Community engaged research to measure the impact of COVID-19 on vulnerable community member's well-being and health : A mixed methods approach.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated existing income inequality and health disparities in the United States (US). The objective of this study was to conduct timely, community-engaged research to understand the disproportionate impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on historically under-resourced communities with the goal of improving health equity. The initiative focused on priorities identified by Community Health Needs Assessments (CHNA) conducted every 3 years per Federal funding requirements. These were access to healthcare, maternal/child health, obesity/food insecurity/physical activity, and mental health/addiction. METHODS: In the first three quarters of 2021, we developed and employed mixed methods in three simultaneous phases of data collection. In phase 1, we used purposive sampling to identify key informants from multiple stakeholder groups and conducted semi-structured interviews. In phase 2, we held focus groups with community members from historically marginalized demographics. In phase 3, we developed a survey using validated scales and distributed it to diverse communities residing in the geographic areas of our healthcare system across four states. CONCLUSION: Healthcare systems may use the methodology outlined in this paper to conduct responsive community engagement during periods of instability and/or crisis and to address health equity issues. The results can inform sustainable approaches to collaborate with communities to build resilience and prepare for future crises.

Strategies Used by Healthcare Systems to Communicate with Hospitalized Patients and Families with Limited English Proficiency During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Narrative Review.

The COVID-19 pandemic disproportionately affected racial and ethnic minorities in the United States, including many with limited English proficiency (LEP). These patients face various communication barriers, including a shortage of available interpreters and the need for masks that exacerbated communication barriers. It is not known how hospitals responded to these unique challenges to providing language services for the large number of patients with LEP during COVID-19. This narrative review assessed literature and lay media to identify strategies utilized by hospitals to communicate with patients with LEP hospitalized during the COVID-19 pandemic. A search of APA PsychInfo, EBM Reviews, Embase, Ovid MEDLINE, Epub Ahead of Print, and Ebsco Megafile initially yielded 61 articles, 6 of which were ultimately included after reviewing abstracts and full texts. The identified interventions, which sought to increase accessibility of language-concordant care, increase accessibility of professional interpretation, and improve family communication and understanding, were described positively, though only one was tested for effectiveness.

A multisite exploration of the association between critical care implementation factors and clinical outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Background: Little is known about strategies to implement new critical care practices in response to COVID-19. Moreover, the association between differing implementation climates and COVID-19 clinical outcomes has not been examined. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the relationship between implementation determinants and COVID-19 mortality rates. Methods: We used mixed methods guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with critical care leaders and analyzed to rate the influence of CFIR constructs on the implementation of new care practices. Qualitative and quantitative comparisons of CFIR construct ratings were performed between hospital groups with low- versus high-mortality rates. Results: We found associations between various implementation factors and clinical outcomes of critically ill COVID-19 patients. Three CFIR constructs (implementation climate, leadership engagement, and engaging staff) had both qualitative and statistically significant quantitative correlations with mortality outcomes. An implementation climate governed by a trial-and-error approach was correlated with high COVID-19 mortality, while leadership engagement and engaging staff were correlated with low mortality. Another three constructs (needs of patient; organizational incentives and rewards; and engaging implementation leaders) were qualitatively different across mortality outcome groups, but these differences were not statistically significant. Conclusions: Improving clinical outcomes during future public health emergencies will require reducing identified barriers associated with high mortality and harnessing salient facilitators associated with low mortality. Our findings suggest that collaborative and engaged leadership styles that promote the integration of new yet evidence-based critical care practices best support COVID-19 patients and contribute to lower mortality.

Facilitators and barriers to the implementation of new critical care practices during COVID-19: a multicenter qualitative study using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR).

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic produced unprecedented demands and rapidly changing evidence and practices within critical care settings. The purpose of this study was to identify factors and strategies that hindered and facilitated effective implementation of new critical care practices and policies in response to the pandemic. METHODS: We used a cross-sectional, qualitative study design to conduct semi-structured in-depth interviews with critical care leaders across the United States. The interviews were audio-taped and professionally transcribed verbatim. Guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), three qualitative researchers used rapid analysis methods to develop relevant codes and identify salient themes. RESULTS: Among the 17 hospitals that agreed to participate in this study, 31 clinical leaders were interviewed. The CFIR-driven rapid analysis of the interview transcripts generated 12 major themes, which included six implementation facilitators (i.e., factors that promoted the implementation of new critical care practices) and six implementation barriers (i.e., factors that hindered the implementation of new critical care practices). These themes spanned the five CFIR domains (Intervention Characteristics, Outer Setting, Inner Setting, Characteristics of Individuals, and Process) and 11 distinct CFIR constructs. Salient facilitators to implementation efforts included staff resilience, commitment, and innovation, which were supported through collaborative feedback and decision-making mechanisms between leadership and frontline staff. Major identified barriers included lack of access to reliable and transferable information, available resources, uncollaborative leadership and communication styles. CONCLUSIONS: Through applying the CFIR to organize and synthesize our qualitative data, this study revealed important insights into implementation determinants that influenced the uptake of new critical care practices during COVID-19. As the pandemic continues to burden critical care units, clinical leaders should consider emulating the effective change management strategies identified. The cultivation of streamlined, engaging, and collaborative leadership and communication mechanisms not only supported implementation of new care practices across sites, but it also helped reduce salient implementation barriers, particularly resource and staffing shortages. Future critical care implementation studies should seek to capitalize on identified facilitators and reduce barriers.

