Search

Abstract Shortly after the first case of SARS-CoV-2 was diagnosed a public health emergency (PHE) was declared and a multi-agency response was initiated within the US federal government to create and propagate testing capacity. As part of this response, an unprecedented program designated Rapid Acceleration of Diagnostics (RADx) Tech was established by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to facilitate the development of point-of-care tests for the COVID-19. The RADx Tech Clinical Studies Core (CSC), located at the University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School (UMass Chan), with partnering academic, private, and non-governmental organizations around the country, was tasked with developing clinical studies to support this work. This manuscript details development of a biorepository specifically focused on the collection and storage of samples designed for diagnostic platform development. It highlights the unified collection and annotation process that enabled gathering a diverse set of samples. This diversity encompasses the geography and backgrounds of the participants as well as sample characteristics such as variant type and RT-PCR cycle threshold (CT) value of the corresponding reference sample on a uniform clinical reference platform.

Objectives: 1) Conduct team building activities for provider-community pharmacist teams in small communities and 2) Determine the impact of the team approach on practitioner-reported consequences and 3) Identify obstacles to the team approach and ways to overcome them. Methods: Eleven provider-pharmacist teams were recruited in rural/micropolitan communities in Iowa. The teams participated in team building sessions facilitated by the project leaders, to discuss the team approach. Decisions included patient identification, practitioner roles, and communications. Most pharmacists conducted blood pressure (BP) checks in the pharmacy and assessed the anti-hypertensive medications. If the BP was not at goal, the pharmacist worked with the patient and provider to make improvements. Teams followed their strategies for 3-5 months. Data were collected from pharmacy logs and on-line surveys of team members before and after the team period. Results: Using a multi-case approach, 4 cases were classified as Worked-Well, 5 as Limited-Success, and 2 as No-Team-Care. The Worked-Well teams provided an average of 26.5 BP visits per team, while the Limited-Success teams averaged 6.8 BP visits. The Worked-Well teams established and used a system to support the team approach. The Limited-Success teams either didn't fully establish their team system, or used it sparingly. The No-Team-Care cases did not provide any team care. Conclusions: Factors supporting success were: positive provider-pharmacist relations, established team system, commitment to team care, and patient willingness to participate. While this program had some success, potential improvements were identified: more follow-up after the team building session, additional patient materials, and guidance for practice changes. Type: Case Study