Search

Purpose Patient-reported outcomes and experiences (PRO) data are an integral component of health care quality measurement and PROs are now being collected by many healthcare systems. However, hospital organizational capacity-building for the collection and sharing of PROs is a complex process. We sought to identify the factors that facilitated capacity-building for PRO data collection in a nascent quality improvement learning collaborative of 16 hospitals that has the goal of improving the childbirth experience. Description We used standard qualitative case study methodologies based on a conceptual framework that hypothesizes that adequate organizational incentives and capacities allow successful achievement of project milestones in a collaborative setting. The 4 project milestones considered in this study were: (1) Agreements; (2) System Design; (3) System Development and Operations; and (4) Implementation. To evaluate the success of reaching each milestone, critical incidents were logged and tracked to determine the capacities and incentives needed to resolve them. Assessment The pace of the implementation of PRO data collection through the 4 milestones was uneven across hospitals and largely dependent on limited hospital capacities in the following 8 dimensions: (1) Incentives; (2) Leadership; (3) Policies; (4) Operating systems; (5) Information technology; (6) Legal aspects; (7) Cross-hospital collaboration; and (8) Patient engagement. From this case study, a trajectory for capacity-building in each dimension is discussed. Conclusion The implementation of PRO data collection in a quality improvement learning collaborative was dependent on multiple organizational capacities for the achievement of project milestones., Author(s): Samia Saeb [sup.1] , Lisa M. Korst [sup.2] , Moshe Fridman [sup.2] , Jeanette McCulloch [sup.3] , Naomi Greene [sup.1] , Kimberly D. Gregory [sup.1] Author Affiliations: (1) grid.50956.3f, [...]

The Coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) pandemic has disrupted both transportation and health systems. While about 40% of Americans have delayed seeking medical care during the pandemic, it remains unclear to what extent transportation is contributing to missed care. To understand the relationship between transportation and unmet health care needs during the pandemic, this paper synthesizes existing knowledge on transportation patterns and barriers across five types of health care needs. While the literature is limited by the absence of detailed data for trips to health care, key themes emerged across populations and settings. We find that some patients, many of whom already experience transportation disadvantage, likely need extra support during the pandemic to overcome new travel barriers related to changes in public transit or the inability to rely on others for rides. Telemedicine is working as a partial substitute for some visits but cannot fulfill all health care needs, especially for vulnerable groups. Structural inequality during the pandemic has likely compounded health care access barriers for low-income individuals and people of color, who face not only disproportionate health risks, but also greater difficulty in transportation access and heightened economic hardship due to COVID-19. Partnerships between health and transportation systems hold promise for jointly addressing disparities in health- and transportation-related challenges but are largely limited to Medicaid-enrolled patients. Our findings suggest that transportation and health care providers should look for additional strategies to ensure that transportation access is not a reason for delayed medical care during and after the COVID-19 pandemic.

Since March 2020, COVID-19 transportation system disruptions have altered how Americans access routine health care. This report examines current knowledge about disparities in transportation and access to health care for people with various health conditions and health care needs. We highlight evidence related to end-stage kidney disease, pregnancy, cancer, mental health and substance use, disabilities, multiple chronic conditions, and preventive care to discuss population-specific transportation needs and challenges, COVID-19 health risks, and impacts of transportation system disruption on health outcomes during the pandemic. The report concludes with policy recommendations for how leaders in transportation, public health, and health care can improve transportation access to care during the COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: To develop a conceptual framework and preliminary item bank for childbirth-specific patient-reported outcome (PRO) domains. DATA SOURCES: Women, who were U.S. residents, ≥18 years old, and ≥20 weeks pregnant, were surveyed regarding their childbirth values and preferences (V&P) using online panels. STUDY DESIGN: Using community-based research techniques and Patient-Reported Outcomes Management Information System (PROMIS® ) methodology, we conducted a comprehensive literature review to identify self-reported survey items regarding patient-reported V&P and childbirth experiences and outcomes (PROs). The V&P/PRO domains were validated by focus groups. We conducted a cross-sectional observational study and fitted a multivariable logistic regression model to each V&P item to describe who wanted each item. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We identified 5,880 V&P/PRO items that mapped to 19 domains and 58 subdomains. We present results for the 2,250 survey respondents who anticipated a vaginal delivery in a hospital. Wide variation existed regarding each V&P item, and personal characteristics, such as maternal confidence and ability to cope well with pain, were frequent predictors in the models. The resulting preliminary item bank consisted of 60 key personal characteristics and 63 V&P/PROs. CONCLUSIONS: The conceptual framework and preliminary (PROMIS® ) item bank presented here provide a foundation for the development of childbirth-specific V&P/PROs.

