Douglas B. Kamerow

The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Diabetes Initiative: demonstration projects emphasizing self-management.

PURPOSE The purpose of the Diabetes Initiative of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation is to demonstrate feasible and sustainable approaches to promoting diabetes self-management in primary care and community settings. METHODS The Diabetes Initiative of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation includes 14 demonstration projects in primary care settings and in community-clinical partnerships. Projects serve predominantly indigent populations from varied cultural and linguistic backgrounds in urban, rural, and frontier settings around the United States. This report describes the Initiative, its ecological perspective on self-management, and implications for program development, sustainability, and dissemination. RESULTS Ecological perspectives stress varied levels of influence ranging from individuals to communities and policies. Based on this, the Initiative has identified key resources and supports for self-management (individualized assessment, collaborative goal setting, enhancing skills, follow-up and support, community resources, and continuity of quality clinical care). Lessons learned include the central roles of community health workers, integration of healthy coping and attention to negative emotion and depression in self-management, community partnerships, approaches to ongoing follow-up and support, organizational factors in sustaining programs, and the utility of a collaborative learning network for program development. Sustainability stresses organizational and policy supports for the program. Dissemination of lessons learned will stress collaboration among interested parties, stimulating consumer understanding and demand for self-management services as central to diabetes care. CONCLUSIONS The Diabetes Initiative demonstrates that effective self-management programs and supports can be implemented in real-world clinical and community settings, providing models of worthwhile, sustainable programs.

Prostate-specific Antigen Testing: Men's Responses to 2012 Recommendation Against Screening

BACKGROUND The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) released a draft recommendation advising against prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing in October 2011, a major shift from previous years of recommending neither for or against PSA testing due to insufficient evidence. PURPOSE The purpose of this study was to assess mens awareness of the new recommendation, and their responses to it. METHODS This study comprised a web survey of men aged 40-74 years that was conducted through GfK Custom Research, LLCs Knowledge Panel® from November 22 to December 2, 2011. Chi-square tests and logistic regression analyses were conducted to identify factors associated with disagreement with and intention to follow the recommendation. Data were analyzed in March 2012. RESULTS The survey sample included 1089 men without a history of prostate cancer. After reviewing the recommendation, 62% agreed with the recommendation. Age and worry about getting prostate cancer were significantly related to disagreement with the recommendation. Only 13% of respondents were intenders (they planned to follow the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation and not get a prostate-specific antigen test in the future); 54% were non-intenders (they planned to not follow the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation and get a prostate-specific antigen test in the future; and 33% were undecided. Black race, higher income, having a PSA test in the past 2 years, and being somewhat/very worried about getting prostate cancer were all positively associated with being a non-intender. CONCLUSIONS Study findings suggest that consumers are favorably disposed to PSA testing, despite new evidence suggesting that the harms outweigh the benefits. The new USPSTF recommendation against PSA testing in all men may be met with resistance.

Cross-site evaluation of the Alliance to Reduce Disparities in Diabetes: clinical and patient-reported outcomes.

Alliance programs implemented multilevel, multicomponent programs inspired by the chronic care model and aimed at reducing health and health care disparities for program participants. A unique characteristic of the Alliance programs is that they did not use a fixed implementation strategy common to programs using the chronic care model but instead focused on strategies that met local community needs. Using data provided by the five programs involved in the Alliance, this evaluation shows that of the 1,827 participants for which baseline and follow-up data were available, the program participants experienced significant decreases in hemoglobin A1c and blood pressure compared with a comparison group. A significant time by study group interaction was observed for hemoglobin A1c as well. Over time, more program participants met quality indicators for hemoglobin A1c and blood pressure. Those participants who attended self-management classes and experienced more resources and support for self-management attained more benefit. In addition, program participants experienced more diabetes competence, increased quality of life, and improvements in diabetes self-care behaviors. The cost-effectiveness of programs ranged from

Evidence-Based Design of Healthcare Facilities: Opportunities for Research and Practice in Infection Prevention

23,161 to

The Role of Facility Design in Preventing the Transmission of Healthcare-Associated Infections: Background and Conceptual Framework

61,011 per quality-adjusted life year. In sum, the Alliance programs reduced disparities and health care disparities for program participants.

Improving the Implementation of Diabetes Self-Management: Findings From the Alliance to Reduce Disparities in Diabetes

Affiliations: 1. SimTigrate Design Lab, School of Architecture, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Georgia; 2. Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia; 3. Health Systems Institute, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Georgia; 4. School of Industrial Design, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Georgia; 5. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, Maryland; 6. RTI International, Washington, DC. Received October 2, 2012; accepted November 21, 2012; electronically published April 9, 2013. 2013 by The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America. All rights reserved. 0899-823X/2013/3405-0011

The Role of Facility Design in Preventing Healthcare-Associated Infection: Interventions, Conclusions, and Research Needs

