Study protocol for the implementation of the Gabby Preconception Care System - an evidence-based, health information technology intervention for Black and African American women

Angela Wangari Walter, Clevanne Julce, Nireesha Sidduri, Leanne Yinusa-Nyahkoon, Jessica Howard, Matthew Reichert, Timothy Bickmore, Brian W Jack, Angela Wangari Walter, Clevanne Julce, Nireesha Sidduri, Leanne Yinusa-Nyahkoon, Jessica Howard, Matthew Reichert, Timothy Bickmore, Brian W Jack

Abstract

Background: Improving the health of women before pregnancy and throughout a woman's lifespan could mitigate disparities and improve the health and wellbeing of women, infants and children. The preconception period is important for reducing health risks associated with poor maternal, perinatal and neonatal outcomes, and eliminating racial and ethnic disparities in maternal and child health. Low cost health information technology interventions provided in community-based settings have the potential to reach and reduce disparities in health outcomes for socially disadvantaged, underserved and health disparity populations. These interventions are particularly important for Black and African American women who have a disproportionate burden of pregnancy-related complications and infant mortality rates compared to any other racial and ethnic group in the U.S.

Methods: This is a hybrid type II implementation-effectiveness cohort study aimed at evaluating appropriateness, acceptability and feasibility implementation outcomes, while also systematically examining the clinical effectiveness of a preconception care (PCC) intervention, the Gabby System, for Black and African American women receiving health services in community-based sites. The intervention will be implemented in six Community Health Centers and six Healthy Start programs across the U.S. Each study site will recruit and enroll 25-50 young Black and African American women who will participate in the intervention for a 6-month period. Appropriateness, acceptability and feasibility of implementing the PCC intervention will be assessed using: 1) Qualitative data derived from individual interviews with Gabby System end-users (clients and patients) and site staff; and, 2) Quantitative data from staff surveys, Gabby System usage and uptake. Aggregate health risk and utilization measures collected directly from the Gabby server will be used to examine the effectiveness of the Gabby System on self-reported behavior change.

Discussion: This study will examine implementation outcomes and clinical effectiveness of an evidence-based PCC intervention for Black and African American women receiving services in Healthy Start programs and Community Health Centers. Contextual factors that influence uptake and appropriate implementation strategies will be identified to inform future scalability of the intervention.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04514224 . Date of registration: August 14, 2020. Retrospectively Registered.

Keywords: Black and African American women; Community Health centers; Health information technology; Healthy Start program; Implementation; Preconception Health; Preconception care.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Gabby System interaction from the perspective of an end-user with frontline staff introducing the System
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Academic-community partner collaborative Gabby System pre-launch implementation process

