Building the foundation for a community-generated national research blueprint for inherited bleeding disorders: research priorities in health services; diversity, equity, and inclusion; and implementation science.

BACKGROUND: The National Hemophilia Foundation (NHF) conducted extensive all-stakeholder inherited bleeding disorder (BD) community consultations to inform a blueprint for future research. Sustaining and expanding the specialized and comprehensive Hemophilia Treatment Center care model, to better serve all people with inherited BDs (PWIBD), and increasing equitable access to optimal health emerged as top priorities. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: NHF, with the American Thrombosis and Hemostasis Network (ATHN), convened multidisciplinary expert working groups (WG) to distill priority research initiatives from consultation findings. WG5 was charged with prioritizing health services research (HSR); diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI); and implementation science (IS) research initiatives to advance community-identified priorities. RESULTS: WG5 identified multiple priority research themes and initiatives essential to capitalizing on this potential. Formative studies using qualitative and mixed methods approaches should be conducted to characterize issues and meaningfully investigate interventions. Investment in HSR, DEI and IS education, training, and workforce development are vital. CONCLUSIONS: An enormous amount of work is required in the areas of HSR, DEI, and IS, which have received inadequate attention in inherited BDs. This research has great potential to evolve the experiences of PWIBD, deliver transformational community-based care, and advance health equity.

Research into how people get their health care, called health services research, is important to understand if care is being delivered equitably and efficiently. This research figures out how to provide the best care at the lowest cost and finds out if everyone gets equally good care. Diversity and inclusion research focuses on whether all marginalized and minoritized populations (such as a given social standing, race, ethnicity, sex, gender identity, sexuality, age, income, disability status, language, culture, faith, geographic location, or country of birth) receive equitable care. This includes checking whether different populations are all getting the care they need and looking for ways to improve the care. Implementation science studies how to make a potential improvement work in the real world. The improvement could be a new way to diagnose or treat a health condition, a better way to deliver health care or do research, or a strategy to remove barriers preventing specific populations from getting the best available care. The National Hemophilia Foundation focuses on improving the lives of all people with bleeding disorders (BD). They brought BDs doctors, nurses, physical therapists, social workers, professors, and government and industry partners together with people and families living with BDs to discuss research in the areas described above. The group came up with important future research questions to address racism and other biases, and other changes to policies, procedures, and practices to make BD care equitable, efficient, and effective.

Ranges and drivers of risk associated with sports and recreational activities in people with haemophilia: results of the Activity-Intensity-Risk Consensus Survey of US physical therapists.

INTRODUCTION: Limited evidence describes physical activity-associated bleeding risks for people with haemophilia, and risks are usually described only generically. AIM: To assess activity-specific ranges of risk for joint, soft tissue and head bleeds by identifying inherent and modifiable risk factors associated with each activity, based on opinions of expert physical therapists (PTs). METHODS: Physical therapists from US haemophilia treatment centres (HTCs) participated in a survey of 101 physical activities. For each activity, PTs provided minimum/maximum risk scores (low = 1; high = 5), and indicated specific bleeding risks in six joints and three injury types (bruising, muscle bleeding, head injury). Risk drivers were identified from free-text comments and explored at a consensus meeting, where they were categorized as inherent or modifiable and activity-driven or patient-driven. RESULTS: Of 32 invited PTs, 17 participated; median experience was 24 years as a PT and 16 years at an HTC. Only a few activities had a wide range of risk assessments encompassing both lower and upper ends of the response range. Joint injury risks were consistent with position and physical requirements, and head and muscle bleed risks were associated with physical contact. Eight PTs participated in the consensus meeting; key risk drivers identified included progression from seasonal to year-round participation, overtraining and improper body mechanics. Inherent risks included impact with surface/ball/equipment and field/surface condition; modifiable risks included safety equipment and tricks/stunts. CONCLUSIONS: These data provide a framework for discussion with patients/families, recognizing how certain activities may be modified to decrease risk, and identifying activities with nonmodifiable inherent risks.