Donna L Berry1, Fangxin Hong1, Barbara Halpenny1, Martin G Sanda2, Viraj A Master3, Christopher P Filson4, Peter Chang5, Gary W Chien6, Meghan Underhill1, Erica Fox1, Justin McReynolds7, Seth Wolpin7. 1. Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts. 2. Department of Urology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta. 3. Department of Urology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta; Winship Cancer Institute, Emory Healthcare, Atlanta. 4. Department of Urology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta; Winship Cancer Institute, Emory Healthcare, Atlanta; Atlanta Veterans Administration Medical Center, Decatur, Georgia. 5. Department of Urology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts. 6. Department of Urology, Kaiser Permanente Los Angeles Medical Center, Los Angeles, California. 7. Biobehavioral Nursing and Health Informatics, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Shared decision making is widely promoted for counseling men with localized prostate cancer. Results of randomized trials suggest decision aid efficacy. However, few practices or institutions have implemented decision support as standard practice. In this study we evaluated various implementation strategies for the decision aid P3P (Personal Patient Profile-Prostate) and analyzed feedback from clinical site staff and providers. METHODS: A hybrid type 1 effectiveness-implementation trial was conducted. Primary data were collected in 6 urology clinics of 3 geographically distinct health networks. During the implementation phase site specific strategies were codesigned with site leaders. Referral and access metrics for men with localized prostate cancer were monitored for up to 7 months. Clinical staff reports of barriers and facilitators of implementation were evaluated in professionally facilitated focus groups. RESULTS: Of 495 men with localized prostate cancer seen in the clinics 252 (51%, 95% CI 46-55) were informed of the program and of those men 107 (43%, 95% CI 36-49) accessed it. The highest access rates were observed with patient care coordinator e-mail and telephone contact (82%) or verbal physician instruction followed by e-mail and telephone invitations (87%). During focus groups physicians appraised the summaries as useful. Staff identified barriers included creating new workflows within heavy workloads and staff misunderstanding of context and resources. Promoters of successful implementation included an identified clinical lead and physician engagement. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation success was realized when physicians engaged and staff provided followup contact. New practice changes to implement interventions require multimodal strategies for early success.
INTRODUCTION: Shared decision making is widely promoted for counseling men with localized prostate cancer. Results of randomized trials suggest decision aid efficacy. However, few practices or institutions have implemented decision support as standard practice. In this study we evaluated various implementation strategies for the decision aid P3P (Personal Patient Profile-Prostate) and analyzed feedback from clinical site staff and providers. METHODS: A hybrid type 1 effectiveness-implementation trial was conducted. Primary data were collected in 6 urology clinics of 3 geographically distinct health networks. During the implementation phase site specific strategies were codesigned with site leaders. Referral and access metrics for men with localized prostate cancer were monitored for up to 7 months. Clinical staff reports of barriers and facilitators of implementation were evaluated in professionally facilitated focus groups. RESULTS: Of 495 men with localized prostate cancer seen in the clinics 252 (51%, 95% CI 46-55) were informed of the program and of those men 107 (43%, 95% CI 36-49) accessed it. The highest access rates were observed with patient care coordinator e-mail and telephone contact (82%) or verbal physician instruction followed by e-mail and telephone invitations (87%). During focus groups physicians appraised the summaries as useful. Staff identified barriers included creating new workflows within heavy workloads and staff misunderstanding of context and resources. Promoters of successful implementation included an identified clinical lead and physician engagement. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation success was realized when physicians engaged and staff provided followup contact. New practice changes to implement interventions require multimodal strategies for early success.
Entities:
Keywords:
decision support techniques; evidence-based practice; medical informatics; prostatic neoplasms
Authors: Donna L Berry; Fangxin Hong; Traci M Blonquist; Barbara Halpenny; Christopher P Filson; Viraj A Master; Martin G Sanda; Peter Chang; Gary W Chien; Randy A Jones; Tracey L Krupski; Seth Wolpin; Leslie Wilson; Julia H Hayes; Quoc-Dien Trinh; Mitchell Sokoloff; Prabhakara Somayaji Journal: J Urol Date: 2017-07-25 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Elyn H Wang; Cary P Gross; Jon C Tilburt; James B Yu; Paul L Nguyen; Marc C Smaldone; Nilay D Shah; Robert Abouassally; Maxine Sun; Simon P Kim Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2015-05 Impact factor: 21.873
Authors: Donna L Berry; Barbara Halpenny; Fangxin Hong; Seth Wolpin; William B Lober; Kenneth J Russell; William J Ellis; Usha Govindarajulu; Jaclyn Bosco; B Joyce Davison; Gerald Bennett; Martha K Terris; Andrea Barsevick; Daniel W Lin; Claire C Yang; Greg Swanson Journal: Urol Oncol Date: 2011-12-07 Impact factor: 3.498
Authors: Donna L Berry; Barbara Halpenny; Seth Wolpin; B Joyce Davison; William J Ellis; William B Lober; Justin McReynolds; Jennifer Wulff Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2010-12-17 Impact factor: 5.428
Authors: Jeff Belkora; Shelley Volz; Meredith Loth; Alexandra Teng; Margot Zarin-Pass; Dan Moore; Laura Esserman Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2015-05-28 Impact factor: 2.655
Authors: Martin G Sanda; Jeffrey A Cadeddu; Erin Kirkby; Ronald C Chen; Tony Crispino; Joann Fontanarosa; Stephen J Freedland; Kirsten Greene; Laurence H Klotz; Danil V Makarov; Joel B Nelson; George Rodrigues; Howard M Sandler; Mary Ellen Taplin; Jonathan R Treadwell Journal: J Urol Date: 2017-12-15 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Glyn Elwyn; Isabelle Scholl; Caroline Tietbohl; Mala Mann; Adrian G K Edwards; Catharine Clay; France Légaré; Trudy van der Weijden; Carmen L Lewis; Richard M Wexler; Dominick L Frosch Journal: BMC Med Inform Decis Mak Date: 2013-11-29 Impact factor: 2.796
Authors: Giulia I Lane; Ajith Dupati; Ji Qi; Stephanie Ferrante; Rodney L Dunn; Roshan Paudel; Daniela Wittmann; Lauren Wallner; Donna L Berry; Chad Ellimoottil; James Montie; J Quentin Clemens Journal: Urol Pract Date: 2022-01-01