Update to the study protocol for an implementation-effectiveness trial comparing two education strategies for improving the uptake of noninvasive ventilation in patients with severe COPD exacerbation.

BACKGROUND: There is strong evidence that noninvasive ventilation (NIV) improves the outcomes of patients hospitalized with severe COPD exacerbation, and NIV is recommended as the first-line therapy for these patients. Yet, several studies have demonstrated substantial variation in NIV use across hospitals, leading to preventable morbidity and mortality. In addition, prior studies suggested that efforts to increase NIV use in COPD need to account for the complex and interdisciplinary nature of NIV delivery and the need for team coordination. Therefore, our initial project aimed to compare two educational strategies: online education (OLE) and interprofessional education (IPE), which targets complex team-based care in NIV delivery. Due to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on recruitment and planned intervention, we had made several changes in the study design, statistical analysis, and implementation strategies delivery as outlined in the methods. METHODS: We originally proposed a two-arm, pragmatic, cluster, randomized hybrid implementation-effectiveness trial comparing two education strategies to improve NIV uptake in patients with severe COPD exacerbation in 20 hospitals with a low baseline rate of NIV use. Due to logistical constrains and slow recruitment, we changed the study design to an opened cohort stepped-wedge design with three steps which will allow the institutions to enroll when they are ready to participate. Only the IPE strategy will be implemented, and the education will be provided in an online virtual format. Our primary outcome will be the hospital-level risk-standardized NIV proportion for the period post-IPE training, along with the change in rate from the period prior to training. Aim 1 will compare the change over time of NIV use among patients with COPD in the step-wedged design. Aim 2 will explore the mediators' role (respiratory therapist autonomy and team functionality) on the relationship between the implementation strategies and effectiveness. Finally, in Aim 3, through interviews with providers, we will assess the acceptability and feasibility of the educational training. CONCLUSION: The changes in study design will result in several limitation. Most importantly, the hospitals in the three cohorts are not randomized as they enroll based on their readiness. Second, the delivery of the IPE is virtual, and it is not known if remote education is conducive to team building. However, this study will be among the first to test the impact of IPE in the inpatient setting carefully and may generalize to other interventions directed to seriously ill patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04206735 . Registered on December 20, 2019.

Changes in Patient Characteristics and Practice Outcomes of a Tele-Urgent Care Clinic Pre- and Post-COVID-19 Telehealth Policy Expansions.

Introduction: The coronavirus 2019 pandemic (COVID-19) has resulted in major changes in lifestyle practices and healthcare delivery. The goal of this study was to examine changes in practice and service outcomes in a telehealth program before and after the federal and private telehealth policy expansion during the COVID-19 pandemic. These findings are particularly useful to understand what may be needed to overcome telehealth challenges in future disasters. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of virtual visits through a statewide telehealth center embedded in a large academic healthcare system. Primary outcomes of this study were changes in telehealth visits pre- and post-policy expansions among at-risk populations. Results: A total of 2,132 telehealth visits were conducted: 1,530 (71.8 percent) patients were female, 1,561 (73.2 percent) were between the ages 18-50, 1,576 (74 percent) were uninsured, and 1,225 (57.5 percent) were from rural regions. The average number of telehealth visits per day increased from 14 to 33 visits post-expansion. A significant change in patient characteristics was found among senior, uninsured, and rural patients after the telehealth expansion.There was an 11 percent decrease in telehealth visits from very high vulnerability regions post-expansion compared to pre-expansion. There was a 15 percent decrease in visits resulting in prescription post-expansion (p-value<0.01). Conclusions: COVID-19 policy expansions expanded telehealth utilization among at-risk populations such as senior, uninsured, and rural patients while decompressing hospitals and emergency rooms and maintaining positive patient experiences. Further regulations are needed around virtual visits unintended consequences, software certification, and guidelines for workforce training.

Telestroke Infrastructure, Processes, and Support Needs: A Survey of Hospitals in Five States.

Introduction: Telestroke has been shown to be a cost-effective approach to promoting use and timeliness of evidence-based treatment. However, adoption of telestroke has been relatively low. Several barriers to telestroke implementation have been previously identified in the literature. These barriers, and the strategies needed to overcome them, may vary across hospitals. Our study aimed to examine telestroke programs to identify opportunities for future research and efforts to promote effective implementation and sustainment of telestroke services. Methods: We surveyed hospitals in five states to capture information about the current status of the hospital's telestroke program; the model(s) of delivery being used (e.g., hub-and-spoke and third-party vendor); and telestroke infrastructure, processes, and implementation strategies. The survey included both closed-ended and open-ended response options. Descriptive results are presented, complemented with illustrative examples of open-ended responses. Results: We received 89 responses, each representing a different hospital. Approximately one-third of telestroke programs in our sample began between 2018 and 2020. More than two-thirds reported participating in a collaboration with other organizations to improve telestroke services. The most commonly reported, high-priority topics for additional guidance involved monitoring process measures, using performance indicators for improvement, and sharing data from measures with physicians. Discussion: Results complement prior studies, specifically about impacts of COVID-19 on telestroke programs and capabilities that hospitals most need assistance with. Challenges faced and guidance needed differ across hospitals, suggesting a need for a tailored support. The results also suggest more work is needed to understand factors that threaten sustainability of telestroke programs.

Impact of Asynchronous Electronic Communication-Based Visits on Clinical Outcomes and Health Care Delivery: Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Electronic visits (e-visits) involve asynchronous communication between clinicians and patients through a secure web-based platform, such as a patient portal, to elicit symptoms and determine a diagnosis and treatment plan. E-visits are now reimbursable through Medicare due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The state of evidence regarding e-visits, such as the impact on clinical outcomes and health care delivery, is unclear. OBJECTIVE: To address this gap, we examine how e-visits have impacted clinical outcomes and health care quality, access, utilization, and costs. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review; MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science were searched from January 2000 through October 2020 for peer-reviewed studies that assessed e-visits' impacts on clinical and health care delivery outcomes. RESULTS: Out of 1859 papers, 19 met the inclusion criteria. E-visit usage was associated with improved or comparable clinical outcomes, especially for chronic disease management (eg, diabetes care, blood pressure management). The impact on quality of care varied across conditions. Quality of care was equivalent or better for chronic conditions, but variable quality was observed in infection management (eg, appropriate antibiotic prescribing). Similarly, the impact on health care utilization varied across conditions (eg, lower utilization for dermatology but mixed impact in primary care). Health care costs were lower for e-visits than those for in-person visits for a wide range of conditions (eg, dermatology and acute visits). No studies examined the impact of e-visits on health care access. It is difficult to draw firm conclusions about effectiveness or impact on care delivery from the studies that were included because many used observational designs. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the evidence suggests e-visits may provide clinical outcomes that are comparable to those provided by in-person care and reduce health care costs for certain health care conditions. At the same time, there is mixed evidence on health care quality, especially regarding infection management (eg, sinusitis, urinary tract infections, conjunctivitis). Further studies are needed to test implementation strategies that might improve delivery (eg, clinical decision support for antibiotic prescribing) and to assess which conditions can be managed via e-visits.