Perceptions and Use of Telehealth Among Diverse Communities: Multisite Community-Engaged Mixed Methods Study.

BACKGROUND: Telehealth has been increasingly adopted by health care systems since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. Although telehealth may provide convenience for patients and clinicians, there are several barriers to accessing it and using it effectively to provide high-quality patient care. OBJECTIVE: This study was part of a larger multisite community-engaged study conducted to understand the impact of COVID-19 on diverse communities. The work described here explored the perceptions of and experience with telehealth use among diverse and underserved community members during COVID-19. METHODS: We used mixed methods across three regions in the United States (Midwest, Arizona, and Florida) from January to November 2021. We promoted our study through social media and community partnerships, disseminating flyers in English and Spanish. We developed a moderator guide and conducted focus groups in English and Spanish, mostly using a videoconferencing platform. Participants were placed in focus groups with others who shared similar demographic attributes and geographic location. Focus groups were audio-recorded and transcribed. We analyzed our qualitative data using the framework analytic approach. We developed our broader survey using validated scales and with input from community and scientific leaders, which was then distributed through social media in both English and Spanish. We included a previously published questionnaire that had been used to assess perceptions about telehealth among patients with HIV. We analyzed our quantitative data using SAS software and standard statistical approaches. We examined the effect of region, age, ethnicity/race, and education on the use and perceptions of telehealth. RESULTS: We included data from 47 focus groups. Owing to our mode of dissemination, we were not able to calculate a response rate for the survey. However, we received 3447 English-language and 146 Spanish-language responses. Over 90% of participants had internet access and 94% had used telehealth. Approximately half of all participants agreed or strongly agreed that telehealth would be beneficial in the future because it better fit their schedules and they would not need to travel. However, approximately half of the participants also agreed or strongly agreed they would not be able to express themselves well and could not be examined when using telehealth. Indigenous participants were especially concerned about these issues when compared to other racial groups. CONCLUSIONS: This work describes findings from a mixed methods community-engaged research study about telehealth, including perceived benefits and concerns. Although participants enjoyed the benefits of telehealth (eg, not having to travel and easier scheduling), they also had concerns (eg, not being able to express themselves well and not having a physical exam) about telehealth. These sentiments were especially notable among the Indigenous population. Our work highlights the importance of fully understanding the impact of these novel health delivery modalities on the patient experience and actual or perceived quality of care received.

Key Stakeholder Perspectives of Community Engagement Efforts and the Impact of the Covid-19 Pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has disproportionally affected historically marginalized populations and their access to resources and healthcare. In times of crisis, authentic community engagement is more important than ever. This study was Phase 1 of a larger 3-phase study to conduct timely community-engaged research with community members to understand the disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on historically underserved communities. The objective of this work was to conduct key informant (KI) interviews (1) to understand community organizations perspectives about the role that large academic health centers play as they interface with community organizations to support their work, (2) to leverage KI's expertise to identify needs and assets within the community, and (3) to inform both Phase 2 (focus group qualitative research) and Phase 3 (survey) of the broader study. METHODS: A total of 24 key informants were identified through purposeful sampling and one-on-one semi-structured interviews were conducted across 4 states using video conferencing. RESULTS: Barriers to access and lack of transparency were highlighted as major issues requiring reform-in particular, aggressive billing practices and insurance barriers exacerbated local distrust of medical institutions. KIs recognized the health institution's support for testing and vaccination during the COVID-19 pandemic, but noted other significant gaps in care, especially regarding mental health support. Although communication with the health institution was consistent for some KIs, others experienced unsustained communication efforts that hindered cooperation and relationship building. CONCLUSIONS: Leaders in the community as key stakeholders can provide unique insights into the challenges and potential solutions required to promote health equity, and foster understanding between local communities and healthcare institutions.

