Comparing Types of Implementation of a Shared Decision Making Intervention (ADAPT-NC)

Wake Forest University (WFU)

Status: Completed

Conditions: Asthma

Treatments: Other: Asthma Shared Decision Making (SDM) Toolkit

Study type: Interventional

Funder types: Other

Identifiers

NCT02047929

CD-12-11-4276

Details and patient eligibility

About

Asthma is a common disease that affects people of all ages and has significant morbidity and mortality. Poor outcomes and health disparities related to asthma result in part from the difficulty of disseminating new evidence and paradigms of care delivery such as shared decision making (SDM) into clinical practice. This study will evaluate a novel mechanism for dissemination of an evidence-based SDM Toolkit for asthma care in primary care practices. The study is ideally suited to study dissemination methods because it will leverage a partnership between an established consortium of practice based research networks (PBRNs) and an advanced Medicaid Network.

This study will evaluate a novel dissemination process (FLOW) to spread an Asthma Shared Decision Making Toolkit to practices within a Medicaid network using a consortium of practice-based research networks (NCNC). The knowledge gained from this proposal and the partnerships formed between practice-based research networks and NC Medicaid will facilitate widespread dissemination to almost 300 practices.

Full description

Changing the behavior of health providers can be challenging, and significant gaps exist in our knowledge of how to best disseminate new medical evidence into everyday practice. This is true when the evidence involves a new paradigm of patient-centered care delivery such as shared decision making (SDM). The most common dissemination used is passive diffusion, which includes journal publications, didactic presentations, and educational material and often fails to produce timely or sustainable practice level changes. A unique partnership between a Medicaid network and a well established consortium of practice-based research networks provides an ideal venue to examine the effectiveness of new effective methods of dissemination. We previously developed an asthma toolkit that was funded by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) and tested across a regional network of Pediatric, Family Medicine, and Internal Medicine ambulatory practices in Mecklenburg County North Carolina. During this study, key principles of community based participatory research were used engaging providers and patients to develop a Facilitator-Led participant OWned (FLOW) Approach to dissemination. The FLOW approach uses Practice Facilitators to guide practices through the process of adapting the Toolkit into the existing culture and workflow. This approach led to rapid dissemination and sustainability of the Toolkit across six practices. The initial results have showed marked improvement in patient outcomes (improved medication adherence and decreased asthma exacerbations) with increased patient involvement in the creation of the care plans. The objective is to determine what dissemination strategy most effectively increases practice level adoption of shared decision making, improves patient outcomes, and increases patient involvement in care decisions. We will leverage a partnership between the statewide Medicaid network and NCNC, a state-wide consortium of research networks, to identify best practices for dissemination of the shared decision making toolkit. We will test the FLOW method for dissemination on a larger scale by randomizing 30 primary care practices from 4 practice based research networks to one of three dissemination arms: (1) Facilitator-Led participant OWned (FLOW) Approach to Dissemination; (2) Traditional dissemination (Active Diffusion) with facilitator exposure; and (3) Passive dissemination.

Enrollment: 30 patients

Sex: All

Ages: 1+ year old

Volunteers: Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Inclusion and exclusion criteria

Inclusion Criteria: North Carolina practices will be eligible for participation in the study if they have over 75 active Medicaid patients in their panel with the diagnosis of asthma.

Exclusion Criteria: Prior participation in the Asthma Comparative Effectiveness Study.

Trial design

Primary purpose: Health Services Research

Allocation: Randomized

Interventional model: Parallel Assignment

Masking: None (Open label)

---

30 participants in 3 patient groups

Facilitator-Led

Active Comparator group

Description:

This approach to dissemination allows clinics some freedom to tailor the Asthma Shared Decision Making (SDM) Toolkit and training process for their specific environment and patient population while maintaining fidelity of certain key elements that are felt to be essential for success. The expertise of the trained Practice Facilitator will help guide the process of implementation at the practice level.

Treatment:

Other: Asthma Shared Decision Making (SDM) Toolkit

Traditional

Active Comparator group

Description:

The most commonly used dissemination technique is active diffusion, which includes didactic presentations, academic detailing, exposure to journal publications and subject matter experts, and educational material distribution. We have defined this type of dissemination, "traditional dissemination". For the purpose of this study, practices randomized to traditional dissemination will receive a lunchtime presentation by a physician champion / subject matter expert on shared decision making. The presentation will give an overview of the Asthma Shared Decision Making (SDM) Toolkit, access to the internet link with additional information, and a copy of all printed materials associated with the Toolkit.

Treatment:

Other: Asthma Shared Decision Making (SDM) Toolkit

Control

No Intervention group

Description:

A third group will be randomized into an arm with no formal dissemination. This arm will receive information only through passive exposure to the concepts of shared decision making. This would include introduction to the SDM concepts through the media, conferences, or social networks. Having this control in place will allow the research team to isolate the effect of both the FLOW approach and the traditional approach to dissemination.