Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

LIVE: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)
Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Implementation Science
Published in: Implementation Science 1/2015

Open Access 01-12-2015 | Study protocol

A national evaluation of a dissemination and implementation initiative to enhance primary care practice capacity and improve cardiovascular disease care: the ESCALATES study protocol

Authors: Deborah J. Cohen, Bijal A. Balasubramanian, Leah Gordon, Miguel Marino, Sarah Ono, Leif I. Solberg, Benjamin F. Crabtree, Kurt C. Stange, Melinda Davis, William L. Miller, Laura J. Damschroder, K. John McConnell, John Creswell

Published in: Implementation Science | Issue 1/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) launched the EvidenceNOW Initiative to rapidly disseminate and implement evidence-based cardiovascular disease (CVD) preventive care in smaller primary care practices. AHRQ funded eight grantees (seven regional Cooperatives and one independent national evaluation) to participate in EvidenceNOW. The national evaluation examines quality improvement efforts and outcomes for more than 1500 small primary care practices (restricted to those with fewer than ten physicians per clinic). Examples of external support include practice facilitation, expert consultation, performance feedback, and educational materials and activities. This paper describes the study protocol for the EvidenceNOW national evaluation, which is called Evaluating System Change to Advance Learning and Take Evidence to Scale (ESCALATES).

Methods

This prospective observational study will examine the portfolio of EvidenceNOW Cooperatives using both qualitative and quantitative data. Qualitative data include: online implementation diaries, observation and interviews at Cooperatives and practices, and systematic assessment of context from the perspective of Cooperative team members. Quantitative data include: practice-level performance on clinical quality measures (aspirin prescribing, blood pressure and cholesterol control, and smoking cessation; ABCS) collected by Cooperatives from electronic health records (EHRs); practice and practice member surveys to assess practice capacity and other organizational and structural characteristics; and systematic tracking of intervention delivery. Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods analyses will be conducted to examine how Cooperatives organize to provide external support to practices, to compare effectiveness of the dissemination and implementation approaches they implement, and to examine how regional variations and other organization and contextual factors influence implementation and effectiveness.

Discussion

ESCALATES is a national evaluation of an ambitious large-scale dissemination and implementation effort focused on transforming smaller primary care practices. Insights will help to inform the design of national health care practice extension systems aimed at supporting practice transformation efforts in the USA.

