Karen Albright

Importance of Mixed Methods in Pragmatic Trials and Dissemination and Implementation Research

With increased attention to the importance of translating research to clinical practice and policy, recent years have seen a proliferation of particular types of research, including pragmatic trials and dissemination and implementation research. Such research seeks to understand how and why interventions function in real-world settings, as opposed to highly controlled settings involving conditions not likely to be repeated outside the research study. Because understanding the context in which interventions are implemented is imperative for effective pragmatic trials and dissemination and implementation research, the use of mixed methods is critical to understanding trial results and the success or failure of implementation efforts. This article discusses a number of dimensions of mixed methods research, utilizing at least one qualitative method and at least one quantitative method, that may be helpful when designing projects or preparing grant proposals. Although the strengths and emphases of qualitative and quantitative approaches differ substantially, methods may be combined in a variety of ways to achieve a deeper level of understanding than can be achieved by one method alone. However, researchers must understand when and how to integrate the data as well as the appropriate order, priority, and purpose of each method. The ability to demonstrate an understanding of the rationale for and benefits of mixed methods research is increasingly important in todays competitive funding environment, and many funding agencies now expect applicants to include mixed methods in proposals. The increasing demand for mixed methods research necessitates broader methodological training and deepened collaboration between medical, clinical, and social scientists. Although a number of challenges to conducting and disseminating mixed methods research remain, the potential for insight generated by such work is substantial.

Population-Based Versus Practice-Based Recall for Childhood Immunizations: A Randomized Controlled Comparative Effectiveness Trial

OBJECTIVES We compared the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of population-based recall (Pop-recall) versus practice-based recall (PCP-recall) at increasing immunizations among preschool children. METHODS This cluster-randomized trial involved children aged 19 to 35 months needing immunizations in 8 rural and 6 urban Colorado counties. In Pop-recall counties, recall was conducted centrally using the Colorado Immunization Information System (CIIS). In PCP-recall counties, practices were invited to attend webinar training using CIIS and offered financial support for mailings. The percentage of up-to-date (UTD) and vaccine documentation were compared 6 months after recall. A mixed-effects model assessed the association between intervention and whether a child became UTD. RESULTS Ten of 195 practices (5%) implemented recall in PCP-recall counties. Among children needing immunizations, 18.7% became UTD in Pop-recall versus 12.8% in PCP-recall counties (P < .001); 31.8% had documented receipt of 1 or more vaccines in Pop-recall versus 22.6% in PCP-recall counties (P < .001). Relative risk estimates from multivariable modeling were 1.23 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.10, 1.37) for becoming UTD and 1.26 (95% CI = 1.15, 1.38) for receipt of any vaccine. Costs for Pop-recall versus PCP-recall were

A qualitative study of informal caregivers’ perspectives on the effects of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis

215 versus

School-Based Health Centers as Patient-Centered Medical Homes

1981 per practice and

Parent and Provider Perspectives on Pediatric Readmissions: What Can We Learn About Readiness for Discharge?

17 versus

Health Promotion Text Messaging Preferences and Acceptability Among the Medically Underserved

62 per child brought UTD. CONCLUSIONS Population-based recall conducted centrally was more effective and cost-effective at increasing immunization rates in preschool children.

Protocol for a mixed-methods study of supplemental oxygen in pulmonary fibrosis

Background Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is a life-shortening lung disease that leads to significant morbidity in patients. The devastation IPF imposes extends beyond patients: it affects their spouses, loved ones and any other person who might take on the role of informal caregiver (IC) to the patient. Objective The aim of this study was to capture ICs’ perspectives on how they are affected by having a loved one with IPF. Given ICs’ vantage, data were also collected on their perceptions of how IPF impacted their patient-loved ones over the course of the disease. Methods Reflexive team analysis was used to analyse the transcripts from semistructured focus groups conducted with ICs of patients with IPF. Based on the analyses, a conceptual framework of the ICs journey with a patient with IPF was developed and includes suggestions for interventions that might ease the burdens ICs endure while caring for their patient-loved ones. Results 14 ICs included in this study experienced several hardships throughout the course of their loved ones’ illness, from emotional devastation at the time of diagnosis to living with an ‘impatient,’ ‘cranky’ loved one and being forced to exist in a ‘smaller world’ because of the physical limitations IPF imposed on their partners. The threat of patients needing supplemental oxygen was central to creating angst among patients and ICs, and supplemental oxygen use by patients prohibited them and their ICs from living the ‘normal’, carefree lives they desired. Conclusions Being an IC to a patient with IPF is extremely challenging (as 1 IC put it: “…harder on the spouse than the patient in some ways”). As patients attempt to adapt to the ‘sick person’ role, ICs face a struggle between performing their duties as caregiver and maintaining their own identities and independence.

