Journal articles: 'Practice based research network (PBRN)' – Grafiati (2024)

Abstract:

ABSTRACT Practice Based Research Networks (PBRNs) are groups of general practices collaborating to produce research. Contemporary New Zealand health information technology systems are ideal for electronic data extraction for PBRN research. Stakeholders have a valuable, but typically underutilised, part to play in research. Development of an e-participation platform will facilitate stakeholder engagement. New Zealand is in a unique position to create an innovative, low cost, stakeholder-engaged PBRN. This type of PBRN would offer unparalleled research opportunities, and would strengthen New Zealand’s general practice research capacity. The more research information we have based on our New Zealand population, the more appropriate care we can provide. Establishing a stakeholder-engaged PBRN in New Zealand will promote and support transformational change within our health system. In June 2015 I had the privilege of attending the annual Practice Based Research Network (PBRN) Conference held in Bethesda, near Washington D.C. The conference is hosted by the North American Primary Care Research Group and the United States (US) Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. In this article I draw on the knowledge I gained at that conference and discuss its translation to New Zealand.

Abstract:

Background: Practice-based research networks (PBRNs) are means to connect practitioners with researchers and increase the body of rigorous research. PBRNs have been used in medicine for decades, but efforts to create PBRNs in massage therapy (MT) are limited. Purpose: Examine and describe the amount of and nature of MT-related publications derived from PBRN-supported endeavors. Publication Selection: Databases: Scopus, CINAHL, PubMed, ClinicalKey, EMBASE, Google Scholar. Keywords: massage, massage therapy, practice-based research network, PBRN. Key items: publication year, operating PBRN, article type, study design, general theme, massage therapist involvement/MT application. Inclusion Criteria: studies conducted through a PBRN using MT/massage therapists as an investigated factor; articles/editorials focused on PBRN-related MT research. Results: Initial database search resulted in 444 records; 40 articles included in analysis from database search, PBRN website access, and PBRN staff contacts. Publication dates ranged from 2005 to 2019, with nearly all published since 2013. Nine PBRNs published 29 articles based on 20 studies and sub-studies as research papers (n=21) or poster/oral presentation abstracts (n=8), and articles discussing the need for PBRNs in MT (n=8). Most research studies were conducted as surveys (n=21), examining practice characteristics (n=9) and patient perspectives/utilization (n=7). Three articles discussing PBRNs in MT were not connected to any specific PBRN. Conclusion: The PBRN model holds promise to further the field of MT, but implementation needs significant development. Promoting the creation and growth of massage-specific PBRNs should be a focus of professional associations and research institutions to expand the body of scientific evidence supporting MT. While the United States has had the most PBRN-related research efforts, a sustainable implementation model is not evident as highlighted by inactivity from US-based PBRNs after initial productivity. An Australian PBRN may serve as a needed sustainability model for massage-related PBRNs in the US if their productivity trajectory continues.

Abstract:

Background: Practice-based research networks (PBRNs) are groups of practitioners and researchers with an interest in designing, evaluating and disseminating solutions to the real-world problems of clinical practices. Objective: To evaluate the level of interest of community pharmacists in participating in a PBRN and to document the services such a network should offer. Method: In a survey of community pharmacists in Montreal, Quebec, and surrounding areas, a questionnaire was mailed to a random sample of 1250 pharmacists. Two of the 28 questions were related to PBRNs: one assessed the pharmacists’ interest in participating in a PBRN; the other sought their views on which services and activities this network should offer. Results: In total, 571 (45.7%) pharmacists completed the questionnaire, but 6 did not answer the questions about the PBRN. Of the respondents, 58.9% indicated they were “very interested” or “interested” in joining a PBRN, while 41.1% reported little or no interest. The most popular potential services identified were access to clinical tools developed in research projects (77.0%), access to continuing education training programs developed in research projects (75.9%), information about conferences on pharmacy practice research (64.1%) and participation in the development of new pharmaceutical practices (56.1%). Conclusion: This study suggests that the level of interest that community pharmacists have in PBRNs is sufficient to further evaluate how such networks may optimize and facilitate pharmacy practice research. Can Pharm J 2013;146:47-54.