PurposeTo evaluate whether exposure to MyFamilyPlan-a web-based preconception health education module-changes the proportion of women discussing reproductive health with providers at well-woman visits.DesignCluster randomized controlled trial. One hundred thirty participants per arm distributed among 34 clusters (physicians) required to detect a 20% change in the primary outcome.SettingUrban academic medical center (California).ParticipantsEligible women were 18 to 45 years old, were English speaking, were nonpregnant, were able to access the Internet, and had an upcoming well-woman visit. E-mail and phone recruitment between September 2015 and May 2016; 292 enrollees randomized.InterventionIntervention participants completed the MyFamilyPlan module online 7 to 10 days before a scheduled well-woman visit; control participants reviewed standard online preconception health education materials.MeasuresThe primary outcome was self-reported discussion of reproductive health with the physician at the well-woman visit. Self-reported secondary outcomes were folic acid use, contraceptive method initiation/change, and self-efficacy score.AnalysisMultilevel multivariate logistic regression.ResultsAfter adjusting for covariates and cluster, exposure to MyFamilyPlan was the only variable significantly associated with an increase in the proportion of women discussing reproductive health with providers (odds ratio: 1.97, 95% confidence interval: 1.22-3.19). Prespecified secondary outcomes were unaffected.ConclusionMyFamilyPlan exposure was associated with a significant increase in the proportion of women who reported discussing reproductive health with providers and may promote preconception health awareness; more work is needed to affect associated behaviors.

Objectives The goals of interconception care are to optimize women's health and encourage adequate spacing between pregnancies. Our study calculated trends in interpregnancy interval (IPI) patterns and measured the association of differing intervals with birth outcomes in California. Methods Women with 'non-first birth' deliveries in California hospitals from 2007 to 2009 were identified in a linked birth certificate and patient discharge dataset and divided into three IPI birth categories:, Author(s): Flojaune Griffin Cofer[sup.1] , Moshe Fridman[sup.2] , Elizabeth Lawton[sup.1] , Lisa M. Korst[sup.3] , Lisa Nicholas[sup.5] , Kimberly D. Gregory[sup.4] [sup.5] [sup.6] Author Affiliations: (1) Maternal, Child and Adolescent [...]

The tracking of elective deliveries (ED) prior to 39 gestational weeks has become a mandatory requirement for all hospitals with [greater than or equal to]1,100 deliveries for accreditation by The Joint Commission (TJC); however, the feasibility and accuracy of monitoring efforts remain problematic for many hospitals. Here, we evaluated the feasibility of three operational approaches to tracking ED. We used mixed methods to evaluate the feasibility of 3 different approaches to tracking ED: (1) using administrative data, (2) using electronic medical record (EMR) data, and (3) using targeted data collection in a county-wide quality improvement (QI) effort. For (1), we analyzed data from the California 2009 linked birth cohort dataset, and calculated hospital rates of ED using TJC technical specifications. For (2), we performed a case study of a project that recruited hospitals to provide EMR data for the TJC measure calculation. For (3), we performed a case study of a project that recruited hospitals to prospectively track elective inductions of labor. For (1), hospital discharge data were insufficient without supplementation from the EMR or birth certificate. For (2), legal and operational issues surrounding data sharing, and non-standardized data elements prohibited hospital participation. For (3), the QI approach successfully established policies and data collection systems yet lacked infrastructure to assure sustainability at a hospital or regional level. In summary, ED tracking required the coordination and support of multiple resources to enable hospitals to satisfactorily report on this measure. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s10995-015-1725-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users., Author(s): Lisa M. Korst[sup.1] , Moshe Fridman[sup.2] , Melanie Estarziau[sup.3] , Kimberly D. Gregory[sup.4] [sup.5] , Connie Mitchell[sup.6] Author Affiliations: (1) Childbirth Research Associates, North Hollywood, CA, USA (2) AMF [...]

Background Many providers ignore hypertensive blood pressures (BPs) during epidural placement, attributing them to patient pain or malposition. We aimed to determine if an elevated BP during epidural placement was associated with increased risk for developing a hypertensive disorder of pregnancy (HDP). Methods Cohort study of previously normotensive nulliparous, singleton, term patients who received neuraxial analgesia and delivered at our institution in 2016. Primary exposure was BP during epidural window (one hour before and after epidural procedure start time). Primary outcome was HDP (gestational hypertension, preeclampsia, eclampsia, or HELLP syndrome) prior to discharge. Statistics included χ², t-test, and multivariable logistic regression; α = 0.05. Results One thousand and eight hundred patients met study criteria. Patients with elevated BP during epidural window (n = 566, 31.4%) were more likely to develop HDP than patients who remained normotensive during epidural window (20.1% vs. 6.4%, adjusted OR 3.57 [95% CI 2.61–4.89]). The incidence of HDP increased in association with BP severity during epidural window: 7.3% for maximum systolic blood pressure (SBP) <140 mmHg; 18.4% for maximum SBP 140–159 mmHg (OR 2.9, 95% CI 2.0–4.0); and 29.9% for maximum SBP ≥160 mmHg (OR 5.4, 95% CI 2.9–9.8). The trend was similar for maximum diastolic BP. The magnitude of increased odds for HDP was highest for Black patients with elevated BP during epidural window (40.9% vs. 10.1%, OR 6.1, 95% CI 2.4–16). Conclusions Previously normotensive patients with an elevated BP during labor epidural placement are significantly more likely to develop HDP than patients who remain normotensive. Elevated BP during epidural placement should not be disregarded to ensure timely diagnosis and treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]