Implementation of an Evidence-Based Intervention with Safety Net Clinics to Improve Mammography Appointment Adherence Among Underserved Women

The Peace of Mind Program is an evidence-based intervention to improve mammography appointment adherence in underserved women. The aim of this study was to assess effectiveness of the intervention and implementation of the intervention in safety net clinics. The intervention was implemented through a non-randomized stepped wedge cluster hybrid study design with 19 Federally Qualified Health Centers and charity care clinics within the Greater Houston area. A multivariable generalized estimating equation logistic regression was conducted to examine mammography appointment adherence. A survey assessing Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research constructs was also conducted with clinic staff prior to adoption and eight weeks post implementation. One-sided t-tests were conducted to analyze mean score changes between the surveys. A total of 4402 women (baseline period = 2078; intervention period = 2324) were included in the final regression analysis. Women in the intervention period were more likely to attend or reschedule their mammography appointment (OR = 1.30; p < 0.01) than those in the baseline period receiving usual care. Women who completed the intervention were more likely to attend or reschedule their mammography appointment than those who did not complete the intervention (OR = 1.62; p < 0.01). The mammography appointment no-show rates for those in the baseline period, in the intervention period, and who completed the intervention were, respectively, 22%, 19%, and 15%. A total of 15 clinics prior to adoption and eight clinics completed the survey at 8 weeks post implementation A statistically significant mean score decrease was observed in Inner Setting and in two Inner Setting CFIR constructs, Culture–Effort, and Implementation Climate. While the intervention improved mammography appointment adherence, there are opportunities to further integrate Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research constructs. Trial registration: Clinical trials registration number: NCT02296177.

Adoption of an Evidence-Based Intervention for Mammography Screening Adherence in Safety Net Clinics

Through an academic-community partnership, an evidence-based intervention to reduce mammography appointment no-show rates in underserved women was expanded to safety net clinics. The partnership implemented four strategies to improve the adoption and scale-up of evidence-based interventions with Federally Qualified Health Centers and charity care clinics: (1) an outreach email blast targeting the community partner member clinics to increase program awareness, (2) an adoption video encouraging enrollment in the program, (3) an outreach webinar educating the community partner member clinics about the program, encouraging enrollment and outlining adoption steps, and (4) an adoption survey adapted from Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research constructs from the Cancer Prevention and Control Research Network for cancer control interventions with Federally Qualified Health Centers. The development of academic-community partnerships can lead to successful adoption of evidence-based interventions particularly in safety net clinics.

Peace of Mind Program (PMP): Impact of the Dissemination and Implementation of an Evidence-based Intervention (EBI) to Improve Mammography Appointment Adherence in Safety Net Clinics

Backgroundhe Peace of Mind Program – an adapted evidence-based intervention to improve mammography appointment adherence in underserved women – was expanded to safety net clinics. This study assessed effectiveness of the intervention in improving mammography appointment adherence and implementation of the intervention. MethodsThe intervention was implemented through a non-randomized stepped wedge cluster design with 19 Federally Qualified Health Centers and charity care clinics in the Greater Houston area. Clinics were their own control during the baseline period and conducted at least three mammography drives during the baseline and intervention period. A multivariable generalized estimating equation logistic regression was conducted to examine mammography appointment adherence. To examine adoption and implementation of the intervention, two surveys assessing Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research constructs were conducted with clinic leadership and staff. One-sided t-tests were conducted to analyze mean score changes between the adoption and implementation survey. Results total of 4402 women (baseline period = 2078; intervention period = 2324) were included in the final analysis. Women in the intervention period were more likely to attend or reschedule their mammography appointment (OR = 1.30; p < 0.01). Similarly, for those in the intervention period, women who completed the intervention were more likely to attend or reschedule their mammography appointment than those who did not complete the intervention (OR = 1.62; p < 0.01). The mammography appointment no-show rates for those in the baseline period, in the intervention period, and who completed the intervention were, respectively, 22%, 19%, and 15%. In terms of the adoption and implementation survey, a statistically significant mean score decrease was observed in Inner Setting overall and in two Inner Setting constructs, Culture – Effort and Implementation Climate. ConclusionsThis study provided a pragmatic approach to translating an evidence-based mammography intervention into practice in safety net clinics. While the intervention improved mammography appointment adherence, there our opportunities to further integrate Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research constructs in future implementation of the intervention. Future research on the effects of implementation moderators particularly Inner Setting constructs would be of value to implementation practitioners.

Challenges of Using Videos in Exam Rooms of Safety-Net Clinics to Encourage Patient Self-Disclosure of Intimate Partner Violence and to Increase Provider Screening

Identifying intimate partner violence (IPV) in clinics allows for early intervention. We tested a comprehensive approach in five safety-net clinics to encourage female victims to self-identify and providers to screen. The main components were (a) short, multilingual videos for female patients; (b) provider training; and (c) management tools. Although videos were viewed 2,150 times, only 9% of eligible patients watched them. IPV disclosure increased slightly (6%). Lack of internal champions, high turnover, increased patient load, and technological challenges hindered outcomes. Safety-net clinics need feasible methods to encourage IPV screening. Management champions and IT support are essential for video-based activities.

Experiences and Perspectives on Adopting New Practices for Social Needs-targeted Care in Safety-net Settings: A Qualitative Case Series Study

Introduction Clinical settings are being encouraged to identify and address patients’ social needs within the clinic or through partner organizations. The purpose of this qualitative study was to describe the current practice of social needs-targeted care in 3 Texas safety net clinics, and facilitators and barriers to adopting new social needs-targeted care tools and practices. Methods Interviews were conducted with staff at 3 safety net clinics serving small and mid-sized communities. Analysis focused on perspectives and decisions around adopting new tools or practices related to social needs-targeted care, including standardized screening tools and community resource referral platforms. Results Nine staff across 3 organizations were interviewed. Two organizations were currently using a standard social needs screening tool in their routine practice, and a third was considering doing so. One organization had adopted a community resource referral platform in partnership with a large community collaboration. Three case studies illustrate a range of facilitators, barriers, perceived benefits, and drawbacks influencing social needs-targeted practices. Benefits of systematic data collection on social needs included the generation of data for community action. Drawbacks include concerns about data privacy. Community resource referral platforms were seen as valuable for creating accountability, but required an influential community partner and adequate community resources. Concerns about disempowering clients and blurring roles were voiced, and potential to increase provider job satisfaction was identified. Conclusions Benefits and drawbacks of adopting new tools and practices related to social needs-targeted care are strongly influenced by the community context. For the adoption of community resource referral platforms, the outer setting is particularly relevant; adoption readiness is best assessed at the community or regional level rather than the clinic system level. While screening tools are much easier than referral platforms for clinics to adopt, the ability to address identified needs remains heavily based on the outer setting.