Abstract:

Background and Objectives: Finding scholarship opportunities is a common struggle for family medicine residency programs, especially community-based programs. Participation in practice-based research networks (PBRNs) has been suggested as one option, but little is known about resident engagement in PBRNs. This study explores how PBRNs are currently involving family medicine residency programs and whether there are additional opportunities for engagement. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional survey of 126 primary care PBRN directors regarding residency program involvement in PBRN governance and scholarly activity. We used descriptive statistics to characterize our sample and bivariate analyses to assess association between involvement of residency programs in PBRNs and PBRN characteristics. Results: Most responding PBRNs (N=56, 44.4% response rate) included at least one residency program (80%) and many had residency faculty involved in projects (67.3%), though involvement of residents was less common (52.7%). When involved, residents were part of fewer projects but participated in the full range of research activities. Few PBRNs had deeper engagement with residencies such as written goals specifying their inclusion in projects (23.6%) or residency faculty participation in the PBRN’s governing body (45.5%). Most PBRNs not currently involving residents are interested in doing so (73.9%), and half of these have the resources to do this. Conclusions: Most family medicine and primary care PBRNs have some involvement with residency programs, usually at the faculty level. Building on current PBRN involvement and making connections between local PBRNs and residency programs where none exist represents an excellent opportunity for education and for growing the research capacity of the discipline.

Abstract:

When school nurses embrace evidence-based practice (EBP), higher-quality care is provided to students, their families, and the larger community. Despite this, school nursing has been slow to embrace EBP. Practice-Based Research Networks (PBRNs), which capitalize on the combined strengths of clinicians and researchers to study clinical questions, are one approach to overcoming barriers towards advancing evidence-based practice (EBP) in school nursing. This article will briefly review EBP and PBRNs. The development of Massachusetts School Nurse Research Network (MASNRN), a PBRN designed to investigate health issues common across schools and to validate school nursing practice, will then be described. Details regarding MASNRN’s mission, governance, communications systems, staffing, and network maintenance and funding will be explicated. MASNRN can serve as a model for PBRN development within the broader school nursing community.

Abstract:

Context Analysis of health care service models requires the collection and evaluation of basic practice characterization data. Practice-based research networks (PBRNs) provide a framework for gathering data useful in characterizing clinical practice. Objective To describe preliminary secondary school setting practice data from the Athletic Training Practice-Based Research Network (AT-PBRN). Design Descriptive study. Setting Secondary school athletic training facilities within the AT-PBRN. Patients or Other Participants Clinicians (n = 22) and their patients (n = 2523) from the AT-PBRN. Main Outcome Measure(s) A Web-based survey was used to obtain data on clinical practice site and clinician characteristics. Patient and practice characteristics were obtained via deidentified electronic medical record data collected between September 1, 2009, and April 1, 2011. Descriptive data regarding the clinician and CPS practice characteristics are reported as percentages and frequencies. Descriptive analysis of patient encounters and practice characteristic data was performed, with the percentages and frequencies of the type of injuries recorded at initial evaluation, type of treatment received at initial evaluation, daily treatment, and daily sign-in procedures. Results The AT-PBRN had secondary school sites in 7 states, and most athletic trainers at those sites (78.2%) had less than 5 years of experience. The secondary school sites within the AT-PBRN documented 2523 patients treated across 3140 encounters. Patients most frequently sought care for a current injury (61.3%), followed by preventive services (24.0%), and new injuries (14.7%). The most common diagnoses were ankle sprain/strain (17.9%), hip sprain/strain (12.5%), concussion (12.0%), and knee pain (2.5%). The most frequent procedures were athletic trainer evaluation (53.9%), hot- or cold-pack application (26.0%), strapping (10.3%), and therapeutic exercise (5.7%). The median number of treatments per injury was 3 (interquartile range = 2, 4; range = 2–19). Conclusions These preliminary data describe services provided by clinicians within the AT-PBRN and demonstrate the usefulness of the PBRN model for obtaining such data.

Abstract:

Purpose: The field of social work is evolving toward community-engaged, stakeholder-driven research in the context of evidence-based practice (EBP) and practice-based evidence (PBE). Methods: We propose that practice-based research networks (PBRNs) are an approach to conducting stakeholder-driven research that can be uniquely valuable for the field of social work. Results: We define the concept of a PBRN and demonstrate how it can address the development of complementary agendas for service improvement, social work science, policy development and advocacy, as well as highlight the challenges and benefits of participating in a PBRN. We provide details of our experiences with a mental health–based PBRN in Los Angeles County, the Recovery-Oriented Care Collaborative, to illustrate the processes outlined and inform our recommendations. Conclusions: PBRNs are an important form of community-based participatory research, which can help the field of social work with reconciling EBPs and PBE to improve service delivery.