Perspectives of patients on factors relating to adherence to post-acute coronary syndrome medical regimens

OBJECTIVE: School-based health centers (SBHCs) have been suggested as possible patient-centered medical homes. Our objectives were to determine, in a low-income, urban population, adolescents’ reasons for visiting SBHCs and the value parents place on SBHC services, and adolescents’ and parents’ assessment of how well SBHCs fulfill criteria for a medical home as defined by the American Academy of Pediatrics. METHODS: A cross-sectional, mailed survey of a random sample of 495 adolescent SBHC users and 497 parents of SBHC users from 10 SBHCs in Denver, CO from May to October 2012. Eligible adolescents were registered in an SBHC with ≥1 visit during the 2011 to 2012 school year. RESULTS: Response rates were 40% (198/495) among adolescents and 36% (181/497) among parents. The top 3 reasons for visits were for illness (78%), vaccines (69%), and sexual health education (63%). Factors reported as very important by >75% of parents in the decision to enroll their adolescent in an SBHC included clinic offering sick or injury visits, sports physicals, and vaccinations. More than 70% of adolescents gave favorable responses (always or usually, excellent or good) to questions about American Academy of Pediatrics medical home criteria (accessibility, continuity, comprehensiveness, family-centeredness, coordination, and compassion). Most parents (83%) reported that they could always or usually trust the SBHC provider to take good care of their child; 82% were satisfied with provider-to-provider communication. CONCLUSIONS: In a low-income urban population, SBHCs met criteria of a medical home from adolescents’ and parents’ perspectives. Policymakers and communities should recognize that SBHCs play an important role in the medical community, especially for underserved adolescents.

Improving the Effectiveness of Medication Review: Guidance from the Health Literacy Universal Precautions Toolkit.

BACKGROUND Readmissions are an increasingly recognized quality metric that will likely affect payments to childrens hospitals. Our aim was to inform future efforts to reduce readmissions by eliciting parent and provider perceptions of pediatric readmissions. METHODS We interviewed English- and Spanish-speaking parents and inpatient providers of children with medical diagnoses who had unplanned readmissions (≤7 days). Parents were interviewed one-on-one during the readmission. Providers were interviewed in person or by phone within 1 week of the patients second discharge. Interviewees were queried about their perceptions of the reason for readmission and whether the readmission was preventable. Interview transcripts were analyzed using qualitative content methods. Code categories were developed and emergent themes independently identified by 2 analysts. RESULTS The study included 30 readmitted children (median age 17 months, 70% male, 80% White or Hispanic, and 66% publically insured). We interviewed 30 parents (23% Spanish speaking) and 27 discharging or readmitting providers. Parents and providers identified several major factors as causing readmissions, including child related (health and symptoms), parent/family related (adherence to recommended care), provider/team related (medical management), communication difficulties, home supports, and quality of discharge teaching. Parents and providers had differing interpretations of the role or magnitude of these factors. Lack of shared understanding between parents and providers emerged as a potentially important cause of readmissions. CONCLUSIONS We identified lack of shared understanding and communication difficulties between parents and providers as potential causes of readmission. Further research is needed to determine if improvements in identifying and addressing such problems can reduce pediatric readmissions.

Challenges of Providing End-of-Life Care for Homeless Veterans

The Colorado Healthy Heart Solutions program uses community health workers to provide health promotion and navigation services for participants in medically underserved, predominantly rural areas who are at risk for developing cardiovascular disease. A text messaging program designed to increase participant engagement and adherence to lifestyle changes was pilot tested with English- and Spanish-speaking participants. Preimplementation focus groups with participants informed the development of text messages that were used in a 6-week pilot program. Postimplementation focus groups and interviews then evaluated the pilot program. Participants reported a preference for concise messages received once daily and for positive messages suggesting specific actions that could be feasibly accomplished within the course of the day. Participants also consistently reported the desire for clarity in message delivery and content, indicating that the source of the messages should be easy to recognize, messages should state clearly when participants were expected to respond to the messages, and any responses should be acknowledged. Links to other websites or resources were generally viewed as trustworthy and acceptable, but were preferred for supplementary material only. These results may inform the development of future chronic disease management programs in underserved areas or augment existing programs using text messaging reinforcement.