Pre-implementation adaptation of primary care cancer prevention clinical decision support in a predominantly rural healthcare system

Melissa L Harry, Daniel M Saman, Anjali R Truitt, Clayton I Allen, Kayla M Walton, Patrick J O'Connor, Heidi L Ekstrom, JoAnn M Sperl-Hillen, Joseph A Bianco, Thomas E Elliott, Melissa L Harry, Daniel M Saman, Anjali R Truitt, Clayton I Allen, Kayla M Walton, Patrick J O'Connor, Heidi L Ekstrom, JoAnn M Sperl-Hillen, Joseph A Bianco, Thomas E Elliott

Abstract

Background: Cancer is a leading cause of death in the United States. Primary care providers (PCPs) juggle patient cancer prevention and screening along with managing acute and chronic health problems. However, clinical decision support (CDS) may assist PCPs in addressing patients' cancer prevention and screening needs during short clinic visits. In this paper, we describe pre-implementation study design and cancer screening and prevention CDS changes made to maximize utilization and better fit a healthcare system's goals and culture. We employed the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), useful for evaluating the implementation of CDS interventions in primary care settings, in understanding barriers and facilitators that led to those changes.

Methods: In a three-arm, pragmatic, 36 clinic cluster-randomized control trial, we integrated cancer screening and prevention CDS and shared decision-making tools (SDMT) into an existing electronic medical record-linked cardiovascular risk management CDS system. The integrated CDS is currently being tested within a predominately rural upper Midwestern healthcare system. Prior to CDS implementation, we catalogued pre-implementation changes made from 2016 to 2018 based on: pre-implementation site engagement; key informant interviews with healthcare system rooming staff, providers, and leadership; and pilot testing. We identified influential barriers, facilitators, and changes made in response through qualitative content analysis of meeting minutes and supportive documents. We then coded pre-implementation changes made and associated barriers and facilitators using the CFIR.

Results: Based on our findings from system-wide pre-implementation engagement, pilot testing, and key informant interviews, we made changes to accommodate the needs of the healthcare system based on barriers and facilitators that fell within the Intervention Characteristics, Inner Setting, and Outer Setting CFIR domains. Changes included replacing the expansion of medical assistant roles in one intervention arm with targeted SDMT, as well as altering cancer prevention CDS and study design elements.

Conclusions: Pre-implementation changes to CDS may help meet healthcare systems' evolving needs and optimize the intervention by being responsive to real-world implementation barriers and facilitators. Frameworks like the CFIR are useful tools for identifying areas where pre-implementation barriers and facilitators may result in design changes, both to research studies and CDS systems.

Trial registration: NCT02986230.

Keywords: Cancer prevention and screening; Clinical decision support; Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research; Pre-implementation adaptation; Primary care; Shared decision-making tools.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Original and adapted study designs. CDS: Clinical decision support. CV: Cardiovascular. MA: Medical assistant. PCP: Primary care provider. SDMT: Shared decision-making tools
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Original and revised protocol items. BCRAT: Breast cancer risk assessment tool. CDS: Clinical decision support. FIT: Fecal immunochemical test. FIT DNA: Fecal immunochemical test deoxyribonucleic acid. IFOB: Immunoassay fecal occult blood test. PCP: Primary care provider. SDMT: Shared decision-making tool