Clinical Trial Registration

NCT02560428 (09/21/15)
Literature
1.
Yuan CT, Nembhard IM, Stern AF, Brush Jr JE, Krumholz HM, Bradley EH. Blueprint for the dissemination of evidence-based practices in health care. Issue brief (Commonwealth Fund). 2010;86:1–16.
2.
McCannon CJ, Perla RJ. Learning networks for sustainable, large-scale improvement. Joint Commission journal on quality and patient safety/Joint Commission Resources. 2009;35(5):286–91.CrossRef
3.
McCannon CJ, Schall MW, Calkins DR, Nazem AG. Saving 100,000 lives in US hospitals. BMJ (Clinical research ed). 2006;332(7553):1328–30.CrossRef
4.
Hing E, Burt CW. Office-based medical practices: methods and estimates from the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey. Adv Data. 2007;383:1–15.
5.
Center for Studying Health System Change, Liebhaber A, Grossman J. Physicians moving to mid-sized single-specialty practices. Tracking Report No. 18: Results from the Community Tracking Study.2007: http://​hschange.​org/​CONTENT/​941/​. Accessed 1 June 2014.
6.
Nutting PA, Crabtree BF, McDaniel RR. Small primary care practices face four hurdles—including a physician-centric mind-set—in becoming medical homes. Health affairs (Project Hope). 2012;31(11):2417–22.CrossRef
7.
Cronholm PF, Shea JA, Werner RM, et al. The patient centered medical home: mental models and practice culture driving the transformation process. J Gen Intern Med. 2013;28(9):1195–201.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
8.
Rittenhouse DR, Casalino LP, Shortell SM, et al. Small and medium-size physician practices use few patient-centered medical home processes. Health affairs (Project Hope). 2011;30(8):1575–84.CrossRef
9.
Wolfson D, Bernabeo E, Leas B, Sofaer S, Pawlson G, Pillittere D. Quality improvement in small office settings: an examination of successful practices. BMC Fam Pract. 2009;10:14.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
10.
Nutting PA, Crabtree BF, Miller WL, Stange KC, Stewart E, Jaen C. Transforming physician practices to patient-centered medical homes: lessons from the national demonstration project. Health affairs (Project Hope). 2011;30(3):439–45.CrossRef
11.
12.
13.
14.
Wessell AM, Liszka HA, Nietert PJ, Jenkins RG, Nemeth LS, Ornstein S. Achievable benchmarks of care for primary care quality indicators in a practice-based research network. Am J Med Qual. 2008;23(1):39–46.CrossRefPubMed
15.
Ivers N, Jamtvedt G, Flottorp S, et al. Audit and feedback: effects on professional practice and healthcare outcomes. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012;6:CD000259.
16.
Baskerville NB, Liddy C, Hogg W. Systematic review and meta-analysis of practice facilitation within primary care settings. Ann Fam Med. 2012;10(1):63–74.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
17.
18.
19.
Nagykaldi Z, Mold JW, Robinson A, Niebauer L, Ford A. Practice facilitators and practice-based research networks. J Am Board Fam Med. 2006;19(5):506–10.CrossRefPubMed
20.
21.
22.
O’Brien MA, Rogers S, Jamtvedt G, et al. Educational outreach visits: effects on professional practice and health care outcomes. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007;4:CD000409.
23.
Boom JA, Nelson CS, Laufman LE, Kohrt AE, Kozinetz CA. Improvement in provider immunization knowledge and behaviors following a peer education intervention. Clin Pediatr (Phila). 2007;46(8):706–17.CrossRef
24.
25.
Curry WJ, Lengerich EJ, Kluhsman BC, et al. Academic detailing to increase colorectal cancer screening by primary care practices in Appalachian Pennsylvania. BMC Health Serv Res. 2011;11:112.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
26.
Bricker PL, Baron RJ, Scheirer JJ, et al. Collaboration in Pennsylvania: rapidly spreading improved chronic care for patients to practices. J Contin Educ Health Prof. 2010;30(2):114–25.CrossRefPubMed
27.
28.
Fleischfresser S. Wisconsin Medical Home Learning Collaborative: a model for implementing practice change. WMJ. 2004;103(5):25–7.PubMed
29.
Goeschel C, Pronovost P. Harnessing the potential of health care collaboratives: lessons from the Keystone ICU Project. In: Henriksen K, Battles J, Keyes M, Grady M, editors. Advances in patient safety: new directions and alternative approaches. Vol. 2, culture and redesign. Rockville: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2008. http://​www.​ahrq.​gov/​professionals/​quality-patient-safety/​patient-safety-resources/​resources/​advances-in-patient-safety-2/​vol2/​Advances-Goeschel_​24.​pdf.​
30.
Mold JW, Aspy CA, Nagykaldi Z. Oklahoma Physicians Resource/Research N. Implementation of evidence-based preventive services delivery processes in primary care: an Oklahoma Physicians Resource/Research Network (OKPRN) study. J Am Board Fam Med. 2008;21(4):334–44.CrossRefPubMed