Abstract:

Pharmacy practice-based research networks (PBRNs) are relatively new compared to their primary care forebears, representing a unique set of research challenges. Recruitment and retention of network members are essential to maintaining the integrity of the network and achieving its research goals. Many studies have evaluated recruitment and retention of practitioners to individual studies, while far fewer have reported on recruitment and retention to the network itself. This literature review summarizes current practices for PBRN member recruitment and retention from a pharmacy perspective.

Abstract:

AbstractPurposeClinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSAs) and Practice-Based Research Networks (PBRNs) have complementary missions. We replicated a 2008 survey of CTSA-PBRN leaders to understand how organizational relationships have evolved.MethodsWe surveyed 60 CTSA community engagement (CE) Directors and 135 PBRN Directors and analyzed data using between and within-group comparisons.ResultsIn total, 43% of CTSA CE Directors (26/60) and 42% of PBRN Directors (57/135) responded. Quantitative responses revealed growing alignment between CTSA/PBRN perceptions, with a few areas of discordance. CE Directors noted declining financial support for PBRNs. PBRN Directors identified greater CTSA effectiveness in PBRN engagement, consultation, and collaborative grant submissions. Qualitative data revealed divergent experiences across CTSA/PBRN programs.ConclusionsRelationships between CTSAs and PBRNs are maturing; for some that means strengthening and for others a growing vulnerability. Findings suggest a mutual opportunity for PBRNs and CTSAs around applied research. Studies to characterize exemplar CTSA-PBRN collaborations are needed.

Abstract:

Practice-based research networks (PBRNs) rely on a cadre of engaged members to participate in research projects. As pharmacist PBRNs increase in number, it is helpful to understand how members of other professions view their own participation in PBRNs and potential collaborative research endeavors with pharmacists. Due to their longer history of PBRN experience, physician PBRN members may have helpful advice for the establishment of pharmacy networks. The objectives of this study were to describe perceptions among a group of physician PBRN members about: Advice for developing a pharmacist PBRN, practice aspects that might benefit from collaborating with pharmacists who are part of a PBRN, and benefits and challenges of PBRN member participation. This study employed qualitative research methods. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with physician members of the Oklahoma Physicians Resource/Research Network, a primary care PBRN. Advice for establishing a pharmacist PBRN included identifying a champion, recruiting a core group, and conducting a needs assessment. Collaborative areas of interest included medication use management, patient education on chronic disease states, and physician education on new therapies. Participation benefits were categorized as personal satisfaction, improvement in practice quality improvement, advancement of specialty, peer interaction and learning, and real-time information and support. These findings offer insight into strategies for developing and sustaining pharmacist PBRNs and may inform pharmacist PBRN initiatives related to development, member recruitment and retention, and interprofessional project planning with physician PBRNs.

Abstract:

With real-world relevance and translatability as important goals, applied methodological approaches have arisen along the participatory continuum that value context and empower stakeholders to partner actively with academics throughout the research process. Community-based participatory research (CBPR) provides the gold standard for equitable, partnered research in traditional communities. Practice-based research networks (PBRNs) also have developed, coalescing communities of practice and of academics to identify, study, and answer practice-relevant questions. To optimize PBRN potential for expanding scientific knowledge, while bridging divides across knowledge production, dissemination, and implementation, we elucidate how PBRN partnerships can be strengthened by applying CBPR principles to build and maintain research collaboratives that empower practice partners. Examining the applicability of CBPR partnership principles to public health (PH) PBRNs, we conclude that PH-PBRNs can serve as authentic, sustainable CBPR partnerships, ensuring the co-production of new knowledge, while also improving and expanding the implementation and impact of research findings in real-world settings.

Abstract:

There are many aspects of the communities of practice (CoP) framework that are applicable to the development of a practice-based research network (PBRN), where the focus is upon building primary health-care workers’ research capacity and research questions. However, there is limited literature focussed on the application of CoP principles applied to research capacity building in Australia. The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate, through a case study, how a developing PBRN, the Illawarra and Southern Practice Research Network, successfully applied the theoretical foundation of CoP to develop a PBRN in a time- and resource-limited context.

