Dataset Information

Developing AHRQ's Feasibility Assessment Criteria for Wide-Scale Implementation of Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Findings.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality's (AHRQ) Patient-Centered Outcomes Research (PCOR) Dissemination and Implementation (D&I) Initiative identifies and prioritizes PCOR findings that could improve health care if widely implemented. To inform PCOR implementation investments, AHRQ sought to assess feasibility of widely implementing impactful PCOR findings with good strength of evidence in clinical practice.

Objective

To develop criteria to assess the feasibility of widely implementing nominated PCOR findings.

Methods

We reviewed literature and interviewed thirteen D&I experts to identify factors affecting feasibility of implementing PCOR findings. We grouped similar factors into themes. Fourteen technical expert panel (TEP) members discussed the face-validity and relative merits of the themes and additional factors, applied themes to fictional case studies, and prioritized themes for assessing feasibility. We developed criteria and guiding questions with a 3-point Likert scale. Seven D&I experts pilot-tested the criteria using sample nominations of PCOR findings. Experts represented diverse views of implementation from federal and state government agencies, research institutions, and quality improvement and advocacy organizations.

Key results

We developed a set of three essential criteria for AHRQ to assess feasibility of widely implementing PCOR findings to be widely implementable: (1) acceptability to the implementers; (2) generalizability, adaptability, and ease of implementing with fidelity; and (3) alignment with external policies and incentives. Two supplemental criteria, (1) the presence of a plan or toolkit supporting implementation, or (2) evidence supporting implementation outside the research setting, can enhance reviewers' confidence in the intervention's feasibility. Each criterion includes "guiding questions" to parse out specific components that could be more readily assessed.

Conclusions

The criteria and guiding questions are a valuable tool for informing AHRQ's investment decisions regarding implementing PCOR findings. Although developed for AHRQ's needs, the criteria may help other funders and health care organizations determine the feasibility of implementing evidence-based practices.

SUBMITTER: Fournier AK

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7878640 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe patient-centered medical home (PCMH) model, an important component of healthcare transformation in the United States, is an approach to primary care delivery with the goal of improving population health and the patient care experience while reducing costs. PCMH research most often focuses on system level indicators including healthcare use and cost; descriptions of patient and provider experience with PCMH are relatively sparse and commonly limited in scope. This study, part of a mixed-methods evaluation of a multi-year New York State initiative to refine and expand the PCMH model, describes patient and provider experience with New York State PCMH and its key components.MethodsThe qualitative component of the evaluation included focus groups with patients of PCMH practices in 5 New York State counties (n = 9 groups and 67 participants) and interviews with providers and practice administrators at New York State PCMH practices (n = 9 interviews with 10 participants). Through these focus groups and interviews, we elicited first-person descriptions of experiences with, as well as perspectives on, key components of the New York State PCMH model, including accessibility, expanded use of electronic health records, integration of behavioral health care, and care coordination.ResultsThere was evident progress and some satisfaction with the PCMH model, particularly regarding integrated behavioral health and, to some extent, expanded use of electronic health records. There was less evident progress with respect to improved access and reasonable wait times, which caused patients to continue to use urgent care or the emergency department as substitutes for primary care.ConclusionsIt is critical to understand the strengths and limitations of the PCMH model, so as to continue to improve upon and promote it. Strengths of the model were evident to participants in this study; however, challenges were also described. It is important to note that these challenges are difficult to separate from wider healthcare system issues, including inadequate incentives for value-based care, and carry implications for PCMH and other models of healthcare delivery.

Project description:BackgroundPatient-physician communication during clinical encounters is essential to ensure quality of care. Many studies have attempted to improve patient-physician communication. Incorporating patient priorities into agenda setting and medical decision-making are fundamental to patient-centered communication. Efficient and scalable approaches are needed to empower patients to speak up and prepare physicians to respond. Leveraging electronic health records (EHRs) in engaging patients and health care teams has the potential to enhance the integration of patient priorities in clinical encounters. A systematic approach to eliciting and documenting patient priorities before encounters could facilitate effective communication in such encounters.ObjectiveIn this paper, we report the design and implementation of a set of EHR tools built into clinical workflows for facilitating patient-physician joint agenda setting and the documentation of patient concerns in the EHRs for ambulatory encounters.MethodsWe engaged health information technology leaders and users in three health care systems for developing and implementing a set of EHR tools. The goal of these tools is to standardize the elicitation of patient priorities by using a previsit "patient important issue" questionnaire distributed through the patient portal to the EHR. We built additional EHR documentation tools to facilitate patient-staff communication when the staff records the vital signs and the reason for the visit in the EHR while in the examination room, with a simple transmission method for physicians to incorporate patient concerns in EHR notes.ResultsThe study is ongoing. The anticipated completion date for survey data collection is November 2021. A total of 34,037 primary care patients from three health systems (n=26,441; n=5136; and n=2460 separately recruited from each system) used the previsit patient important issue questionnaire in 2020. The adoption of the digital previsit questionnaire during the COVID-19 pandemic was much higher in one health care system because it expanded the use of the questionnaire from physicians participating in trials to all primary care providers midway through the year. It also required the use of this previsit questionnaire for eCheck-ins, which are required for telehealth encounters. Physicians and staff suggested anecdotally that this questionnaire helped patient-clinician communication, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic.ConclusionsEHR tools have the potential to facilitate the integration of patient priorities into agenda setting and documentation in real-world primary care practices. Early results suggest the feasibility and acceptability of such digital tools in three health systems. EHR tools can support patient engagement and clinicians' work during in-person and telehealth visits. They could potentially exert a sustained influence on patient and clinician communication behaviors in contrast to prior ad hoc educational efforts targeting patients or clinicians.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT03385512; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03385512.International registered report identifier (irrid)DERR1-10.2196/30431.