Search

BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has remarkably altered community mental health service delivery through the rapid implementation of telehealth. This study reports provider perspectives on the impact that COVID-19 and the transition to telehealth had on their work and their ability to deliver evidence-based practices (EBPs).MethodsProviders (n = 93) completed online surveys with quantitative measures and open-ended items exploring their reactions to COVID-19 and to the transition to providing services via telehealth.ResultsPerceptions of personal risk and rumination around COVID-19 were low, while telehealth was viewed positively by providers. Three major themes emerged regarding the major impacts of COVID-19 on work: (1) the altered nature of interactions between patient/client and provider due to telehealth implementation, (2) changes in provider expectations regarding productivity, and (3) challenges maintaining work-life balance. In regard to the major impacts of COVID-19 on EBP delivery, three themes emerged: (1) increased difficulty delivering certain therapies via telehealth, (2) potential limitations to session confidentiality, and (3) challenge of engaging children in telehealth.ConclusionsIn the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, community mental health providers continued to engage with clients and deliver EBPs while navigating a number of changes related to the rapid transition to and implementation of telehealth. This study highlights the need for further work on what supports providers need to effectively engage with clients and deliver EBPs via telehealth, and has implications for how telehealth is sustained or de-implemented post-COVID-19.

ObjectiveTo develop updated guidelines for the pharmacologic management of rheumatoid arthritis.MethodsWe developed clinically relevant population, intervention, comparator, and outcomes (PICO) questions. After conducting a systematic literature review, the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to rate the certainty of evidence. A voting panel comprising clinicians and patients achieved consensus on the direction (for or against) and strength (strong or conditional) of recommendations.ResultsThe guideline addresses treatment with disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), including conventional synthetic DMARDs, biologic DMARDs, and targeted synthetic DMARDs, use of glucocorticoids, and use of DMARDs in certain high-risk populations (i.e., those with liver disease, heart failure, lymphoproliferative disorders, previous serious infections, and nontuberculous mycobacterial lung disease). The guideline includes 44 recommendations (7 strong and 37 conditional).ConclusionThis clinical practice guideline is intended to serve as a tool to support clinician and patient decision-making. Recommendations are not prescriptive, and individual treatment decisions should be made through a shared decision-making process based on patients' values, goals, preferences, and comorbidities.

The successful implementation of evidence-based practices (EBPs) in real-world settings requires an adaptive approach and ongoing process evaluation and tailoring. Although conducting a needs assessment during the preparation phase of implementation is beneficial, it is challenging to predict all barriers to EBP implementation that may arise over the course of implementation and sustainment. This article describes a process evaluation that identified emergent and persistent barriers that impacted the implementation of an EBP across multiple behavioral health organizations and clinics. This study was conducted during the first cohort of a cluster randomized controlled trial testing the effectiveness of the Leadership and Organizational Change for Implementation (LOCI) strategy to implement motivational interviewing (MI) in substance use disorder treatment agencies and clinics. We used a modified nominal group technique (NGT) in which clinic leaders identified barriers faced during the implementation process. Barriers were categorized, then ranked and rated according to leaders' perceptions of each barrier's influence on implementation. The barriers were then contextualized through individual qualitative interviews. Fifteen barriers were identified, grouped into staff-level barriers, management-level barriers, and implementation program barriers. Time and resistance to MI were rated as the most influential staff-level barriers. Among management-level barriers, time was also rated highest, followed by turnover and external contractual constraints. The most influential implementation barrier was client apprehension of recording for fidelity assessment and feedback. Individual interviews supported these findings and provided suggested adaptations for future implementation efforts. EBP implementation is an ongoing process whereby implementation strategies must be proactively and strategically tailored to address emergent barriers. This research described a process evaluation that was used to identify 15 emergent and/or persistent barriers related to staff, management, and the implementation program. Using implementation strategies that can be tailored and/or adapted to such emergent barriers is critical to implementation effectiveness.