References

    1. Bryant AS, Worjoloh A, Caughey AB, Washington AE. Racial/ethnic disparities in obstetric outcomes and care: prevalence and determinants. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2010;202(4):335–343. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2009.10.864.
    1. Lu MC, Halfon N. Racial and ethnic disparities in birth outcomes: a life-course perspective. Matern Child Health J. 2003;7(1):13–30. doi: 10.1023/A:1022537516969.
    1. Creanga AA, Syverson C, Seed K, Callaghan WM. Pregnancy-related mortality in the United States, 2011-2013. Obstet Gynecol. 2017;130(2):366–373. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000002114.
    1. Petersen EE, Davis NL, Goodman D, Cox S, Syverson C, Seed K, et al. Racial/ethnic disparities in pregnancy-related deaths - United States, 2007-2016. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2019;68(35):762–765. doi: 10.15585/mmwr.mm6835a3.
    1. Ely DM, Driscoll AK. Infant mortality in the United States, 2017: data from the period linked birth/infant death file. . Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics; 2019.
    1. Johnson K, Posner SF, Biermann J, Cordero JF, Atrash HK, Parker CS, et al. Recommendations to improve preconception health and health care--United States. A report of the CDC/ATSDR Preconception Care Work Group and the Select Panel on Preconception Care. MMWR Recomm Rep. 2006;55(Rr-6):1–23.
    1. Atrash HK, Johnson K, Adams M, Cordero JF, Howse J. Preconception care for improving perinatal outcomes: the time to act. Matern Child Health J. 2006;10(5 Suppl):S3–11. doi: 10.1007/s10995-006-0100-4.
    1. Kroelinger CD, Okoroh EM, Boulet SL, Olson CK, Robbins CL. Making the case: the importance of using 10 key preconception indicators in understanding the Health of women of reproductive age. J Women's Health (Larchmt) 2018;27(6):739–743. doi: 10.1089/jwh.2018.7034.
    1. Broussard DL, Sappenfield WB, Fussman C, Kroelinger CD, Grigorescu V. Core state preconception health indicators: a voluntary, multi-state selection process. Matern Child Health J. 2011;15(2):158–168. doi: 10.1007/s10995-010-0575-x.
    1. Stulberg DB, Dahlquist IH, Disterhoft J, Bello JK, Hunter MS. Increase in contraceptive counseling by primary care clinicians after implementation of one key question® at an Urban Community Health center. Matern Child Health J. 2019;23(8):996–1002. doi: 10.1007/s10995-019-02754-z.
    1. Bronstein JM, Felix HC, Bursac Z, Stewart MK, Foushee HR, Klapow J. Providing general and preconception health care to low income women in family planning settings: perception of providers and clients. Matern Child Health J. 2012;16(2):346–354. doi: 10.1007/s10995-011-0744-6.
    1. Goossens J, De Roose M, Van Hecke A, Goemaes R, Verhaeghe S, Beeckman D. Barriers and facilitators to the provision of preconception care by healthcare providers: a systematic review. Int J Nurs Stud. 2018;87:113–130. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2018.06.009.
    1. M'Hamdi HI, van Voorst SF, Pinxten W, Hilhorst MT, Steegers EA. Barriers in the uptake and delivery of preconception care: exploring the views of care providers. Matern Child Health J. 2017;21(1):21–28. doi: 10.1007/s10995-016-2089-7.
    1. Stephenson J, Patel D, Barrett G, Howden B, Copas A, Ojukwu O, et al. How do women prepare for pregnancy? Preconception experiences of women attending antenatal services and views of health professionals. PLoS One. 2014;9(7):e103085. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0103085.
    1. Corbould C. Becoming African Americans: Harvard University press. 2009.
    1. Perez AD, Hirschman C. The changing racial and ethnic composition of the US population: emerging American identities. Popul Dev Rev. 2009;35(1):1–51. doi: 10.1111/j.1728-4457.2009.00260.x.
    1. Sigelman L, Tuch SA, Martin JK. What's in a name? Preference for “black” versus “African-American” among Americans of African descent. Public Opin Q. 2005;69(3):429–438. doi: 10.1093/poq/nfi026.
    1. Jack B, Bickmore T, Hempstead M, Yinusa-Nyahkoon L, Sadikova E, Mitchell S, et al. Reducing preconception risks among African American women with conversational agent technology. J Am Board Fam Med. 2015;28(4):441–451. doi: 10.3122/jabfm.2015.04.140327.
    1. Jack BW, Bickmore T, Yinusa-Nyahkoon L, Reichert M, Julce C, Sidduri N, et al. Improving the health of young african american women in the preconception period using health information technology: a randomized controlled trial. Lancet Digital Health. 2020;2(9):E475–E85.
    1. The office of the national coordinator for health information technology. connecting health and care for the nation: a shared nationwide interoperability roadmap. Final Version 1.0. . 2014. Accessed 20 May 2020.
    1. The office of the national coordinator for health information technology. connecting health and care for the nation: a 10-Year vision to achieve an interoperable health IT infrastructure. . 2014. Accessed 20 May 2020.
