Michael D. Fetters

Designing A Mixed Methods Study In Primary Care

BACKGROUND Mixed methods or multimethod research holds potential for rigorous, methodologically sound investigations in primary care. The objective of this study was to use criteria from the literature to evaluate 5 mixed methods studies in primary care and to advance 3 models useful for designing such investigations. METHODS We first identified criteria from the social and behavioral sciences to analyze mixed methods studies in primary care research. We then used the criteria to evaluate 5 mixed methods investigations published in primary care research journals. RESULTS Of the 5 studies analyzed, 3 included a rationale for mixing based on the need to develop a quantitative instrument from qualitative data or to converge information to best understand the research topic. Quantitative data collection involved structured interviews, observational checklists, and chart audits that were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistical procedures. Qualitative data consisted of semistructured interviews and field observations that were analyzed using coding to develop themes and categories. The studies showed diverse forms of priority: equal priority, qualitative priority, and quantitative priority. Data collection involved quantitative and qualitative data gathered both concurrently and sequentially. The integration of the quantitative and qualitative data in these studies occurred between data analysis from one phase and data collection from a subsequent phase, while analyzing the data, and when reporting the results. DISCUSSION We recommend instrument-building, triangulation, and data transformation models for mixed methods designs as useful frameworks to add rigor to investigations in primary care. We also discuss the limitations of our study and the need for future research.

Achieving Integration in Mixed Methods Designs—Principles and Practices

Mixed methods research offers powerful tools for investigating complex processes and systems in health and health care. This article describes integration principles and practices at three levels in mixed methods research and provides illustrative examples. Integration at the study design level occurs through three basic mixed method designs-exploratory sequential, explanatory sequential, and convergent-and through four advanced frameworks-multistage, intervention, case study, and participatory. Integration at the methods level occurs through four approaches. In connecting, one database links to the other through sampling. With building, one database informs the data collection approach of the other. When merging, the two databases are brought together for analysis. With embedding, data collection and analysis link at multiple points. Integration at the interpretation and reporting level occurs through narrative, data transformation, and joint display. The fit of integration describes the extent the qualitative and quantitative findings cohere. Understanding these principles and practices of integration can help health services researchers leverage the strengths of mixed methods.

Cancer disclosure in Japan: Historical comparisons, current practices

Although Japanese physicians historically have not disclosed cancer diagnoses to patients, pressures upon physicians to disclose have increased in recent years. We questioned physicians practicing at a private medical hospital in rural Japan about their current approach to cancer disclosure. We compared their responses with responses of physicians in a 1991 study conducted in Japan, and two studies conducted in the United States, in 1961 and in 1977. Seventy-seven clinically active physicians with experience treating cancer patients responded (73% response rate). Forty percent of respondents reported usually telling patients of a cancer diagnosis, over three times more than the 13% who reported such a policy in Japan in 1991. Physicians were significantly more likely (P < 0.001) to make exceptions than physicians in the previous Japanese study, and physicians in the previous U.S. studies. Respondents reported considering more factors in deciding whether to tell than participants in the 1977 U.S. study. Factors predicting an increased probability of disclosure included age (in a hyperbolic relationship), improved prognosis, breast or cervical cancer, and social status and religion (by a minority of respondents). Increase in a substitute decision makers age was predictive for physicians not to involve the person in decision-making. Most respondents reported their disclosure policy is based on clinical experience. More respondents indicated a likelihood of changing in the future than respondents in the previous U.S. studies. These data suggest Japanese physicians are moving away from a rigid policy of nondisclosure to a policy of selective disclosure, but they have not adopted universal cancer disclosure as practiced in many Western countries. Since young age and advanced age predicted self-reports of not disclosing cancer diagnoses, these data raise the question of whether nondisclosure by age groups represents age discrimination or compassionate medical care tailored to individual patient needs.