Objective: To develop initial American College of Rheumatology (ACR) guidelines on the use of exercise, rehabilitation, diet, and additional interventions in conjunction with disease‐modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) as part of an integrative management approach for people with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Methods: An interprofessional guideline development group constructed clinically relevant Population, Intervention, Comparator, and Outcome (PICO) questions. A literature review team then completed a systematic literature review and applied the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach to rate the certainty of evidence. An interprofessional Voting Panel (n = 20 participants) that included 3 individuals with RA achieved consensus on the direction (for or against) and strength (strong or conditional) of recommendations. Results: The Voting Panel achieved consensus on 28 recommendations for the use of integrative interventions in conjunction with DMARDs for the management of RA. Consistent engagement in exercise received a strong recommendation. Of 27 conditional recommendations, 4 pertained to exercise, 13 to rehabilitation, 3 to diet, and 7 to additional integrative interventions. These recommendations are specific to RA management, recognizing that other medical indications and general health benefits may exist for many of these interventions. Conclusion: This guideline provides initial ACR recommendations on integrative interventions for the management of RA to accompany DMARD treatments. The broad range of interventions included in these recommendations illustrates the importance of an interprofessional, team‐based approach to RA management. The conditional nature of most recommendations requires clinicians to engage persons with RA in shared decision‐making when applying these recommendations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The goal was to elicit adolescents' and young adults' (AYAs) perspectives about how to implement the Six Core Elements of Healthcare Transition within rheumatology care. Methods: AYAs (ages 16–28 years old) with self‐reported rheumatic conditions were recruited through patient organizations and social media. In Phase One (qualitative [QUAL]), 90‐minute focus groups were facilitated to elicit AYAs' reactions to Six Core Elements content. In Phase Two (quantitative; QUAN), a national survey was conducted to determine generalizability of recommendations extracted from Phase One. Mixed methods analyses were conducted by a multidisciplinary team of social science researchers, pediatric rheumatologists, and patients. Results: Although focus group participants (n = 39) were previously unfamiliar with the Six Core Elements, they reacted favorably to its format and content. Participants provided suggestions for how to logistically execute each component in the clinic. Additionally, 3 overarching recommendations emerged that focused on motivating AYAs to engage: 1) frame health care transition as an opportunity for empowerment; 2) implement a structured education plan; and 3) consider the role of parents. In line with qualitative findings, survey participants (n = 137) reported that they would prefer to learn most transitional skills from and discuss developmentally specific topics with their rheumatology team. Participants reported they would likely complete programs to learn transitional skills from allied professionals, via patient portals, or in group settings. Conclusion: Incorporating patient perspectives into research and clinical practice is an opportunity to strengthen educational programs. AYAs emphasized the importance of gaining independence and becoming empowered through the health care transition process with structured support from their rheumatology teams. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Importance: Lifestyle Redesign® originated as a preventive occupational therapy intervention for healthy older adults, and it was found to be both effective and cost effective in the Well Elderly Studies initiated in the 1990s. Building on that empirical foundation, the scope of Lifestyle Redesign has been greatly expanded as a general intervention framework addressing prevention and chronic condition management in a wide range of populations, settings, and conditions. Yet until now, its full scope, defining characteristics, and supporting evidence have not been clearly and succinctly described, limiting its potential reach and impact. Objective: To outline the definition and key characteristics of Lifestyle Redesign, provide a scoping review of its evidence base and future directions for research, describe its current applications, and make recommendations for its use in clinical practice. Evidence Review: We searched PubMed and CINAHL, tables of contents of 10 occupational therapy journals, and citations in two seminal Lifestyle Redesign publications to identify articles published in 1997–2020 that described quantitative outcomes (for n ≥ 20) of interventions meeting the defining characteristics of Lifestyle Redesign. Findings: Our scoping review yielded 12 publications providing supportive evidence for Lifestyle Redesign's positive impact on a range of health and well-being outcomes among both well populations and those with chronic conditions. Conclusions and Relevance: Lifestyle Redesign has the potential to meet a growing need in clinical and community settings for health care services that address prevention, health promotion, and chronic disease management. What This Article Adds: Current evidence supports the use of Lifestyle Redesign to improve health and well-being for a range of client populations. This review outlines its defining characteristics and current applications to improve its implementation in clinical practice and expand related research efforts. This synthesis and scoping review outlines the defining characteristics and applications of Lifestyle Redesign® and highlights current evidence that supports the use of the occupational therapy intervention to improve health and well-being for a range of client populations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Fatigue is one of the most burdensome and disabling symptoms in numerous acute and chronic conditions and is associated with reduced participation in all aspects of daily life, for example, parenting, employment, and socialization. Historically, occupational practitioners played key roles in fatigue management by creating and implementing interventions. The American Occupational Therapy Foundation convened a Planning Grant Collective workshop with the goal to develop collaborative research ideas and proposals to advance the understanding and management of fatigue. Participants from occupational therapy and other disciplines, with expertise with fatigue or who were conducting research on fatigue, participated in a 3-day virtual workshop. Four main topics emerged: implementation science, treatment taxonomy, trial design and comparative effectiveness, and phenotyping. This white paper describes the proceedings, summarizes the discussions, and outlines recommendations from the PGC workshop on fatigue.

Objective: This study seeks to assess rheumatology fellows' (RFs') and program directors' (PDs') interests in different educational tools and methods and to facilitate curriculum development for reproductive health related to rheumatic disease., Methods: Constructs were conceptualized in four dimensions: 1) RF and PD confidence in their current curriculum relating to the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) Reproductive Health Guidelines (RHGs), 2) personal interest in this topic, 3) opinions of the importance of this topic, and 4) interest in a range of learning materials and educational experiences. The final survey was distributed to 753 RFs and 179 PDs in the United States using the ACR Committee on Training and Workforce email list., Results: Response rates were 13% (n = 98) for RFs and 25% (n = 44) for PDs. Both groups indicated more interest in the topic than confidence in their curriculum and rated summary sheets, question banks, didactics, and online modules higher than nine other educational tools or methods. Despite interest in the topic, 38% of RF respondents and 24% of PD respondents were unaware of the recently published ACR RHGs., Conclusion: RFs and PDs consider reproductive health very important and report high personal interest in this topic. In contrast, both groups indicated lower confidence in current curricula, and substantial proportions of both groups were unaware of recently published guidelines. RFs' and PDs' interests in specific educational modalities are aligned. Curriculum development efforts should prioritize summary sheets, question banks, didactics, and online modules. Efforts are needed to address the educational needs of practicing rheumatologists and other professionals caring for patients with rheumatic disease., (© 2023 American College of Rheumatology. This article has been contributed to by U.S. Government employees and their work is in the public domain in the USA.)