The Impact of Health Information Technology for Early Detection of Patient Deterioration on Mortality and Length of Stay in the Hospital Acute Care Setting: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of health information technology (HIT) for early detection of patient deterioration on patient mortality and length of stay (LOS) in acute care hospital settings. DATA SOURCES: We searched MEDLINE and Epub Ahead of Print, In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations and Daily, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Scopus from 1990 to January 19, 2021. STUDY SELECTION: We included studies that enrolled patients hospitalized on the floor, in the ICU, or admitted through the emergency department. Eligible studies compared HIT for early detection of patient deterioration with usual care and reported at least one end point of interest: hospital or ICU LOS or mortality at any time point. DATA EXTRACTION: Study data were abstracted by two independent reviewers using a standardized data extraction form. DATA SYNTHESIS: Random-effects meta-analysis was used to pool data. Among the 30 eligible studies, seven were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 23 were pre-post studies. Compared with usual care, HIT for early detection of patient deterioration was not associated with a reduction in hospital mortality or LOS in the meta-analyses of RCTs. In the meta-analyses of pre-post studies, HIT interventions demonstrated a significant association with improved hospital mortality for the entire study cohort (odds ratio, 0.78 [95% CI, 0.70-0.87]) and reduced hospital LOS overall. CONCLUSIONS: HIT for early detection of patient deterioration in acute care settings was not significantly associated with improved mortality or LOS in the meta-analyses of RCTs. In the meta-analyses of pre-post studies, HIT was associated with improved hospital mortality and LOS; however, these results should be interpreted with caution. The differences in patient outcomes between the findings of the RCTs and pre-post studies may be secondary to confounding caused by unmeasured improvements in practice and workflow over time.

Investigating the cognitive capacity constraints of an ICU care team using a systems engineering approach.

BACKGROUND: ICU operational conditions may contribute to cognitive overload and negatively impact on clinical decision making. We aimed to develop a quantitative model to investigate the association between the operational conditions and the quantity of medication orders as a measurable indicator of the multidisciplinary care team's cognitive capacity. METHODS: The temporal data of patients at one medical ICU (MICU) of Mayo Clinic in Rochester, MN between February 2016 to March 2018 was used. This dataset includes a total of 4822 unique patients admitted to the MICU and a total of 6240 MICU admissions. Guided by the Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety model, quantifiable measures attainable from electronic medical records were identified and a conceptual framework of distributed cognition in ICU was developed. Univariate piecewise Poisson regression models were built to investigate the relationship between system-level workload indicators, including patient census and patient characteristics (severity of illness, new admission, and mortality risk) and the quantity of medication orders, as the output of the care team's decision making. RESULTS: Comparing the coefficients of different line segments obtained from the regression models using a generalized F-test, we identified that, when the ICU was more than 50% occupied (patient census > 18), the number of medication orders per patient per hour was significantly reduced (average = 0.74; standard deviation (SD) = 0.56 vs. average = 0.65; SD = 0.48; p < 0.001). The reduction was more pronounced (average = 0.81; SD = 0.59 vs. average = 0.63; SD = 0.47; p < 0.001), and the breakpoint shifted to a lower patient census (16 patients) when at a higher presence of severely-ill patients requiring invasive mechanical ventilation during their stay, which might be encountered in an ICU treating patients with COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: Our model suggests that ICU operational factors, such as admission rates and patient severity of illness may impact the critical care team's cognitive function and result in changes in the production of medication orders. The results of this analysis heighten the importance of increasing situational awareness of the care team to detect and react to changing circumstances in the ICU that may contribute to cognitive overload.

Clinical Characteristics, Treatment, and Outcomes of Critically Ill Patients With COVID-19: A Scoping Review.

A growing number of studies on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are becoming available, but a synthesis of available data focusing on the critically ill population has not been conducted. We performed a scoping review to synthesize clinical characteristics, treatment, and clinical outcomes among critically ill patients with COVID-19. Between January 1, 2020, and May 15, 2020, we identified high-quality clinical studies describing critically ill patients with a sample size of greater than 20 patients by performing daily searches of the World Health Organization and LitCovid databases on COVID-19. Two reviewers independently reviewed all abstracts (2785 unique articles), full text (218 articles), and abstracted data (92 studies). The 92 studies included 61 from Asia, 16 from Europe, 10 from North and South America, and 5 multinational studies. Notable similarities among critically ill populations across all regions included a higher proportion of older males infected and with severe illness, high frequency of comorbidities (hypertension, diabetes, and cardiovascular disease), abnormal chest imaging findings, and death secondary to respiratory failure. Differences in regions included newly identified complications (eg, pulmonary embolism) and epidemiological risk factors (eg, obesity), less chest computed tomography performed, and increased use of invasive mechanical ventilation (70% to 100% vs 15% to 47% of intensive care unit patients) in Europe and the United States compared with Asia. Future research directions should include proof-of-mechanism studies to better understand organ injuries and large-scale collaborative clinical studies to evaluate the efficacy and safety of antivirals, antibiotics, interleukin 6 receptor blockers, and interferon. The current established predictive models require further verification in other regions outside China.