Context Matters: The Experience of 14 Research Teams in Systematically Reporting Contextual Factors Important for Practice Change

PURPOSE We aimed to advance the internal and external validity of research by sharing our empirical experience and recommendations for systematically reporting contextual factors. METHODS Fourteen teams conducting research on primary care practice transformation retrospectively considered contextual factors important to interpreting their findings (internal validity) and transporting or reinventing their findings in other settings/situations (external validity). Each team provided a table or list of important contextual factors and interpretive text included as appendices to the articles in this supplement. Team members identified the most important contextual factors for their studies. We grouped the findings thematically and developed recommendations for reporting context. RESULTS The most important contextual factors sorted into 5 domains: (1) the practice setting, (2) the larger organization, (3) the external environment, (4) implementation pathway, and (5) the motivation for implementation. To understand context, investigators recommend (1) engaging diverse perspectives and data sources, (2) considering multiple levels, (3) evaluating history and evolution over time, (4) looking at formal and informal systems and culture, and (5) assessing the (often nonlinear) interactions between contextual factors and both the process and outcome of studies. We include a template with tabular and interpretive elements to help study teams engage research participants in reporting relevant context. CONCLUSIONS These findings demonstrate the feasibility and potential utility of identifying and reporting contextual factors. Involving diverse stakeholders in assessing context at multiple stages of the research process, examining their association with outcomes, and consistently reporting critical contextual factors are important challenges for a field interested in improving the internal and external validity and impact of health care research.

Integrating Quantitative and Qualitative Results in Health Science Mixed Methods Research Through Joint Displays

PURPOSE Mixed methods research is becoming an important methodology to investigate complex health-related topics, yet the meaningful integration of qualitative and quantitative data remains elusive and needs further development. A promising innovation to facilitate integration is the use of visual joint displays that bring data together visually to draw out new insights. The purpose of this study was to identify exemplar joint displays by analyzing the various types of joint displays being used in published articles. METHODS We searched for empirical articles that included joint displays in 3 journals that publish state-of-the-art mixed methods research. We analyzed each of 19 identified joint displays to extract the type of display, mixed methods design, purpose, rationale, qualitative and quantitative data sources, integration approaches, and analytic strategies. Our analysis focused on what each display communicated and its representation of mixed methods analysis. RESULTS The most prevalent types of joint displays were statistics-by-themes and side-by-side comparisons. Innovative joint displays connected findings to theoretical frameworks or recommendations. Researchers used joint displays for convergent, explanatory sequential, exploratory sequential, and intervention designs. We identified exemplars for each of these designs by analyzing the inferences gained through using the joint display. Exemplars represented mixed methods integration, presented integrated results, and yielded new insights. CONCLUSIONS Joint displays appear to provide a structure to discuss the integrated analysis and assist both researchers and readers in understanding how mixed methods provides new insights. We encourage researchers to use joint displays to integrate and represent mixed methods analysis and discuss their value.

Video Elicitation Interviews: A Qualitative Research Method for Investigating Physician-Patient Interactions

We describe the concept and method of video elicitation interviews and provide practical guidance for primary care researchers who want to use this qualitative method to investigate physician-patient interactions. During video elicitation interviews, researchers interview patients or physicians about a recent clinical interaction using a video recording of that interaction as an elicitation tool. Video elicitation is useful because it allows researchers to integrate data about the content of physician-patient interactions gained from video recordings with data about participants’ associated thoughts, beliefs, and emotions gained from elicitation interviews. This method also facilitates investigation of specific events or moments during interactions. Video elicitation interviews are logistically demanding and time consuming, and they should be reserved for research questions that cannot be fully addressed using either standard interviews or video recordings in isolation. As many components of primary care fall into this category, high-quality video elicitation interviews can be an important method for understanding and improving physician-patient interactions in primary care.

Conflict resolution at the end of life.

