Search

Introduction: This article provides an overview of presentations and discussions from the inaugural Healthcare Delivery Science: Innovation and Partnerships for Health Equity Research (DESCIPHER) Symposium. Methods: The symposium brought together esteemed experts from various disciplines to explore models for translating evidence‐based interventions into practice. Results: The symposium highlighted the importance of disruptive innovation in healthcare, the need for multi‐stakeholder engagement, and the significance of family and community involvement in healthcare interventions. Conclusions: The article concluded with a call to action for advancing healthcare delivery science to achieve health equity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: This scoping review describes existing care models that integrate primary care and childhood cancer survivorship care, examines the effectiveness of these models, and characterizes barriers and facilitators to their integration. Methods: A systematic search (PubMed®, CINAHL®, Embase®) was conducted to identify citations which were evaluated against inclusion criteria using the PICOTTS framework. The PRISMA-ScR extension for scoping reviews was used to report review findings (protocol https://osf.io/92xbg). Results: Twenty-three studies were included. Three care models integrating primary care and childhood cancer survivorship care were identified: consultative shared care in a primary care setting (N = 3); longitudinal shared care (N = 2); and PCP-led care employing a survivorship care plan (N = 5). While many described risk-adapted care, few used risk stratification approaches to inform care. Measures of model effectiveness varied, with discrepant findings regarding late effects detection in PCP-led approaches. The most frequently cited barriers and facilitators reflected provider- and system-level factors (PCP knowledge/experience identified as greatest barrier (N = 11); clinical information from oncologist identified as greatest facilitator (N = 9)). Conclusions: Identified models depended on PCP knowledge and healthcare system coordination, and studies suggested the need for strong oncologic involvement in follow-up care. Improved training for PCPs and the coordinated transfer of clinical information could facilitate their involvement in such care. Overall, standardized measures of effectiveness are needed to deliver optimal childhood cancer survivorship care. Implications for Cancer Survivors: The literature revealed three care models defined by SCP use, provider involvement, and continuity of care, with several studies recommending oncologic involvement in follow-up care for high-risk survivors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We adapted a U.S. HIV prevention program to address knowledge gaps and cultural pressures that increase the risk of infection in adolescent Ghanaian girls. The theory-based nine-module HIV prevention program combines didactics and games, an interactive computer program about sugar daddies, and tie-and-dye training to demonstrate an economic alternative to transactional sex. The abstinence-based study was conducted in a church-affiliated junior secondary school in Nsawam, Ghana. Of 61 subjects aged 10-14 in the prevention program, over two thirds were very worried about becoming HIV infected. A pre-post evaluation of the intervention showed significant gains in three domains: HIV knowledge (p = 0.001) and self efficacy to discuss HIV and sex with men (p less than 0.001) and with boys (p less than 0.001). Responses to items about social norms of HIV risk behavior were also somewhat improved (p = 0.09). Subjects rated most program features highly. Although short-term knowledge and self-efficacy to address HIV improved significantly, longer term research is needed to address cultural and economic factors placing young women at risk of HIV infection.

Background: Quality improvement (QI) initiatives often reflect approaches based on anecdotal evidence, but it is unclear how initiatives can best incorporate scientific literature and methods into the QI process. Review of studies of QI initiatives that aim to systematically incorporate evidence review (termed evidence-based quality improvement (EBQI)) may provide a basis for further methodological development. Methods: In this scoping review (registration: https://osf.io/hr5bj) of EBQI, we searched the databases PubMed, CINAHL, and SCOPUS. The review addressed three central questions: How is EBQI defined? How is evidence used to inform evidence-informed QI initiatives? What is the effectiveness of EBQI? Results: We identified 211 publications meeting inclusion criteria. In total, 170 publications explicitly used the term "EBQI." Published definitions emphasized relying on evidence throughout the QI process. We reviewed a subset of 67 evaluations of QI initiatives in primary care, including both studies that used the term "EBQI" with those that described an evidence-based initiative without using EBQI terminology. The most frequently reported EBQI components included use of evidence to identify previously tested effective QI interventions; engaging stakeholders; iterative intervention development; partnering with frontline clinicians; and data-driven evaluation of the QI intervention. Effectiveness estimates were positive but varied in size in ten studies that provided data on patient health outcomes. Conclusions: EBQI is a promising strategy for integrating relevant prior scientific findings and methods systematically in the QI process, from the initial developmental phase of the IQ initiative through to its evaluation. Future QI researchers and practitioners can use these findings as the basis for further development of QI initiatives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of PM & R: Journal of Injury, Function & Rehabilitation is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)