15.00. DOI: 10.1086/670220 Evidence-based design (EBD) of healthcare facilities is an emerging field that has the potential to significantly reduce the burden of healthcare-associated infections (HAIs). There is a growing body of evidence demonstrating that the built environment of healthcare settings—their layout, materials, equipment, and furnishings—plays a key role in facilitating or preventing transmission of pathogens. The infection prevention community can be an important partner in further developing this evidence base by advocating for and including healthcare facility design in its research agenda. At the same time, the EBD of the built environment has the promise of providing an additional set of tools for infection prevention. A relatively new discipline, EBD has deep roots in environmental psychology, architecture, medicine, and other sciences. It postulates that the design of the built environment fundamentally impacts patient, provider, and organizational outcomes (ie, decreased infection rates, length of stay, falls, use of analgesics, and operating costs) while improving patient and caregiver experience and satisfaction. Similar to evidence-based medicine, EBD uses the best available evidence to inform decision making and includes measurement of outcomes. EBD of healthcare facilities gained prominence in the early 2000s with the publication of the Institute of Medicine’s report Crossing the Quality Chasm, a growing research evidence base, and the initiation of the largest hospital construction program in US history. After a decade of closing hospitals, the US began spending more than

News Media Coverage, Body Mass Index, and Public Attitudes about Obesity

40 billion annually on new healthcare facilities to accommodate shifting demographics, advancing technologies, and competitive pressures. EBD is a multistep process that includes (1) framing of goals and models, (2) incorporation of healthcare facility guidelines, (3) planning and design, and (4) operations (Figure 1). These are in turn affected by the economic and professional culture in which decisions are made: the evidence base, the greater visibility and pay for performance that comes from the “quality revolution,” best practices or examples, and shrinking reimbursement margins in a competitive environment. Infection prevention plays a key role at each step, as follows. Framing. Specific decisions about guidelines, planning and design, and operations are framed by stakeholders’ understanding of the goals of healthcare design and the models that drive it. Owners, clinicians, patients, regulators, and designers develop a view of “good” healthcare settings: what they should achieve and how to do so. Early models included envisioning hospitals as churches or, more recently, as pristine, white, modern laboratories. In the 2000s, a series of literature reviews highlighted that design and the built environment could improve patient safety, decrease pain, and increase satisfaction. These reviews and the growing focus on patientand family-centered care helped create demand for larger, light-filled, quieter healthcare facilities that provided comfort and positive distractions for patients and families, such as designated family areas in patient rooms, gardens, and water features. Families were provided increased access to patient rooms, including within intensive care units, where there had previously been strict visiting hours. Healthcare workers were provided spaces that better suited their tasks and afforded respite when on break. Several prominent articles emerged suggesting that the return on investment for these design features was achieved in as little as 1–3 years, based on designs that increased market share and decreased length of stay, due in part to decreased infections, reduced falls, and reduced analgesic use. Guidelines. Evidence and expectations are translated to design in part through the process of writing guidelines and standards. These guidelines, such as those promulgated by the Facilities Guidelines Institute (FGI), are often written by volunteer committees of professionals and offer guidance or are adopted as codes in the majority of the states. The Hospital Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee’s

Expert Opinions on the Role of Facility Design in the Acquisition and Prevention of Healthcare-Associated Infections

OBJECTIVE: To describe the conceptual framework and methodology used to conduct a comprehensive literature review of current evidence evaluating the role of the built environment in the transmission of healthcare-associated infections. BACKGROUND: A multidisciplinary approach to evaluating a vast and diverse dataset requires a conceptual framework to create a common understanding for interpretation. This common understanding is accomplished through the application of a “chain of transmission” model depicting temporal and physical paths of pathogens that cause healthcare-associated infections. The chain of transmission interventions model argues that infection can potentially be reduced by interrupting any of several links in the chain. TOPICAL HEADINGS: The key pathogens impacted by the built environment are identified. The chain of transmission and the conceptual framework are described. Opportunities for intervention through the built environment are presented, which in turn guide the subsequent methodology used to conduct the systematic literature review. CONCLUSIONS: The chain of transmission interventions model is a multidisciplinary conceptualization of the interaction between pathogens and the built environment, and this model facilitated a systematic literature review of a very large amount of data.

Understanding the Role of Facility Design in the Acquisition and Prevention of Healthcare-Associated Infections:

To enhance the health and well-being of patients managing type 2 diabetes, the five grantees comprising the Alliance to Reduce Disparities in Diabetes implemented evidence-based approaches to patient self-management education as part of their programs. This article describes strategies implemented by the grantees that may help explain program success, defined as improvement in clinical values and patient-reported outcomes. A process evaluation of grantee programs included interviews and document review at the beginning, midpoint, and end of the Alliance initiative. A total of 97 interviews were conducted over time with 65 program representatives. The Alliance programs served 2,328 people from diverse racial and ethnic backgrounds and provided 36,826 diabetes self-management sessions across the intervention sites. Framework analysis of the interviews identified four key themes that emerged across time and program sites that may help account for program success: empowerment, increasing access and support, addressing local needs and barriers, and care coordination. The overall evaluation findings may help other diabetes self-management programs seeking to translate and implement evidence-based approaches to reduce disparities and enhance patient well-being.