Journal of Patient-Centered Research and Reviews最新文献

Purpose: We sought to gain an understanding of cancer prevention and screening perspectives among patients exposed to a clinical decision support (CDS) tool because they were due or overdue for certain cancer screenings or prevention.

Methods: Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with 37 adult patients due or overdue for cancer prevention services in 10 primary care clinics within the same health system. Data were thematically segmented and coded using qualitative content analysis.

Results: We identified three themes: 1) The CDS tool had more strengths than weaknesses, with areas for improvement; 2) Many facilitators and barriers to cancer prevention and screening exist; and 3) Discussions and decision-making varied by type of cancer prevention and screening. Almost all participants made positive comments regarding the CDS. Some participants learned new information, reporting the CDS helped them make a decision they otherwise would not have made. Participants who used the tool with their provider had higher self-reported rates of deciding to be screened than those who did not.

Conclusions: Learning about patients' perceptions of a CDS tool may increase understanding of how patient-tailored CDS impacts cancer screening and prevention rates. Participants found a personalized CDS tool for cancer screening and prevention in primary care useful and a welcome addition to their visit. However, many providers were not using the tool with eligible patients.

Purpose: We hypothesized that health care providers would behave in a more patient-centered manner after the implementation of communication skills training, without causing the consultation to last longer.

Methods: This study was part of the large-scale implementation of a communication skills training program called "Clear-Cut Communication With Patients" at Lillebaelt Hospital in Denmark. Audio recordings from real-life consultations were collected in a pre-post design, with health care providers' participation in communication skills training as the intervention. The training was based on the Calgary-Cambridge Guide, and audio recordings were rated using the Observation Scheme-12.

Results: Health care providers improved their communication behavior in favor of being more patient-centered. Results were tested using a mixed-effect model and showed significant differences between pre- and postintervention assessments, with a coefficient of 1.3 (95% Cl: 0.35-2.3; P=0.01) for the overall score. The consultations did not last longer after the training.

Conclusions: Health care providers improved their communication in patient consultations after the implementation of a large-scale patient-centered communication skills training program based on the Calgary-Cambridge Guide. This did not affect the length of the consultations.

Guidelines recommend that clinicians practice shared decision-making (SDM) with women in their 40s to discuss breast cancer screening. Traditionally, SDM includes discussion of values and preferences to help determine a decision that is congruent with what the patient desires. We analyzed 54 women's breast cancer screening decisions after a SDM conversation with their clinician. We looked at both patient and clinician characteristics that predicted whether or not a woman would get a screening mammogram. Women with a family history of breast cancer or who had a previous abnormal mammogram had higher rates of screening. Screening rates also varied widely between clinicians, raising the question of whether clinician attitudes impacted the SDM conversation.

Purpose: Three New York State practice-based research networks provided quality improvement strategies to improve screening rates for breast, cervical, and colorectal (BCC) cancers in safety-net primary care, over 7 years. In the final year (Y7), the United States experienced the COVID-19 pandemic. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on BCC cancer screening rates was assessed qualitatively.

Methods: A total of 12 primary care practices participated in Y7 of the quality improvement project. BCC cancer screening rates at year beginning and end were assessed. Practice staff were asked about how COVID-19 impacted screening. Average pre/postintervention screening rates and qualitative thematic analysis regarding how COVID-19 impacted cancer screening were ascertained.

Results: In Y7, there was an increase in breast cancer and a decrease in colorectal and cervical cancer screening rates compared to the previous project year. Many practices were able to continue pre-COVID-19 cancer screening processes. Overall, practices reported loss of staff, changes in data entry, and a shift from preventive screening to care of sick patients. Telehealth was vital for practices to continue serving patients but had a less positive impact on patients with financial/technological disadvantages. BCC cancer screenings were impacted at various levels.

Conclusions: The COVID-19 pandemic negatively impacted primary care practice cancer screening; however, some practices were able to mitigate effects by shifting focus to processes supporting screening outside of in-person office visits.