31.
Kaufman A, Powell W, Alfero C, et al. Health extension in new Mexico: an academic health center and the social determinants of disease. Ann Fam Med. 2010;8(1):73–81.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
32.
Farley TA, Dalal MA, Mostashari F, Frieden TR. Deaths preventable in the U.S. by improvements in use of clinical preventive services. Am J Prev Med. 2010;38(6):600–9.CrossRefPubMed
33.
Frieden TR. BDM. The “million hearts” initiative—preventing heart attacks and strokes. New Engl. J Med New England J Med. 2011;365(13):e27.21–4.
34.
Go AS, Mozaffarian D, Roger VL, et al. Executive summary: heart disease and stroke statistics—2014 update: a report from the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2014;129(3):399–410.CrossRefPubMed
35.
Bardach NS, Wang JJ, De Leon SF, et al. Effect of pay-for-performance incentives on quality of care in small practices with electronic health records: a randomized trial. JAMA. 2013;310(10):1051–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
36.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Vital signs: prevalence, treatment, and control of high levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol—United States, 1999-2002 and 2005-200. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2011;60(4):109–14.
37.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Vital signs: awareness and treatment of uncontrolled hypertension among adults—United States, 2003-2010. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2012;61:703–9.
38.
Ockene JK, Edgerton EA, Teutsch SM, et al. Integrating evidence-based clinical and community strategies to improve health. Am J Prev Med. 2007;32(3):244–52.CrossRefPubMed
39.
Jousilahti P, Laatikainen T, Peltonen M, et al. Primary prevention and risk factor reduction in coronary heart disease mortality among working aged men and women in eastern Finland over 40 years: population based observational study. BMJ (Clinical research ed). 2016;352:i721.
40.
Balasubramanian BA, Cohen DJ, Davis MM, et al. Learning evaluation: blending quality improvement and implementation research methods to study healthcare innovations. Implement Sci. 2015;10:31.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
41.
Damschroder LJ, Aron DC, Keith RE, Kirsh SR, Alexander JA, Lowery JC. Fostering implementation of health services research findings into practice: a consolidated framework for advancing implementation science. Implement Sci. 2009;4(50):1748–5908.
42.
Cohen D, McDaniel Jr RR, Crabtree BF, et al. A practice change model for quality improvement in primary care practice. J Healthc Manag/Am Coll Healthc Exec. 2004;49(3):155–68. discussion 169-170.
43.
Cohen DJ, Leviton LC, Isaacson N, Tallia AF, Crabtree BF. Online diaries for qualitative evaluation: gaining real-time insights. Am J Eval. 2006;27(2):163–84.CrossRef
44.
Solberg LI, Asche SE, Margolis KL, Whitebird RR. Measuring an organization’s ability to manage change: the change process capability questionnaire and its use for improving depression care. Am J Med Qual. 2008;23(3):193–200.CrossRefPubMed
45.
Solberg LI, Stuck LH, Crain AL, et al. Organizational factors and change strategies associated with medical home transformation. Am J Med Qual. 2014;30(4):337-44.
46.
Nutting PA, Crabtree BF, Miller WL, Stewart EE, Stange KC, Jaen CR. Journey to the patient-centered medical home: a qualitative analysis of the experiences of practices in the National Demonstration Project. Ann Fam Med. 2010;8 Suppl 1:S45–56. s92.CrossRefPubMed
47.
Nutting PA, Crabtree BF, Stewart EE, et al. Effect of facilitation on practice outcomes in the National Demonstration Project model of the patient-centered medical home. Ann Fam Med. 2010;8 Suppl 1:S33–44. S92.CrossRefPubMed
48.
Nutting PA, Miller WL, Crabtree BF, Jaen CR, Stewart EE, Stange KC. Initial lessons from the first national demonstration project on practice transformation to a patient-centered medical home. Ann Fam Med. 2009;7(3):254–60.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
49.
50.
Rodie AR, Pol LG, Crabtree BF, McIlvain HE. Assessing quality. As pressure mounts for clinics to deliver quality, medical practice blueprints and genograms serve as useful tools. Mark Health Serv. 1999;19(2):16–24.PubMed
51.
Simas AB, Barreto-Souza W, Rocha AV. Improved estimators for a general class of beta regression models. Comput Stat Data Anal. 2010;54(2):348–66.CrossRef
52.
Zhao W, Zhang R, Lv Y, Liu J. Variable selection for varying dispersion beta regression model. J Appl Stat. 2014;41(1):95–108.CrossRef