References

    1. Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion. Cancer. Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion website. 2019. . Accessed 29 May 2020.
    1. Kwon HT, Ma GX, Gold RS, Atkinson NL, Wang MQ. Primary care physicians’ cancer screening recommendation practices and perceptions of cancer risk of Asian Americans. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2013;14:1999–2004. 10.7314/APJCP.2013.14.3.1999.
    1. Barrett B, McKenna P. Communicating benefits and risks of screening for prostate, colon, and breast cancer. Fam Med 2011;43:248–53.
    1. Petrova D, Garcia-Retamero R, Cokely ET. Understanding the harms and benefits of cancer screening: a model of factors that shape informed decision making. Med Decis Mak 2015;35:847–858. .
    1. Hoffman RM, Lewis CL, Pignone MP, Couper MP, Barry MJ, Elmore JG, et al. Decision-making processes for breast, colorectal, and prostate cancer screening: the DECISIONS survey. Med Decis Mak 2010;30:53S–64S. .
    1. Wegwarth O, Gigerenzer G. “There is nothing to worry about”: gynecologists’ counseling on mammography. Patient Educ Couns 2011;84:251–256. .
    1. Barry MJ, Edgman-Levitan S. Shared decision making — the pinnacle of patient-centered care. N Engl J Med 2012;366:780–781. .
    1. Brown RF, Butow PN, Juraskova I, Ribi K, Gerber D, Bernhard J, et al. Sharing decisions in breast cancer care: development of the Decision Analysis System for Oncology (DAS-O) to identify shared decision making during treatment consultations. Health Expect 2011;14:29–37. 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2010.00613.x.
    1. Rimer BK, Briss PA, Zeller PK, Chan ECY, Woolf SH. Informed decision making: what is its role in cancer screening? Cancer 2004;101(Suppl 5):S1214–S1228. 10.1002/cncr.20512.
    1. Wagner EH. Chronic disease management: what will it take to improve care for chronic illness? Eff Clin Pract 1998;1:2–4.
    1. Osheroff JA, Teich JM, Levick D, Saldana L, Velasco FT, Sittig DF, et al. Improving outcomes with clinical decision support: an implementer’s guide. 2nd ed. Chicago: HIMSS; 2012.
    1. Berner ES. Clinical decision support systems: State of the art. Report No.: 09–0069-EF. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services website. 2009. . Accessed 29 May 2020.
    1. Stacey D, Légaré F, Lewis K, Barry MJ, Bennett CL, Eden KB, et al. Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions (review). Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2017;4:CD001431. 10.1002/14651858.CD001431.pub5.
    1. Trikalinos TA, Wieland LS, Adam GP, Zgodic A, Ntzani EE. Decision aids for cancer screening and treatment. Report No.: EHC002-EF. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services website. 2014. . Accessed 29 May 2020.
    1. Harry ML, Truitt AR, Saman DM, Henzler-Buckingham HA, Allen CI, Walton KM, et al. Barriers and facilitators to implementing cancer prevention clinical decision support in primary care: a qualitative study. BMC Health Serv Res 2019;19:534. 10.1186/s12913-019-4326-4.
    1. Dall T, Reynolds R, Jones K, Chakrabarti R, Iacobucci W. Update 2019: The complexities of physician supply and demand: Projections from 2017 to 2032. Washington, DC: IHS Markit Ltd. Association of American Medical Colleges website. 2019. . Accessed 29 May 2020.
    1. Bodenheimer T, Sinsky C. From triple to quadruple aim: care of the patient requires care of the provider. Ann Fam Med 2014;12:573–576. 10.1370/afm.1713.
    1. Bodenheimer T, Willard-Grace R, Ghorob A. Expanding the roles of medical assistants: who does what in primary care? JAMA Intern Med 2014;174:1025–26. 10.1001/jamainternmed.2014.1319.
    1. Blash L, Dower C, Chapman S. University of Utah Community Clinics - Medical assistant teams enhance patient-centered, physician-efficient care. Center for the Health Professions at UCSF. San Francisco: Center for the Health Professions. University of California, San Francisco website. 2011. . Accessed 29 May 2020.
    1. Nelson K, Pitaro M, Tzellas A, Lum A. Transforming the role of medical assistants in chronic disease management. Health Aff 2010;29:963–965. .
    1. Willard-Grace R, DeVore D, Chen EH, Hessler D, Bodenheimer T, Thom DH. The effectiveness of medical assistant health coaching for low-income patients with uncontrolled diabetes, hypertension, and hyperlipidemia: protocol for a randomized controlled trial and baseline characteristics of the study population. BMC Fam Pract 2013;14:27. .
    1. Willard-Grace R, Chen EH, Hessler D, DeVore D, Prado C, Bodenheimer T, et al. Health coaching by medical assistants to improve control of diabetes, hypertension, and hyperlipidemia in low-income patients: a randomized controlled trial. Ann Fam Med 2015;13:130–138. .
    1. Baker AN, Parsons M, Donnelly SM, Johnson L, Day J, Mervis A, et al. Improving colon cancer screening rates in primary care: a pilot study emphasising the role of the medical assistant. Qual Saf Health Care 2009;18:355–359. .