Purpose: Breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening rates are suboptimal in underserved populations. A 7-year quality improvement (QI) project implemented academic detailing and practice facilitation in safety-net primary care practices to increase cancer screening rates. This manuscript assesses barriers and promoters.

Methods: Primary care practices providing care to underserved patients were recruited in New York cities Buffalo, Rochester, and Syracuse. Enrollment totaled 31 practices, with 12 practices participating throughout. Annually, each practice received 6 months of practice facilitation support for development and implementation of evidence-based interventions to increase screening rates for the three cancer types. At the end of each practice facilitation period, focus groups and key informant interviews were conducted with participating personnel. Content analysis was performed annually to identify barriers and promoters. A comprehensive final analysis was performed at project end.

Results: Barriers included system-level (inconsistent communication with specialists, electronic health record system transitions, ownership changes) and practice-level challenges (staff turnover, inconsistent data entry, QI fatigue) that compound patient-level challenges of transportation, cost, and health literacy. Cyclical barriers like staff turnover returned despite attempts to resolve them, while successful implementation was promoted by reducing patients' structural barriers, adapting interventions to existing practice priorities, and enacting officewide policies. During the QI project, practices became aware of the impact of social determinants of health on patients' screening decisions.

Conclusions: The project's longitudinal design enabled identification of key barriers that reduced accuracy of practices' screening rates and increased risk of patients falling through the cracks. Identified promoters can help sustain interventions to increase screenings.

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and PRO measures (PROMs) are often used to help clinicians and researchers understand patients' personal concerns, feelings, experiences, and perspectives following the implementation of an intervention. Notably, PROs and PROMs can inform health systems, health policy, and payers on the utility of clinical genetic testing based on each patient's personal values, perspectives, and potential health behaviors subsequent to testing. In this topic synopsis, we discuss the underexplored role of and implications for PROs and PROMs following genetic testing for familial hypercholesterolemia (FH), an autosomal dominant genetic disorder of cholesterol metabolism that can lead to highly premature fatal and nonfatal myocardial infarction and stroke. We also discuss why the use and consideration of patient perspectives, via PROs and PROMs, are critical to the process of optimizing patient care across various FH treatment contexts. As expert clinician groups consider the latest evidence when establishing recommendations for FH genetic testing, there is a ripe opportunity for clinicians and researchers to explore the value and utility of PROs to inform and possibly improve care for patients diagnosed with FH.

Prompt and clear code team leader identification is vital in effective cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), and pediatric trainees often have limited experience in these scenarios. This project sought to develop a tangible object that provided clear leader identification and assisted in code team management and simulated team training. A Code Team Leader Card (CTLC) was designed to provide clear leader identification while simultaneously providing a cognitive aid via integration of pediatric advanced life support (PALS) algorithms. Additionally, CTLC served to occupy the leader's hands to limit their ability to intervene on procedural tasks. The CTLC was incorporated into pediatric resident simulation training, and pre- and postintervention survey data were analyzed. Analysis particularly focused on whether "a leader was clearly identified by all team members." The relationship between CTLC implementation and consistent leader recognition was evaluated using chi-squared test, and secondary qualitative data were obtained via debriefing sessions. Pediatric residents completed 131 surveys prior to CTLC implementation and 41 surveys after implementation. Consistent code team leader recognition increased significantly from 61.8% (81 of 131) pre-CTLC to 80.5% (33 of 41) after introduction of CTLC (P=0.027). Participants commented on the benefits of CTLC during debriefing sessions. Use of a CTLC significantly improved leader recognition during simulated CPR. Inclusion of PALS algorithms led to normalization and increased utilization of these adjunct materials. The CTLC provided a secondary benefit of occupying the leader's hands, thereby allowing that person to focus on overseeing the team rather than assisting with procedural tasks.