53.
Wang H, Li B, Leng C. Shrinkage tuning parameter selection with a diverging number of parameters. J R Stat Soc Ser B Stat Methodol. 2009;71(3):671–83.CrossRef
54.
Glaser B, Strauss A. The discovery of grounded theory: strategies for qualitative research. New York: Sociology Press; 1967.
55.
Strauss A, Corbin J. Basics of qualitative research: techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 1998.
56.
Charmaz K. Grounded theory methods in social justice research. In: Denzin N, Lincoln Y, editors. The SAGE handbook of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, Inc; 2011. p. 359–80.
57.
Miles MB, Huberman AM. Qualitative data analysis : an expanded sourcebook. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications; 1994.
58.
59.
Malterud K. Qualitative research: standards, challenges, and guidelines. Lancet. 2001;358(9280):483–8.CrossRefPubMed
60.
61.
Lincoln Y, Guba EG. Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications; 1985.
62.
Dimick JB, Ryan AM. Methods for evaluating changes in health care policy: the difference-in-differences approach. JAMA. 2014;312(22):2401–2.CrossRefPubMed
63.
Bertrand M, Duflo E, Mullainathan S. How much should we trust differences-in-differences estimates? Q J Econ. 2004;119(1):249–75.CrossRef
64.
Donald S, Lang K. Inference with difference-in-differences and other panel data. Rev Econ Stat. 2007;89(2):221–33.CrossRef
65.
Friedberg M, Schneider E, Rosenthal M, Volpp K, Werner R. Association between participation in a multipayer medical home intervention and changes in quality, utilization, and costs of care. JAMA. 2014;311(8):815–25.CrossRefPubMed
66.
Higgins S, Chawla R, Colombo C, Snyder R, Nigam S. Medical homes and cost and utilization among high-risk patients. The American journal of managed care. Am J Manag Care. 2013;20(3):e61–71.
67.
Werner R, Duggan M, Duey K, Zhu J, Stuart E. The patient-centered medical home: an evaluation of a single private payer demonstration in New Jersey. Med Care. 2013;51(6):487–93.CrossRefPubMed
68.
Werner R, Konetzka T, Polsky D. The effect of pay-for-performance in nursing homes: evidence from state Medicaid programs. Health Serv Res. 2013;48(4):1393–414.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
69.
Kraemer HC. Discovering, comparing, and combining moderators of treatment on outcome after randomized clinical trials: a parametric approach. Stat Med. 2013;32(11):1964–73.CrossRefPubMed
70.
Tomoaia-Cotisel A, Scammon DL, Waitzman NJ, et al. Context matters: the experience of 14 research teams in systematically reporting contextual factors important for practice change. Ann Fam Med. 2013;11 Suppl 1:S115–123.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
71.
Stange K, Glasgow R. Contextual factors: the importance of considering and reporting on context in research on the patient-centered medical home. Rockville: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2013.
72.
Heritage J. Garfinkel and ethnomethodology. Cambridge: Polity Press; 1984.
Metadata
Title
A national evaluation of a dissemination and implementation initiative to enhance primary care practice capacity and improve cardiovascular disease care: the ESCALATES study protocol
Authors
Deborah J. Cohen
Bijal A. Balasubramanian
Leah Gordon
Miguel Marino
Sarah Ono
Leif I. Solberg
Benjamin F. Crabtree
Kurt C. Stange
Melinda Davis
William L. Miller
Laura J. Damschroder
K. John McConnell
John Creswell
Publication date
01-12-2015
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Implementation Science / Issue 1/2015
Electronic ISSN: 1748-5908
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-016-0449-8

Other articles of this Issue 1/2015

Implementation Science 1/2015 Go to the issue

Systematic review

Effectiveness of multifaceted implementation strategies for the implementation of back and neck pain guidelines in health care: a systematic review

Research

Process evaluation of a tailored intervention programme of cardiovascular risk management in general practices

Research

Bridging the gap between science and policy: an international survey of scientists and policy makers in China and Canada

Systematic review

Barriers and enablers to guideline implementation strategies to improve obstetric care practice in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review of qualitative evidence

Research

Efficiency of the implementation of cardiovascular risk management in primary care practices: an observational study

Research

Printed educational messages fail to increase use of thiazides as first-line medication for hypertension in primary care: a cluster randomized controlled trial [ISRCTN72772651]