Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background Economic evaluations frequently are utilized to compare the value of different interventions in medicine and health in concrete terms. Implementation science also would benefit from the incorporation of economic evaluations, but such studies are rare in the literature. The National Cancer Institute has supported a special collection of articles focusing on economic evaluations in implementation science. Even when interventions are supported by substantial evidence, they are implemented infrequently in the field. Implementation costs are important determinants for whether organizational decision-makers choose to adopt an intervention and whether the implementation process is successful. Economic evaluations, such as cost-effectiveness analyses, can help organizational decision-makers choose between implementation approaches for evidence-based interventions by accounting for costs and succinctly presenting cost/benefit tradeoffs. Main text This manuscript presents a discussion of important considerations for incorporating economic evaluations into implementation science. First, the distinction between intervention and implementation costs is presented, along with an explanation of why the comprehensive representation of implementation costs is elusive. Then, the manuscript describes how economic evaluations in implementation science may differ from those in medicine and health intervention studies, especially in terms of determining the perspectives and outcomes of interest. Finally, referencing a scale-up trial of an evidence-based behavioral health intervention, concrete case examples of how cost data can be collected and used in economic evaluations targeting implementation, rather than clinical outcomes, are described. Conclusions By gaining a greater understanding of the costs and economic impact associated with different implementation approaches, organizational decision-makers will have better transparency for future replication and scale-up. The use of economic evaluations can help to advance this understanding and provide researchers, purveyors or third-party intermediaries, and organizational decision-makers with essential information to facilitate implementation.

Background Numerous studies have examined melanoma incidence and survival, but studies on melanoma recurrence are limited. We examined melanoma incidence, recurrence, and mortality among members of Kaiser Permanente Colorado (KPCO) between January 1, 2000 and December 31, 2015. Methods Age‐adjusted incidence rates were computed to examine trends among KPCO members aged 21 years and older. Cox proportional hazards models were used to examine factors associated with recurrence and mortality. Results Our cohort included 1931 cases of invasive melanoma. Incidence rates increased over time and were higher than SEER rates; however, the increase was limited to early stage disease. In multivariable models, stage at initial diagnosis, gender, and age were associated with melanoma recurrence. Men were more likely to have a recurrence than women (adjusted hazard ratio [HR]: 1.70, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.19‐2.43), and for each decade of increasing age, the adjusted HR = 1.20 (95% CI: 1.06‐1.37). Factors associated with all‐cause mortality included stage (HR = 12.87, 95% CI: 6.63‐24.99, for stage IV vs stage I), male gender (HR = 1.42, 95% CI: 1.12‐1.79), older age at diagnosis, lower socioeconomic status, and comorbidity index. For melanoma‐specific mortality, results were similar, with one exception: age was not associated with melanoma‐specific death (HR = 1.09, 95% CI: 0.94‐1.25, P = 0.253). Conclusions Data derived from an insured patient population, such as KPCO, have the potential to enhance our understanding of emerging trends in melanoma. This is the first population‐based study in the United States to examine patient characteristics associated with risk of recurrence. Men have an increased risk of both recurrence and death, and thus may benefit from more intensive follow‐up than women. This is the first population‐based study in the United States to examine patient characteristics associated with risk of melanoma recurrence. Men have an increased risk of both recurrence and death, and thus may benefit from more intensive follow‐up than women.

OBJECTIVE:We assessed the relationship between diabetes mellitus (DM) and measures of worker productivity, direct health care costs, and costs associated with lost productivity (LP) among health care industry workers across two integrated health care systems. METHODS:We used data from the Value Based Benefit Design Health and Wellness Study Phase II (VBD), a prospective study of employees surveyed across health systems. Survey and health care utilization data were linked to estimate LP and health care utilization costs. RESULTS:Mean marginal lost productive time per week was 0.56 hours higher for respondents with DM. Mean adjusted monthly total health care utilization costs were $467 higher for respondents with DM. CONCLUSION:The impact of DM is reflected in higher rates of LP and higher indirect costs for employers related to LP and higher health care resource use.

Background People living with chronic heart failure (CHF), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and interstitial lung disease (ILD) suffer impaired quality of life due to burdensome symptoms and depression. The Advancing Symptom Alleviation with Palliative Treatment (ADAPT) trial aims to determine the effect of a multidisciplinary, team-based intervention on quality of life in people with these common diseases. Methods/design The ADAPT trial is a two-site, patient-level randomized clinical trial that examines the effectiveness of the ADAPT intervention compared to usual care on patient-reported quality of life at 6 months in veterans with CHF, COPD or ILD with poor quality of life and increased risk for hospitalization or death. The ADAPT intervention involves a multidisciplinary team—a registered nurse, social worker, palliative care specialist, and primary care provider (with access to a pulmonologist and cardiologist)—who meet weekly to make recommendations and write orders for consideration by participants’ individual primary care providers. The nurse and social worker interact with participants over six visits to identify and manage a primary bothersome symptom and complete a structured psychosocial intervention and advance care planning. The primary outcome is change in patient-reported quality of life at 6 months as measured by the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-General questionnaire. Secondary outcomes at 6 months include change in symptom distress, depression, anxiety, disease-specific quality of life hospitalizations, and advance care planning communication and documentation. Intervention implementation will be assessed using a mixed-methods approach including a qualitative assessment of participants’ and intervention personnel experiences and a quantitative assessment of care delivery, resources, and cost. Discussion The ADAPT trial studies an innovative intervention designed to improve quality of life for veterans with common, burdensome illnesses by targeting key underlying factors—symptoms and depression—that impair quality of life but persist despite disease-specific therapies. Leveraging the skills of affiliate health providers with physician supervision will extend the reach of palliative care and improve quality of life for those with advanced disease within routine outpatient care. The hybrid effectiveness/implementation design of the ADAPT trial will shorten the time to broader dissemination if effective and create avenues for future research. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02713347 . Registered March 19, 2016.

Background Cardiovascular medications may be associated with cancer development, but little is known about their association with cancer recurrence. Medications such as statins and antihypertensives may be commonly used among colon cancer survivors, who are, on average, diagnosed in their mid-60s. We described the associations between statins and antihypertensive medications and colon cancer recurrence in a large, population-based study. Methods We conducted a cohort study among adults with stage I-IIIA colon cancer diagnosed in 1995–2014 in two Kaiser Permanente regions, Colorado and Washington. Statin and antihypertensive use were obtained from electronic pharmacy dispensing data. People were classified as medication users on the date of their first dispensing after cohort entry, which started 90 days after completing cancer treatment, continuing through the earliest of death, health plan disenrollment, or chart abstraction. We collected outcome information from medical record abstraction and tumor registries on colon cancer recurrences and second primary cancers. Using Cox proportional hazards multivariable models, we estimated hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for colon cancer recurrences and any cancer event (recurrences and new primaries at any anatomic site) comparing medication users to non-users. Results Among 2039 people, 937 (46%) used statins and 1425 (70%) used antihypertensives at any point during a median of 4.9 years of follow-up; 460 people had any additional cancer event, including 152 with a colon cancer recurrence. Statin use was not associated with colon cancer recurrence (HR = 1.09, 95%CI = 0.65–1.85) or any cancer event (HR = 1.12, 95%CI = 0.85–1.47), nor was antihypertensive use associated with recurrence (HR = 0.73, 95%CI = 0.44–1.21) or any cancer event (HR = 0.93, 95%CI = 0.70–1.24). Conclusions Our results suggest no association between cardiovascular medication use and the risk of recurrence or any additional cancer, and may provide reassurance to colon cancer survivors.

To compare the risk of prostate cancer mortality among men treated with 5- alpha reductase inhibitors (5-ARIs) with those treated with alpha-adrenergic blockers (ABs) in community practice settings. A retrospective matched cohort (N=174,895) and nested case-control study (N=18,311) were conducted in 4 regions of an integrated health care system. Men 50 years and older who initiated pharmaceutical treatment for benign prostatic hyperplasia between January 1, 1992, and December 31, 2007, and had at least 3 consecutive prescriptions were followed through December 31, 2010. Adjusted subdistribution hazard ratios, accounting for competing risks of death, and matched odds ratios were used to estimate prostate cancer mortality associated with 5-ARI use (with or without concomitant ABs) as compared with AB use. In the cohort study, 1,053 men died of prostate cancer (mean follow-up, 3 years), 15% among 5-ARI users (N= 25,388) and 85% among AB users (N=149,507) (unadjusted mortality rate ratio, 0.80). After accounting for competing risks, it was found that 5-ARI use was not associated with prostate cancer mortality when compared with AB use (adjusted subdistribution hazard ratio, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.72-1.01). Similar results were observed in the case-control study (adjusted matched odds ratio, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.78-1.17). Among men being pharmaceutically treated for benign prostatic hyperplasia, 5-ARI use was not associated with an increased risk of prostate cancer–specific mortality when compared with AB use. The increased prevalence of high-grade lesions at the time of diagnosis noted in our study and the chemoprevention trials may not result in increased prostate cancer mortality.

Research is increasingly conducted through multi-institutional consortia, and best practices for establishing multi-site research collaborations must be employed to ensure efficient, effective, and productive translational research teams. In this manuscript, we describe how the Population-based Research to Optimize the Screening Process Lung Research Center (PROSPR-Lung) utilized evidence-based Science of Team Science (SciTS) best practices to establish the consortium’s infrastructure and processes to promote translational research in lung cancer screening. We provide specific, actionable examples of how we: (1) developed and reinforced a shared mission, vision, and goals; (2) maintained a transparent and representative leadership structure; (3) employed strong research support systems; (4) provided efficient and effective data management; (5) promoted interdisciplinary conversations; and (6) built a culture of trust. We offer guidance for managing a multi-site research center and data repository that may be applied to a variety of settings. Finally, we detail specific project management tools and processes used to drive collaboration, efficiency, and scientific productivity.

BackgroundCounseling on access to lethal means is highly recommended for patients with suicide risk, but there are no formal evaluations of its impact in real-world settings.ObjectiveEvaluate whether lethal means assessment reduces the likelihood of suicide attempt and death outcomes.DesignQuasi-experimental design using an instrumental variable to overcome confounding due to unmeasured patient characteristics that could influence provider decisions to deliver lethal means assessment.SettingKaiser Permanente Colorado, an integrated health system serving over 600,000 members, with comprehensive capture of all electronic health records, medical claims, and death information.ParticipantsAdult patients who endorsed suicide ideation on the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) depression screener administered in behavioral health and primary care settings from 2010 to 2016.InterventionsProvider documentation of lethal means assessment in the text of clinical notes, collected using a validated Natural Language Processing program.MeasurementsMain outcome was ICD-9 or ICD-10 codes for self-inflicted injury or suicide death within 180 days of index PHQ-9 event.ResultsWe found 33% of patients with suicide ideation reported on the PHQ-9 received lethal means assessment in the 30 days following identification. Lethal means assessment reduced the risk of a suicide attempt or death within 180 days from 3.3 to 0.83% (p = .034, 95% CI = .069–.9).LimitationsUnmeasured suicide prevention practices that co-occur with lethal means assessment may contribute to the effects observed.ConclusionsClinicians should expand the use of counseling on access to lethal means, along with co-occurring suicide prevention practices, to all patients who report suicide ideation.

Background Uptake of lung cancer screening (LCS) has been slow with less than 20% of eligible people who currently or formerly smoked reported to have undergone a screening CT. Objective To determine individual-, health system-, and neighborhood-level factors associated with LCS uptake after a provider order for screening. Design and Subjects We conducted an observational cohort study of screening-eligible patients within the Population-based Research to Optimize the Screening Process (PROSPR)–Lung Consortium who received a radiology referral/order for a baseline low-dose screening CT (LDCT) from a healthcare provider between January 1, 2015, and June 30, 2019. Main Measures The primary outcome is screening uptake, defined as LCS-LDCT completion within 90 days of the screening order date. Key Results During the study period, 18,294 patients received their first order for LCS-LDCT. Orders more than doubled from the beginning to the end of the study period. Overall, 60% of patients completed screening after receiving their first LCS-LDCT order. Across health systems, uptake varied from 41 to 87%. In both univariate and multivariable analyses, older age, male sex, former smoking status, COPD, and receiving care in a centralized LCS program were positively associated with completing LCS-LDCT. Unknown insurance status, other or unknown race, and lower neighborhood socioeconomic status, as measured by the Yost Index, were negatively associated with screening uptake. Conclusions Overall, 40% of patients referred for LCS did not complete a LDCT within 90 days, highlighting a substantial gap in the lung screening care pathway, particularly in decentralized screening programs.