    1. Skinner L, Staiger DO, Auerbach DI, Buerhaus PI. Implications of an aging rural physician workforce. N Engl J Med. 2019;381:299–301. 10.1056/NEJMp1900808.
    1. Arora PG, Connors EH, Blizzard A, Coble K, Gloff N, Pruitt D. Dissemination and implementation science in program evaluation: a telemental health clinical consultation case example. Eval Program Plann 2017;60:56–63. .
    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;4:50. .
    1. Cole AM, Esplin A, Baldwin LM. Adaptation of an evidence-based colorectal cancer screening program using the consolidated framework for implementation research. Prev Chronic Dis 2015;12:E213. 10.5888/pcd12.150300.
    1. Kowalski CP, Veeser M, Heisler M. Formative evaluation and adaptation of pre-and early implementation of diabetes shared medical appointments to maximize sustainability and adoption. BMC Fam Pract 2018;19:109. 10.1186/s12875-018-0797-3.
    1. Gail MH, Brinton LA, Byar DP, Corle DK, Green SB, Schairer C, et al. Projecting individualized probabilities of developing breast cancer for white females who are being examined annually. J Natl Cancer Inst 1989;81:1879–86. 10.1093/jnci/81.24.1879.
    1. National Cancer Institute. Breast Cancer Risk Assessment Tool. National Cancer Institute website. n.d. Accessed 29 May 2020.
    1. National Cancer Institute. Colorectal Cancer Risk Assessment Tool. National Cancer Institute website. n.d. Accessed 29 May 2020.
    1. National Cancer Institute, Division of Cancer Epidemiology & Genetics. Risk-based National Lung Cancer Screening Trial Outcomes Tool (RNOT). National Cancer Institute website. . n.d. Accessed 29 May 2020.
    1. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Final recommendation statement: Lung cancer: Screening. U.S. Preventative Services Task Force website. . 2013. Accessed 29 May 2020.
    1. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Final recommendation statement: Breast cancer: Screening. U.S. Preventative Services Task Force website. 2016. . Accessed 29 May 2020.
    1. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Final recommendation statement: Colorectal cancer: Screening. U.S. Preventative Services Task Force website. 2016.. Accessed 29 May 2020.
    1. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Final recommendation statement: Cervical cancer: Screening. U.S. Preventative Services Task Force website. 2018.. Accessed 29 May 2020.
    1. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Lung cancer screening tools. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. 2016. . Accessed 29 May 2020.
    1. Meites E, Kempe A, Markowitz LE. Use of a 2-dose schedule for human papillomavirus vaccination — updated recommendations of the advisory committee on immunization practices. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2016;65;1405–1408. .
    1. O’Connor PJ, Sperl-Hillen JM, Rush WA, Johnson PE, Amundson JH, Asche SE, et al. EMR-based clinical decision support system improved glucose and blood pressure control in adults with diabetes. Diab 2009;58(Suppl. 1):A13.
    1. O’Connor PJ, Sperl-Hillen JM, Rush WA, Johnson PE, Amundson GH, Asche SE, et al. Impact of electronic health record clinical decision support on diabetes care: a randomized trial. Ann Fam Med 2011;9:12–21. .
    1. O’Connor PJ, Desai JR, Butler JC, Kharbanda EO, Sperl-Hillen JM. Current status and future prospects for electronic point-of-care clinical decision support in diabetes care. Curr Diab Rep 2013;13:172–176. 10.1007/s11892-012-0350-z.
    1. Sperl-Hillen JM, Crain AL, Margolis KL, Ekstrom HL, Appana D, Amundson G, et al. Clinical decision support directed to primary care patients and providers reduces cardiovascular risk: a randomized trial. JAMIA 2018;25(9):1137–1146. 10.1093/jamia/ocy085.
    1. Greenes RA, Bates DW, Kawamoto K, Middleton B, Osheroff J, Shahar Y. Clinical decision support models and frameworks: seeking to address research issues underlying implementation successes and failures. J Biomed Inform 2018;78:134–143. 10.1016/j.jbi.2017.12.005.
    1. Bates DW, Kuperman GJ, Wang S, Gandhi T, Kittler A, Volk L, et al. Ten commandments for effective clinical decision support: making the practice of evidence-based medicine a reality. JAMIA 2003;10(6):523–530.
    1. Van de Velde S, Kunnamo I, Roshanov P, Kortteisto T, Aertgeerts B, Vandvik PO, et al. The GUIDES checklist: development of a tool to improve the successful use of guideline-based computerized clinical decision support. Implement Sci 2018;13:86. 10.1186/s13012-018-0772-3.
    1. Medlock S, Wyatt JC, Patel VL, Shortliffe EH, Abu-Hanna A. Modeling information flows in clinical decision support: key insights for enhancing system effectiveness. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2016;23(5):1001–1006. 10.1093/jamia/ocv177.

Source: PubMed

赞助者和合作者

医疗条件

药物干预

3
订阅