    1. Mullangi S, Kaushal R, Ibrahim SA. Equity in the Age of Health Care Information Technology and Innovation: Addressing the Digital Divide. Med Care. 2019;57 Suppl 6 Suppl 2:S106-S1s7.
    1. Bickmore T, Cassell J. Social dialogue with embodied conversational agents. Adv Nat Multimodal Dial Syst Dordrecht. 2005:23–54.
    1. Cassell J, Sullivan J, Churchill E, Prevost S, editors. Embodied conversational agents. MIT press. 2000.
    1. Bickmore TW, Pfeifer LM, Byron D, Forsythe S, Henault LE, Jack BW, et al. Usability of conversational agents by patients with inadequate health literacy: evidence from two clinical trials. J Health Commun. 2010;15(Suppl 2):197–210. doi: 10.1080/10810730.2010.499991.
    1. Prochaska JO, DiClemente CC. Stages of change in the modification of problem behaviors. In: Hersen M, Eisler RM, Miller PM, editors. Progress in behavior modification. Sycamore, IL: Sycamore Publishing Co; 1992.
    1. Gardiner P, Hempstead MB, Ring L, Bickmore T, Yinusa-Nyahkoon L, Tran H, et al. Reaching women through health information technology: the Gabby preconception care system. Am J Health Promot. 2013;27(3 Suppl):eS11–eS20. doi: 10.4278/ajhp.1200113-QUAN-18.
    1. Proctor E, Silmere H, Raghavan R, Hovmand P, Aarons G, Bunger A, et al. Outcomes for implementation research: conceptual distinctions, measurement challenges, and research agenda. Admin Pol Ment Health. 2011;38(2):65–76. doi: 10.1007/s10488-010-0319-7.
    1. Proctor EK, Landsverk J, Aarons G, Chambers D, Glisson C, Mittman B. Implementation research in mental health services: an emerging science with conceptual, methodological, and training challenges. Admin Pol Ment Health. 2009;36(1):24–34. doi: 10.1007/s10488-008-0197-4.
    1. Damschroder LJ, Aron DC, Keith RE, Kirsh SR, Alexander JA, Lowery JC. Fostering implementation of health services research findings into practice: a consolidated framework for advancing implementation science. Implement Sci. 2009;4(1):50. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-4-50.
    1. National institute for children's health quality. Healthy start EPIC center program overview. . Accessed 20 May 2020. .
    1. National association of community health centers. What is a community health center? . 2020. Accessed 15 Sept 2020. .
    1. Thompson DM, Fernald DH, Mold JW. Intraclass correlation coefficients typical of cluster-randomized studies: estimates from the Robert wood Johnson prescription for Health projects. Ann Fam Med. 2012;10(3):235–240. doi: 10.1370/afm.1347.
    1. Powell BJ, Waltz TJ, Chinman MJ, Damschroder LJ, Smith JL, Matthieu MM, et al. A refined compilation of implementation strategies: results from the expert recommendations for implementing change (ERIC) project. Implement Sci. 2015;10:21. doi: 10.1186/s13012-015-0209-1.
    1. Zoom Video Communications, Inc.: Video Conferencing Platform. Version 5.0.4. 2016.
    1. NIH Office of Behavioral and Social Sciences. Best practices for mixed methods research in the health sciences (2nd ed). Bethesda, MD.: National Institutes of Health; 2018.
    1. Guest G, Bunce A, Johnson L. How many interviews are enough?:an experiment with data saturation and variability. Field Methods. 2006;18(1):59–82. doi: 10.1177/1525822X05279903.
    1. Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) research team-center for clinical management research. Interview guide tool. . 2020. Accessed 15 Sept 2020.
    1. Tuttas CA. Lessons learned using web conference technology for online focus group interviews. Qual Health Res. 2015;25(1):122–133. doi: 10.1177/1049732314549602.
    1. Archibald MM, Ambagtsheer RC, Casey MG, Lawless M. Using zoom videoconferencing for qualitative data collection: perceptions and experiences of researchers and participants. Int J Qual Methods. 2019;18:1609406919874596. doi: 10.1177/1609406919874596.
    1. Saldana J. The coding manual for qualitative researchers: sage publications, Ltd.; 2016.
    1. Gale NK, Heath G, Cameron E, Rashid S, Redwood S. Using the framework method for the analysis of qualitative data in multi-disciplinary health research. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2013;13:117. doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-13-117.
    1. Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) research team-center for clinical management research. Qualitative data - data analysis. . 2020. Accessed 15 September 2020. .
    1. Dedoose. Web application for managing, analyzing, and presenting qualitative and mixed method research data. 8.2.14 ed. Los Angeles, CA: SocioCultural Research Consultants, LLC; 2018.
    1. R Core Team. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria. 2017.
    1. Cuevas AG, O’Brien K, Saha S. African American experiences in healthcare: “I always feel like I'm getting skipped over”. Health Psychol. 2016;35(9):987–995. doi: 10.1037/hea0000368.

Source: PubMed

Sponsorer og samarbeidspartnere

Medisinsk tilstand

Legemiddelintervensjoner

3
Abonnere