ObjectiveLimited empirical research has examined how decisions are made when the preferences of terminally ill patients conflict with physicians’ recommendations. This study sought to investigate physicians’ strategies for resolving conflicts with dying patients. DesignCross-sectional, qualitative interviews. SubjectsSubjects were 158 physicians caring for at least one terminally ill patient. SettingUniversity medical center. Measurements and Main Results We analyzed physicians’ responses to the open-ended interview questions, “How do you handle a situation when a patient wants a treatment that you believe does not provide any benefit?” and “How do you handle a situation when a patient does not want a treatment you think would be beneficial?” For patient requests of nonbeneficial treatments, physicians reported the following as important: negotiating with and educating patients (71%), deferring to patient requests for benign or uncomplicated treatments (34%), convincing patients to forgo treatments (33%), refusing patient requests for nonbeneficial treatment (22%), using family influence (16%), not offering futile treatments (13%), and referring to other physicians for disputed care (9%). Potential harm (23%) and cost of treatment (18%) were reasons cited for withholding treatments. In response to patient refusals of beneficial treatments, physicians report the following as important: negotiating with patients (59%), convincing patients to receive treatment (41%), assessing patient competence (32%), using family influence (27%), and referring to other physicians (21%). ConclusionsPhysicians vary in the communication and negotiation strategies they use when their medical judgment conflicts with dying patients’ preferences. Medical ethicists could play a greater role in teaching ethically important communication skills. Physicians providing care at the end of life report strategies for respecting patients that reflect graduated degrees of accommodation tailored to the costliness and riskiness of requests; they are most accepting of patient requests for benign, technically easy, inexpensive, and medically effective treatments.

Partial and Incremental PCMH Practice Transformation: Implications for Quality and Costs

OBJECTIVE To examine the associations between partial and incremental implementation of the Patient Centered Medical Home (PCMH) model and measures of cost and quality of care. DATA SOURCE We combined validated, self-reported PCMH capabilities data with administrative claims data for a diverse statewide population of 2,432 primary care practices in Michigan. These data were supplemented with contextual data from the Area Resource File. STUDY DESIGN We measured medical home capabilities in place as of June 2009 and change in medical home capabilities implemented between July 2009 and June 2010. Generalized estimating equations were used to estimate the mean effect of these PCMH measures on total medical costs and quality of care delivered in physician practices between July 2009 and June 2010, while controlling for potential practice, patient cohort, physician organization, and practice environment confounders. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS Based on the observed relationships for partial implementation, full implementation of the PCMH model is associated with a 3.5 percent higher quality composite score, a 5.1 percent higher preventive composite score, and

Identification of the hikikomori syndrome of social withdrawal: Psychosocial features and treatment preferences in four countries:

26.37 lower per member per month medical costs for adults. Full PCMH implementation is also associated with a 12.2 percent higher preventive composite score, but no reductions in costs for pediatric populations. Incremental improvements in PCMH model implementation yielded similar positive effects on quality of care for both adult and pediatric populations but were not associated with cost savings for either population. CONCLUSIONS Estimated effects of the PCMH model on quality and cost of care appear to improve with the degree of PCMH implementation achieved and with incremental improvements in implementation.

The Role of Group Dynamics in Mixed Methods Health Sciences Research Teams

Background: Hikikomori, a form of social withdrawal first reported in Japan, may exist globally but cross-national studies of cases of hikikomori are lacking. Aims: To identify individuals with hikikomori in multiple countries and describe features of the condition. Method: Participants were recruited from sites in India, Japan, Korea and the United States. Hikikomori was defined as a 6-month or longer period of spending almost all time at home and avoiding social situations and social relationships, associated with significant distress/impairment. Additional measures included the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) Loneliness Scale, Lubben Social Network Scale (LSNS-6), Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) and modified Cornell Treatment Preferences Index. Results: A total of 36 participants with hikikomori were identified, with cases detected in all four countries. These individuals had high levels of loneliness (UCLA Loneliness Scale M = 55.4, SD = 10.5), limited social networks (LSNS-6 M = 9.7, SD = 5.5) and moderate functional impairment (SDS M = 16.5, SD = 7.9). Of them 28 (78%) desired treatment for their social withdrawal, with a significantly higher preference for psychotherapy over pharmacotherapy, in-person over telepsychiatry treatment and mental health specialists over primary care providers. Across countries, participants with hikikomori had similar generally treatment preferences and psychosocial features. Conclusion: Hikikomori exists cross-nationally and can be assessed with a standardized assessment tool. Individuals with hikikomori have substantial psychosocial impairment and disability, and some may desire treatment.