescents in Lima, Peru is in the range of 13%-19.6%, our data suggest that < 5% of children in low-resource communities are currently taking guideline-based therapies. There is an urgent need for effective, locally tailored solutions to address the asthma treatment gap in low-income communities in Peru.MethodsThis study aims to develop and test a locally adapted intervention package to improve adoption of self-management practices and utilization of preventive health services for asthma among children in Lima Norte. The intervention package was designed using a systematic, theory-based framework (Capability, Opportunity, Motivation - Behavior Framework) and is rooted in a multi-phased formative research approach. The main study design is an individually randomized implementation-effectiveness hybrid trial enrolling 110 children aged 5-17 years with asthma and their caregivers. Families allocated to the treatment group receive the supported self-management intervention package, while families allocated to the control group receive the standard of care plus asthma education. We will follow participants monthly for six months and evaluate asthma control (Asthma Control Test), healthcare utilization, and medication adherence (Adherence to Refills and Medications Scale). Disease-specific quality of life for children (Pediatric Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire) and caregivers (Pediatric Asthma Caregiver's Quality of Life Questionnaire) will be evaluated at baseline, 3 months, and 6 months. We will also evaluate acceptability, feasibility, and fidelity of the intervention using mixed methods approaches.DiscussionThe long-term goal of this study is to disseminate locally appropriate asthma management strategies in LMIC settings. This study will contribute to the body of knowledge surrounding approaches for developing and evaluating intervention strategies for asthma using systematic, theory-based approaches grounded in local context. Such strategies have the potential to inform the development and adaptation of appropriate and scalable solutions for asthma management in LMIC settings.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03986177. Registered on 14 June 2019.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Group-Based Opioid Treatment (GBOT) has recently emerged as a mechanism for treating patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) in the outpatient setting. However, the more practical "how to" components of successfully delivering GBOT has received little attention in the medical literature, potentially limiting its widespread implementation and utilization. Building on a previous case series, this paper delineates the key components to implementing GBOT by asking: (a) What are the core components to GBOT implementation, and how are they defined? (b) What are the malleable components to GBOT implementation, and what conceptual framework should providers use in determining how to apply these components for effective delivery in their unique clinical environment? METHODS:To create a blueprint delineating GBOT implementation, we integrated findings from a previously conducted and separately published systematic review of existing GBOT studies, conducted additional literature review, reviewed best practice recommendations and policies related to GBOT and organizational frameworks for implementing health systems change. We triangulated this data with a qualitative thematic analysis from 5 individual interviews and 2 focus groups representing leaders from 5 different GBOT programs across our institution to identify the key components to GBOT implementation, distinguish "core" and "malleable" components, and provide a conceptual framework for considering various options for implementing the malleable components. RESULTS:We identified 6 core components to GBOT implementation that optimize clinical outcomes, comply with mandatory policies and regulations, ensure patient and staff safety, and promote sustainability in delivery. These included consistent group expectations, team-based approach to care, safe and confidential space, billing compliance, regular monitoring, and regular patient participation. We identified 14 malleable components and developed a novel conceptual framework that providers can apply when deciding how to employ each malleable component that considers empirical, theoretical and practical dimensions. CONCLUSION:While further research on the effectiveness of GBOT and its individual implementation components is needed, the blueprint outlined here provides an initial framework to help office-based opioid treatment sites implement a successful GBOT approach and hence potentially serve as future study sites to establish efficacy of the model. This blueprint can also be used to continuously monitor how components of GBOT influence treatment outcomes, providing an empirical framework for the ongoing process of refining implementation strategies.

Dataset Information

Study protocol for evaluating Six Building Blocks for opioid management implementation in primary care practices.

Publications

Study protocol for evaluating Six Building Blocks for opioid management implementation in primary care practices.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets