Patterns of Care Following a Positive Fecal Blood Test for Colorectal Cancer: A Mixed Methods Study.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: Multilevel barriers to colonoscopy after a positive fecal blood test for colorectal cancer (CRC) are well-documented. A less-explored barrier to appropriate follow-up is repeat fecal testing after a positive test. We investigated this phenomenon using mixed methods. DESIGN: This sequential mixed methods study included quantitative data from a large cohort of patients 50-89 years from four healthcare systems with a positive fecal test 2010-2018 and qualitative data from interviews with physicians and patients. MAIN MEASURES: Logistic regression was used to evaluate whether repeat testing was associated with failure to complete subsequent colonoscopy and to identify factors associated with repeat testing. Interviews were coded and analyzed to explore reasons for repeat testing. KEY RESULTS: A total of 316,443 patients had a positive fecal test. Within 1 year, 76.3% received a colonoscopy without repeat fecal testing, 3% repeated testing and then received a colonoscopy, 4.4% repeated testing without colonoscopy, and 16.3% did nothing. Among repeat testers (7.4% of total cohort, N = 23,312), 59% did not receive a colonoscopy within 1 year. In adjusted models, those with an initial positive test followed by a negative second test were significantly less likely to receive colonoscopy than those with two successive positive tests (OR 0.37, 95% CI 0.35-0.40). Older age (65-75 vs. 50-64 years: OR 1.37, 95% CI 1.33-1.41) and higher comorbidity score (≥ 4 vs. 0: OR 1.75, 95% CI 1.67-1.83) were significantly associated with repeat testing compared to those who received colonoscopy without repeat tests. Qualitative interview data revealed reasons underlying repeat testing, including colonoscopy avoidance, bargaining, and disbelief of positive results. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients in this cohort, 7.4% repeated fecal testing after an initial positive test. Of those, over half did not go on to receive a colonoscopy within 1 year. Efforts to improve CRC screening must address repeat fecal testing after a positive test as a barrier to completing colonoscopy.

Transgender Care Experiences, Barriers, and Recommendations for Improvement in a Large Integrated Health Care System in the United States.

Purpose: Transgender individuals who pursue gender affirmation medical procedures often need to navigate a complex health system and interact with multiple health care providers in primary and specialty care. We sought to better understand patient, provider, and system level barriers to transgender care in a large integrated health care system in California. Methods: Three 90-min focus groups were conducted with 13 transgender individuals who received specialty care between April and August 2018 in Kaiser Permanente Southern California. Results: Participants cited common adversities such as misgendering and system-wide insensitivity during health care encounters and low levels of understanding of their transgender experience among primary care providers. Provider-patient relationship improvements were recommended for pre- and postsurgical care and service-provider sensitivity training. Suggestions include better care coordination, reducing redundancy in clearance for specialty care services, and enhancing patient support for navigation of gender affirmation services. Participants requested careful consideration when implementing systemwide routine processes such as using pronouns and names when calling patients in for visits or describing procedures on service invoices. Conclusions: Education and training programs for improving transgender care competency and enhancing care coordination between primary care and specialty care for transgender patients are warranted. Including transgender voices with lived-experience as active stakeholders in ongoing efforts such as community advisory boards to identify care gaps may facilitate patient-centered and culturally sensitive transgender care and increased patient satisfaction. Policy Implications: There is a need for systematic training for transgender care competent providers and enhancement of care coordination between primary care and specialty care.

Incidence and Survival for Patients Diagnosed With Breast, Colorectal, and Lung Cancer in an Integrated System.

INTRODUCTION: Documenting trends in cancer incidence and survival is a national priority. This study estimated age- and sex-adjusted incidence and 5-year relative survival among patients with cancer diagnosed within Kaiser Permanente compared to Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) estimates. METHODS: The cohort included Kaiser Permanente health plan members diagnosed with breast (BC), colorectal (CRC), or lung cancer (LC) between January 1, 1999 and December 31, 2018. Incidence was computed as age-adjusted rates per 100,000 member-years. SEER*Stat was used to compute 5-year relative survival. RESULTS: Kaiser Permanente BC incidence rates were persistently higher than SEER from 2004 (126.5 [95% confidence interval (CI) = 123.2-129.9] vs 122.6 [95% CI = 121.3-123.2]) through 2013 (132.06 [95% CI = 129.5-135.7] vs 126.7 [95% CI = 125.9-127.5]). Kaiser Permanente CRC and LC incidence rates were lower than SEER for all years except 2008, showing a spike in CRC incidence (51.5 [95% CI = 49.9-53.0] vs 46.1 [95% CI = 45.7-46.4]). Kaiser Permanente BC, CRC, and LC survival estimates for all stages were higher than SEER. CONCLUSIONS: Incidence rates for all-stage and localized-stage BC were consistently higher for Kaiser Permanente than for SEER. CRC and LC rates were lower. Kaiser Permanente survival rates were consistently higher than for SEER. The strengths of these findings are associated with the ability to capture "gold-standard" cancer registry data on defined Kaiser Permanente populations. However, findings should be interpreted cautiously given differences in the underlying populations and secular and regional differences between Kaiser Permanente and SEER. The Kaiser Permanente population is younger and more racially diverse than SEER aggregate populations, and Kaiser Permanente members are insured with access to preventive care (eg, smoking cessation programs, cancer screening).

Barriers and facilitators to implementation and sustainment of guideline-recommended depression screening for patients with breast cancer in medical oncology: a qualitative study.

OBJECTIVES: Implementation of guideline-recommended depression screening in oncology presents numerous challenges. Implementation strategies that are responsive to local context may be critical elements of adoption and sustainment. We evaluated barriers and facilitators to implementation of a depression screening program for breast cancer patients in a community medical oncology setting as part of a cluster randomized controlled trial. METHODS: Guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, we employed qualitative methods to evaluate clinician, administrator, and patient perceptions of the program using semi-structured interviews. We used a team-coding approach for the data; thematic development focused on barriers and facilitators to implementation using a grounded theory approach. The codebook was refined through open discussions of subjectivity and unintentional bias, coding, and memo applications (including emergent coding), and the hierarchical structure and relationships of themes. RESULTS: We conducted 20 interviews with 11 clinicians/administrators and 9 patients. Five major themes emerged: (1) gradual acceptance and support of the intervention and workflow; (2) compatibility with system and personal norms and goals; (3) reinforcement of the value of and need for adaptability; (4) self-efficacy within the nursing team; and (5) importance of identifying accountable front-line staff beyond leadership "champions." CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest a high degree of acceptability and feasibility due to the selection of appropriate implementation strategies, alignment of norms and goals, and a high degree of workflow adaptability. These findings will be uniquely helpful in generating actionable, real-world knowledge to inform the design, implementation, and sustainment of guideline-recommended depression screening programs in oncology. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov #NCT02941614.

Decision-Making about COVID-19 Vaccines among Health Care Workers and Their Adolescent Children.

Health care workers promote COVID-19 vaccination for adolescent patients, and as parents, may influence their own children to get vaccinated. We conducted virtual, semi-structured qualitative interviews with vaccinated health care workers and their adolescent children to explore their decision-making process for COVID-19 vaccination. In total, 21 health care workers (physicians, nurses, and medical staff) and their adolescent children (N = 17) participated in interviews. The following three themes described parent-adolescent decision-making for COVID-19 vaccination: (1) family anticipation and hesitation about COVID-19 vaccine approval; (2) parents' or adolescents' choice: the decision maker for adolescent COVID-19 vaccination; and (3) leveraging one's vaccination status to encourage others to get vaccinated. Nurses encouraged adolescent autonomy in decisions for COVID-19 vaccination while physicians viewed vaccination as the parent's decision. Health care workers and their adolescent children used role-modeling to motivate unvaccinated peers and may model their decision-making process for adolescent COVID-19 vaccination with their own children to support their patients' and parents' vaccine decisions.

Patient-Reported Barriers to Treatment Initiation and Completion for Latent Tuberculosis Infection Among Patients Within a Large Integrated Health Care System in Southern California.

OBJECTIVE: More than 80% of active tuberculosis in the United States is due to reactivation of latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI), which can be prevented via screening and treatment. Treatment initiation and completion rates are low for patients with LTBI in the United States, and the barriers to successful treatment are poorly understood. DESIGN: We conducted semistructured qualitative interviews with 38 patients who were prescribed LTBI treatment (9 months isoniazid, 6 months rifampin, or 3 months rifamycin-isoniazid short-course combinations). We used purposeful sampling employing a maximum variation approach to obtain diverse perspectives of patients who did not initiate treatment, who did not complete treatment, and who completed treatment (n = 14, n = 16, and n = 8, respectively). Patients were asked about LTBI knowledge, experience regarding treatment, interactions with providers, and barriers they faced. Using a team coding model (2 coders/analysts), we developed deductively derived (a priori) codes based on our central research questions and inductively derived codes that emerged directly from the data. Analysis of our coding categories and relationships generated a hierarchy of key themes and subthemes. SETTING: Kaiser Permanente Southern California. PARTICIPANTS: Individuals 18 years or older who received a diagnosis of LTBI and prescribed treatment. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: LTBI knowledge, attitudes toward LTBI, attitudes toward LTBI treatment, attitudes toward providers, and explanation of barriers. RESULTS: Most patients reported having limited knowledge of LTBI. In addition to the duration of treatment, barriers to initiation and completion included perceived lack of support, uncomfortable side effects, and pervasive minimization of the positive impact of treatment on their health. Many patients felt there was little incentive to overcome barriers. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, patient experience with LTBI treatment initiation and completion could be improved with patient-centered treatment and more frequent follow-ups.

Adolescent Self-Consent for COVID-19 Vaccination: Views of Healthcare Workers and Their Adolescent Children on Vaccination Autonomy.

PURPOSE: This study explored the perceptions of healthcare worker parents (physicians, nurses, and staff) and their adolescents (aged 12-17 years) on adolescent self-consent to COVID-19 vaccination by applying the concept of positive deviance of those already vaccinated against COVID-19. METHODS: We used a qualitative descriptive design to conduct individual, semi-structured interviews with COVID-19-vaccinated healthcare workers in Southern California and their vaccinated adolescent children. Separate interviews were conducted with parents and adolescents from November to December 2021 using digital phone conferencing software. All interviews were recorded and transcribed. Thematic and constant comparative analysis techniques were used to identify relevant themes and subthemes. RESULTS: Twenty one healthcare workers (9 nurses, one nurse practitioner, one technologist, and 10 physicians) and their adolescents (N = 17) participated. Three overarching themes were identified to describe participants' perspectives about adolescent self-consent for COVID-19 vaccination: (1) Family values and practices around adolescent vaccination; (2) Differences in parent and adolescent support for vaccine self-consent laws; and (3) Parent and adolescent uncertainty on readiness for vaccine self-consent laws. Adolescents largely supported self-consent while parents supported the policy if they would be able to have a discussion with their adolescent prior to the decision. DISCUSSION: Parents and adolescents supported adolescent self-consent for COVID-19 vaccination, with the reservation that adolescents should discuss the decision alongside their parents to exercise their medical autonomy with supportive guidance. Greater adolescent involvement in making decisions and providing self-consent for healthcare, including vaccines, could prepare adolescents to have a greater sense of autonomy over their health and contribute to population health measures.

COVID-19 vaccine concerns of health care providers and ancillary staff.

A web-based survey was widely distributed between November 1st-December 27th, 2021, to health care providers and ancillary staff to assess reported COVID-19 vaccination of their children as well as their vaccine concerns. Fewer nurses and laboratory / radiology technicians reported COVID-19 vaccination of their adolescent children and intent to vaccinate their younger children compared to physicians and pharmacists, along with more frequently reported concern about anaphylaxis and infertility. Focused efforts to update ancillary staff as well as all health care providers on emerging COVID-19 vaccine safety information for children is crucial to promote strong COVID-19 vaccine recommendations. IMPACT: Nurses, laboratory technicians and radiology technicians frequently reported concern about anaphylaxis and infertility after COVID-19 vaccination despite reassuring safety data. Education of ancillary staff with emerging safety data is important to strengthen health care provider vaccine recommendations.

"Still on the Fence": A Mixed Methods Investigation of COVID-19 Vaccine Confidence Among Health Care Providers.

BACKGROUND: There is evidence of disparities in COVID-19 vaccine acceptance among health care providers. The purpose of this study was to examine confidence receiving and recommending COVID-19 vaccines by health care provider type and race/ethnicity. METHODS: This mixed methods study involved a cross-sectional survey and qualitative, semi-structured interviews from March to May 2021 among a sample of physicians, advanced practice providers, nurses, and pharmacists. These workers were recruited through voluntary response sampling from an integrated health system in Southern California. The primary dependent variables were (a) confidence in vaccine safety, (b) confidence in vaccine effectiveness, and (c) intent to recommend the vaccine to others. The primary independent variables were health care provider type and race/ethnicity. FINDINGS: A total of 2,948 providers completed the survey. Nurses relative to physicians were 15% less likely to perceive the COVID-19 vaccine to be safe (risk ratio [RR] = 0.85; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.83-0.87); 27% less likely to perceive the vaccine to prevent COVID-19 (RR = 0.73; 95% CI = 0.69-0.76); and 11% less likely to recommend the vaccine to others (RR = 0.89; 95% CI = 0.87-0.91). Hispanic/Latinx providers were 10% less likely to perceive the vaccine to prevent COVID-19 (RR = 0.90; 95% CI = 0.83-0.98) relative to White providers. Qualitative themes included: No need for vaccine; distrusting vaccine research and roll-out; caretaking barriers; uncertainty and potential to change one's mind; framing vaccine decisions around personal beliefs. CONCLUSIONS & APPLICATION TO PRACTICE: Health care workplaces should consider interventions to increase COVID-19 vaccination among their workers, including education and mandatory vaccination policies.

Potentially Harmful Medication Dispenses After a Fall or Hip Fracture: A Mixed Methods Study of a Commonly Used Quality Measure.

BACKGROUND: High-risk medication dispenses to patients with a prior fall or hip fracture represent a potentially dangerous disease-drug interaction among older adults. The research team quantified the prevalence, identified risk factors, and generated patient and provider insights into high-risk medication dispenses in a large, community-based integrated health system using a commonly used quality measure. METHODS: This was a mixed methods study with a convergent design combining a retrospective cohort study using electronic health record (EHR) data, individual interviews of primary care physicians, and a focus group of patient advisors. RESULTS: Of 113,809 patients ≥ 65 years with a fall/fracture in 2009-2015, 35.4% had a potentially harmful medication dispensed after their fall/fracture. Most medications were prescribed by primary care providers. Older age, male gender, and race/ethnicity other than non-Hispanic White were associated with a reduced risk of high-risk medication dispenses. Patients with a pre-fall/fracture medication dispense were substantially more likely to have a post-fall/fracture medication dispense (hazard ratio [HR] = 13.26, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 12.91-13.61). Both patients and providers noted that providers may be unaware of patient falls due to inconsistent assessments and patient reluctance to disclose falls. Providers also noted the lack of a standard location to document falls and limited decision support alerts within the EHR. CONCLUSION: High-risk medication dispenses are common among older patients with a history of falls/fractures. Future interventions should explore improved assessment and documentation of falls, decision support, clinician training strategies, patient educational resources, building trusting patient-clinician relationships to facilitate long-term medication discontinuation among persistent medication users, and a focus on fall prevention.

Effect of a Community-Based Medical Oncology Depression Screening Program on Behavioral Health Referrals Among Patients With Breast Cancer: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Implementation of guideline-recommended depression screening in medical oncology remains challenging. Evidence suggests that multicomponent care pathways with algorithm-based referral and management are effective, yet implementation of sustainable programs remains limited and implementation-science guided approaches are understudied. Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of an implementation-strategy guided depression screening program for patients with breast cancer in a community setting. Design, Setting, and Participants: A pragmatic cluster randomized clinical trial conducted within Kaiser Permanente Southern California (KPSC). The trial included 6 medical centers and 1436 patients diagnosed with new primary breast cancer who had a consultation with medical oncology between October 1, 2017, through September 30, 2018. Patients were followed up through study end date of May 31, 2019. Interventions: Six medical centers in Southern California participated and were randomized 1:1 to tailored implementation strategies (intervention, 3 sites, n = 744 patients) or education-only (control, 3 sites, n = 692 patients) groups. The program consisted of screening with the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) and algorithm-based scoring and referral to behavioral health services based on low, moderate, or high score. Clinical teams at tailored intervention sites received program education, audit, and feedback of performance data and implementation facilitation, and clinical workflows were adapted to suit local context. Education-only controls sites received program education. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was percent of eligible patients screened and referred (based on PHQ-9 score) at intervention vs control groups measured at the patient level. Secondary outcomes included outpatient health care utilization for behavioral health, primary care, oncology, urgent care, and emergency department. Results: All 1436 eligible patients were randomized at the center level (mean age, 61.5 years; 99% women; 18% Asian, 17% Black, 26% Hispanic, and 37% White) and were followed up to the end of the study, insurance disenrollment, or death. Groups were similar in demographic and tumor characteristics. For the primary outcome, 7.9% (59 of 744) of patients at tailored sites were referred compared with 0.1% (1 of 692) at education-only sites (difference, 7.8%; 95% CI, 5.8%-9.8%). Referrals to a behavioral health clinician were completed by 44 of 59 patients treated at the intervention sites (75%) intervention sites vs 1 of 1 patient at the education-only sites (100%). In adjusted models patients at tailored sites had significantly fewer outpatient visits in medical oncology (rate ratio, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.86-0.89; P = .001), and no significant difference in utilization of primary care, urgent care, and emergency department visits. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with breast cancer treated in community-based oncology practices, tailored strategies for implementation of routine depression screening compared with an education-only control group resulted in a greater proportion of referrals to behavioral care. Further research is needed to understand the clinical benefit and cost-effectiveness of this program. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02941614.

Laboratory monitoring to reduce adverse drug-related events: a mixed methods study.

BACKGROUND: Therapy with angiotensinconverting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) requires laboratory monitoring to avoid hyperkalemia and acute kidney failure. OBJECTIVE: To assess the frequency of recommended annual serum potassium and creatinine monitoring and determine potential factors associated with care gaps among adults dispensed an ACEI or ARB. METHODS: This mixed-methods study integrated findings from a retrospective cohort study and individual patient interviews. Adults aged 21 years and over within Kaiser Permanente Southern California with at least 180 treatment days of an ACEI and/or ARB in 2015 were included. Patients invited for qualitative interviews included those who did and did not complete the recommended laboratory tests. We assessed the proportion of patients completing both recommended laboratory tests, factors associated with not receiving laboratory monitoring, and patients' insights into barriers and facilitators of recommended monitoring. RESULTS: Of 437,544 patients who received an ACEI or ARB, 9.0% did not receive both a serum potassium and creatinine laboratory test during treatment (defined as a care gap). Lower risk of a care gap was observed for patients with increasing age (rate ratio [RR] per 10-year increase = 0.78, 95% CI = 0.77-0.79); diabetes mellitus (RR = 0.62, 95% CI = 0.60-0.64); hypertension (RR = 0.71, 95% CI = 0.71-0.74); Charlson Comorbidity Index score of at least 2 (RR = 0.62, 95% CI = 0.60-0.64); those who changed medication classes (RR = 0.53, 95% CI = 0.51-0.56); and patients with a cardiologist (RR = 0.81, 95% CI = 0.73-0.90) or nephrologist (RR = 0.60, 95% CI = 0.52-0.69) as their prescribing provider. Twenty-five patients completed the qualitative interviews. Patients often lacked knowledge about the need for laboratory monitoring, cited logistical barriers to accessing the laboratory, and deemed the reminders they received through an outpatient safety program as a facilitator to completing tests. CONCLUSIONS: Given the large patient population on ACEI and ARB medications, monitoring and support strategies such as electronic clinical surveillance could be important in addressing care gaps and potentially reducing adverse drug effects. DISCLOSURES: This project was supported by grant number R01HS024437 from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. The funder had no role in the design of the study; collection, analyses, or interpretation of the data, or decision to submit this manuscript for publication. Harrison, Reynolds, Hahn, Munoz-Plaza, Yi, Fischer, Luong, Sim, Brettler, Handler, and Mittman are employees of the Southern California Permanente Medical Group. Danworth was employed by the Southern California Permanente Medical Group at the time of this study. Singh was partially supported by the Houston VA HSR&D Center for Innovations in Quality, Effectiveness and Safety (CIN13-413). Reynolds reports grants from Novartis, Amgen Inc., and Vital Strategies, Resolve to Save Lives, unrelated to this work. Yi reports grants from Novartis unrelated to this work. Kanter has nothing to disclose.

Health Care Providers' Trusted Sources for Information About COVID-19 Vaccines: Mixed Methods Study.

BACKGROUND: Information and opinions shared by health care providers can affect patient vaccination decisions, but little is known about who health care providers themselves trust for information in the context of new COVID-19 vaccines. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to investigate which sources of information about COVID-19 vaccines are trusted by health care providers and how they communicate this information to patients. METHODS: This mixed methods study involved a one-time, web-based survey of health care providers and qualitative interviews with a subset of survey respondents. Health care providers (physicians, advanced practice providers, pharmacists, nurses) were recruited from an integrated health system in Southern California using voluntary response sampling, with follow-up interviews with providers who either accepted or declined a COVID-19 vaccine. The outcome was the type of information sources that respondents reported trusting for information about COVID-19 vaccines. Bivariate tests were used to compare trusted information sources by provider type; thematic analysis was used to explore perspectives about vaccine information and communicating with patients about vaccines. RESULTS: The survey was completed by 2948 providers, of whom 91% (n=2683) responded that they had received ≥1 dose of a COVID-19 vaccine. The most frequently trusted source of COVID-19 vaccine information was government agencies (n=2513, 84.2%); the least frequently trusted source was social media (n=691, 9.5%). More physicians trusted government agencies (n=1226, 93%) than nurses (n=927, 78%) or pharmacists (n=203, 78%; P<.001), and more physicians trusted their employer (n=1115, 84%) than advanced practice providers (n=95, 67%) and nurses (n=759, 64%; P=.002). Qualitative themes (n=32 participants) about trusted sources of COVID-19 vaccine information were identified: processing new COVID-19 information in a health care work context likened to a "war zone" during the pandemic and communicating information to patients. Some providers were hesitant to recommend vaccines to pregnant people and groups they perceived to be at low risk for COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians have stronger trust in government sources and their employers for information about COVID-19 vaccines compared with nurses, pharmacists, and advanced practice providers. Strategies such as role modeling, tailored messaging, or talking points with standard language may help providers to communicate accurate COVID-19 vaccine information to patients, and these strategies may also be used with providers with lower levels of trust in reputable information sources.

De-implementation and substitution of clinical care processes: stakeholder perspectives on the transition to primary human papillomavirus (HPV) testing for cervical cancer screening.

BACKGROUND: New cervical cancer screening guidelines recommend primary human papillomavirus (HPV) testing for women age 30-65 years. Healthcare organizations are preparing to de-implement the previous recommended strategies of Pap testing or co-testing (Pap plus HPV test) and substitute primary HPV testing. However, there may be significant challenges to the replacement of this entrenched clinical practice, even with an evidence-based substitution. We sought to identify stakeholder-perceived barriers and facilitators to this substitution within a large healthcare system, Kaiser Permanente Southern California. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews with clinician, administrative, and patient stakeholders regarding (a) acceptability and feasibility of the planned substitution; (b) perceptions of barriers and facilitators, with an emphasis on those related to the de-implementation/implementation cycle of substitution; and (c) perceived readiness to change. Our interview guide was informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Using a team coding approach, we developed an initial coding structure refined during iterative analysis; the data were subsequently organized thematically into domains, key themes, and sub-themes using thematic analysis, followed by framework analysis informed by CFIR. RESULTS: We conducted 23 interviews: 5 patient and 18 clinical/administrative. Clinicians perceived that patients feel more tests equals better care, and clinicians and patients expressed fear of missed cancers ("…it'll be more challenging convincing the patient that only one test is…good enough to detect cancer."). Patients perceived practice changes resulting in "less care" are driven by the desire to cut costs. In contrast, clinicians/administrators viewed changing from two tests to one as acceptable and a workflow efficiency ("…It's very easy and half the work."). Stakeholder-recommended strategies included focusing on the increased efficacy of primary HPV testing and developing clinician talking points incorporating national guidelines to assuage "cost-cutting" fears. CONCLUSIONS: Substitution to replace an entrenched clinical practice is complex. Leveraging available facilitators is key to ease the process for clinical and administrative stakeholders-e.g., emphasizing the efficiency of going from two tests to one. Identifying and addressing clinician and patient fears regarding cost-cutting and perceived poorer quality of care is critical for substitution. Multicomponent and multilevel strategies for engagement and education will be required. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, # NCT04371887.

High School Basketball Coach and Player Perspectives on Warm-Up Routines and Lower Extremity Injuries.

BACKGROUND: While participation in sports-related activities results in improved health outcomes, high school athletes are at risk for lower extremity injuries, especially ankle, knee, and thigh injuries. Efforts to promote the adoption and implementation of evidence-driven approaches to reduce injury risk among school-aged athletes are needed. However, there is limited research regarding the perceived barriers, facilitators, and adherence factors that may influence the successful implementation of effective warm-up routines among this population. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative study using semi-structured interviews and focus groups to assess high school basketball coach and player current practices, knowledge, and perspectives about warm-ups and lower-extremity injuries (LEIs). We interviewed coaches (n = 12) and players (n = 30) from May to October 2019. Participants were recruited from public high schools in a joint school district in Southern California. Multiple coders employed thematic analysis of the data using validated methods. RESULTS: Coaches and players reported regular engagement (e.g., daily) in warm-up routines, but the time dedicated (range 5-45 min), types of exercises, and order varied substantially. Players often co-lead the warm-up practice with the coach or assistant coach. Despite regular engagement in warm-up, players and coaches report multiple challenges, including (1) limited time and space to warm-up effectively at games, (2) a perception that young players are not prone to injury, (3) competing demands for coaches' time during practice, and (4) coaches' lack of knowledge. Coaches and players perceive that warming up before practice will result in fewer injuries, and many players are motivated to warm up as a result of their personal injury experience; however, they desire guidance on the ideal exercises for preventing injury and training on the proper form for each exercise. CONCLUSIONS: Regular involvement in basketball warm-up routines is common among high school teams, but the methods and time dedicated to these practices varied. Players and coaches are eager for more information on warm-up programs shown to reduce LEIs.

Patient and Physician Perspectives of Deprescribing Potentially Inappropriate Medications in Older Adults with a History of Falls: a Qualitative Study.

BACKGROUND: High-risk medications pose serious safety risks to older adults, including increasing the risk of falls. Deprescribing potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) in older adults who have experienced a fall is a key element of fall reduction strategies. However, continued use of PIMs in older adults is common, and clinicians may face substantial deprescribing barriers. OBJECTIVE: Explore patient and clinician experiences with and perceptions of deprescribing PIMs in patients with a history of falls. DESIGN: We led guided patient feedback sessions to explore deprescribing scenarios with patient stakeholders and conducted semi-structured interviews with primary care physicians (PCPs) to explore knowledge and awareness of fall risk guidelines, deprescribing experiences, and barriers and facilitators to deprescribing. PARTICIPANTS: PCPs from Kaiser Permanente Southern California (KPSC) and patient members of the KPSC Regional Patient Advisory Committee. APPROACH: We used maximum variation sampling to identify PCPs with patients who had a fall, then categorized the resulting PIM dispense distribution for those patients into high and low frequency. We analyzed the data using a hybrid deductive-inductive approach. Coders applied initial deductively derived codes to the data, simultaneously using an open-code inductive approach to capture emergent themes. KEY RESULTS: Physicians perceived deprescribing discussions as potentially contentious, even among patients with falls. Physicians reported varying comfort levels with deprescribing strategies: some felt that the conversations might be better suited to others (e.g., pharmacists), while others had well-planned negotiation strategies. Patients reported lack of clarity as to the reasons and goals of deprescribing and poor understanding of the seriousness of falls. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that key barriers to deprescribing include PCP trepidation about raising a contentious topic and insufficient patient awareness of the potential seriousness of falls. Findings suggest the need for multifaceted, multilevel deprescribing approaches with clinician training strategies, patient educational resources, and a focus on building trusting patient-clinician relationships.

Follow-up of Abnormal Estimated GFR Results Within a Large Integrated Health Care Delivery System: A Mixed-Methods Study.

BACKGROUND: Timely follow-up of abnormal laboratory results is important for high-quality care. We sought to identify risk factors, facilitators, and barriers to timely follow-up of an abnormal estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) for the diagnosis of chronic kidney disease. STUDY DESIGN: Mixed-methods study: retrospective electronic health record (EHR) analyses, physician interviews. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: Large integrated health care delivery system. Quantitative analyses included 244,540 patients 21 years or older with incident abnormal eGFRs from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2015, ordered by 7,164 providers. Qualitative analyses included 15 physician interviews. EXPOSURES: Patient-, physician-, and system-level factors. OUTCOME: Timely follow-up of incident abnormal eGFRs, defined as repeat eGFR obtained within 60 to 150 days, follow-up testing before 60 days that indicated normal kidney function, or diagnosis before 60 days of chronic kidney disease or kidney cancer. ANALYTICAL APPROACH: Multivariable robust Poisson regression models accounting for clustering within provider were used to estimate risk ratios (RRs) and 95% CIs for lack of timely follow-up. Team coding was used to identify themes from physician interviews. RESULTS: 58% of patients lacked timely follow-up of their incident abnormal eGFRs (ie, had a care gap). An abnormal creatinine result flag in the EHR was associated with better follow-up (RR for care gap, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.64-0.66). Patient online portal use and physician panel size were weakly associated with follow-up. Patients seen by providers behind on managing their EHR message box were at higher risk for care gaps. Physician interviews identified system-level (eg, panel size and assistance in managing laboratory results) and provider-level (eg, proficiency using EHR tools) factors that influence laboratory result management. LIMITATIONS: Unable to capture intentional delays in follow-up testing. CONCLUSIONS: Timely follow-up of abnormal results remains challenging in an EHR-based integrated health care delivery system. Strategies improving provider EHR message box management and leveraging health information technology (eg, flagging abnormal eGFR results), making organizational/staffing changes (eg, increasing the role of nurses in managing laboratory results), and boosting patient engagement through better patient portals may improve test follow-up.

Use of recommended posttreatment services for adolescent and young adult survivors of Hodgkin lymphoma.

BACKGROUND: Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) is a leading cancer diagnosis for adolescents and young adults (AYAs), with an overall 5-year survival rate of >80%. However, to the authors' knowledge, little is known regarding posttreatment patterns of care. In the current study, the authors characterized the use of guideline-recommended services in a cohort of AYA survivors of HL in Kaiser Permanente Southern California. METHODS: Patients with HL who were diagnosed between ages 15 and 39 years between 2000 and 2010 were identified. The authors calculated the number of patients who received recommended short-term care within 2 years after treatment cessation for those who remained enrolled and alive from 2001 through 2015. Use of recommended late-effects screening for breast cancer and cardiovascular disease was examined. Logistic regression was used to evaluate the association between receipt of recommended care and patient, cancer, and treatment characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 354 patients were identified, with a mean age at the time of diagnosis of 26 years (standard deviation, 6.9 years). Approximately 12% of patients had stage I disease, 59% had stage II disease, 17% had stage III disease, and 13% of patients had stage IV disease. Nearly all patients received chemotherapy (95%), 51% received radiotherapy, and 5% received care from a pediatric oncologist. Overall, approximately 49% of patients received recommended short-term care. Of those patients eligible for cardiovascular screening at 10 years posttreatment (60 patients), 53% received at least 1 screening. Of those patients eligible for breast cancer screening (21 patients), approximately 50% underwent at least 1 screening. Regression results indicated that those patients treated by a pediatric oncologist were >3 times as likely to receive recommended short-term care. CONCLUSIONS: The results of the current study highlight gaps in the delivery of posttreatment care to AYA survivors of HL. By determining areas in need of improvement, these findings can guide the development of tailored interventions with which to improve care.

Developing innovative models of care for cancer survivors: use of implementation science to guide evaluation of appropriateness and feasibility.

PURPOSE: Limited understanding of factors affecting uptake and outcomes of different cancer survivorship care models hampers implementation of best practices. We conducted a formative evaluation of stakeholder-perceived acceptability and feasibility of an embedded primary care provider (PCP) survivorship care model. METHODS: We identified clinical, operational, and patient stakeholders within Kaiser Permanente Southern California and conducted semi-structured interviews. Analyses were guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), an integrated framework from the field of implementation science. Deductive thematic categories were derived a priori from CFIR domains; thematic sub-categories were developed inductively. RESULTS: We interviewed 12 stakeholders; multiple themes were identified. Acceptability: oncologists and operational leaders perceived that the model was an acceptable solution to issues of capacity and efficiency with the potential to improve quality; however, several oncologists perceived negative consequences including "[loss of] the joy of medicine." Patients were less enthusiastic, fearing the introduction of "[someone] who doesn't know me." Feasibility: confidence was high that this model can succeed, although there was concern about finding the right PCP and investment in training and staff support. Culture/climate: numerous system-level facilitators were identified, including encouragement of innovation and familiarity with developing new models. CONCLUSIONS: Formative evaluation is a critical pre-implementation process. Acceptability and feasibility for this model were high among oncologists and operational leaders but patients were ambivalent. Keys to successful implementation include training and support of engaged PCPs and a patient transition plan introduced early in the care trajectory.

Survivorship care plans: are randomized controlled trials assessing outcomes that are relevant to stakeholders?

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes assessed in extant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to outcomes that stakeholders expect from survivorship care plans (SCPs). To facilitate the transition from active treatment to follow-up care for the 15.5 million US cancer survivors, many organizations require SCP use. However, results of several RCTs of SCPs' effectiveness have been null, possibly because they have evaluated outcomes on which SCPs should be expected to have limited influence. Stakeholders (e.g., survivors, oncologists) may expect outcomes that differ from RCTs' outcomes. METHODS: We identified RCTs' outcomes using a PubMed literature review. We identified outcomes that stakeholders expect from SCPs using semistructured interviews with stakeholders in three healthcare systems in the USA and Canada. Finally, we mapped RCTs' outcomes onto stakeholder-identified outcomes. RESULTS: RCT outcomes did not fully address outcomes that stakeholders expected from SCPs, and RCTs assessed outcomes that stakeholders did not expect from SCPs. RCTs often assessed outcomes only from survivors' perspectives. CONCLUSIONS: RCTs of SCPs' effectiveness have not assessed outcomes that stakeholders expect. To better understand SCPs' effectiveness, future RCTs should assess outcomes of SCP use that are relevant from the perspective of multiple stakeholders. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: SCPs' effectiveness may be optimized when used with an eye toward outcomes that stakeholders expect from SCPs. For survivors, this means using SCPs as a map to guide them with respect to what kind of follow-up care they should seek, when they should seek it, and from whom they should seek it.