Abstract:

Despite the rapid growth in research and R&D expenditures, the translation of research into practice is limited. One approach to increase the translation and utilization of research is practice based research networks. With the aim of strengthening evidence-based practice (EBP) within occupational health services in Sweden (OH-Services), a practice-based research network (PBRN-OSH) was developed. The PBRN-OSH includes researchers and representatives from end-users. This paper reports on the development, outputs and lessons learned in the PBRN-OSH. The PBRN-OSH resulted in several practice-based research projects as well as different measures to ensure EBP in OSH such as the governmentally sanctioned national guidelines for the OH-services. Moreover, results show that the competence in EBP increased among practitioners at the OH-services. Conducting research in a PBRN is more resource demanding; however, this does not imply that it is less cost effective. To succeed in increasing the utility of research findings via PBRN, resources must be invested into an infrastructure that supports collaboration in the PBRN, including costs for a variety of means of dissemination. Further, translation activities need to be included in academic career paths and reward systems if a major improvement in the impact and return of investments from research is to be expected.

Abstract:

Context To improve patient care, athletic training clinicians and researchers should work together to translate research findings into clinical practice. Problems with patient care observed in clinical practice should be translated into research frameworks, where they can be studied. Practice-based research networks (PBRNs) provide a compelling model for linking clinicians and researchers so they can conduct translational research to improve patient care. Objective To describe (1) the translational research model, (2) practice-based research as a mechanism for translating research findings into clinical practice, (3) the PBRN model and infrastructure, (4) the research potential using the PBRN model, and (5) protection of human participants in PBRN research. Description Translational research is the process of transforming research findings into health behavior that ultimately serves the public and attempts to bridge the gap between research and clinical practice. Practice-based research represents the final step in the translational research continuum and describes research conducted by providers in clinical practices. The PBRNs are characterized by an organizational framework that transcends a single site or study and serves as the clinical research “laboratory” for conducting comparative-effectiveness studies using patient-oriented measures. The PBRN approach to research has many benefits, including enhanced generalizability of results, pooling of resources, rapid patient recruitment, and collaborative opportunities. However, multisite research also brings challenges related to the protection of human participants and institutional review board oversight. Clinical and Research Advantages Athletic training studies frequently include relatively few participants and, consequently, are able to detect only large effects. The incidence of injury at a single site is sufficiently low that gathering enough data to adequately power a treatment study may take many years. Collaborative efforts across diverse clinical practice environments can yield larger patient samples to overcome the limitations inherent in single-site research efforts.

Abstract:

While the vast majority of people re­ceive their medical care in community primary and specialty care clinics, most clinical research is performed in academic tertiary care hospitals and hospital clin­ics. Practice-based research networks are most commonly collections of primary care practices that work together to ask and answer health questions for their patients and communities and are an integral part of the translational pathway from discovery to practice to community health. Community primary care practices are at the front line of health equity issues; equity in clinical care, equity in community health, equity in social determinants of health, and equity in health outcomes. Practice-based research networks can gather and combine data from dozens of communities, hundreds of prac­tices and thousands of patients to address health equity and disparities across the full spectrum of community and public health to clinical and primary care. This article will briefly outline the history of PBRNs, types of PBRNs, locations, topics, and patient outcomes over the past 25 years. Current PBRN efforts to address health disparities and improve health equity will be described. New PBRN opportunities to address health disparities and approaches to advance implementation research for health equity in the practice and community will be described. Readers will be challenged to consider ways to engage practice-based research networks in their health equity ef­forts.Ethn Dis. 2019;29(Suppl 1):113-118; doi:10.18865/ed.29.S1.113.

Abstract:

While the vast majority of people re­ceive their medical care in community primary and specialty care clinics, most clinical research is performed in academic tertiary care hospitals and hospital clin­ics. Practice-based research networks are most commonly collections of primary care practices that work together to ask and answer health questions for their patients and communities and are an integral part of the translational pathway from discovery to practice to community health. Community primary care practices are at the front line of health equity issues; equity in clinical care, equity in community health, equity in social determinants of health, and equity in health outcomes. Practice-based research networks can gather and combine data from dozens of communities, hundreds of prac­tices and thousands of patients to address health equity and disparities across the full spectrum of community and public health to clinical and primary care. This article will briefly outline the history of PBRNs, types of PBRNs, locations, topics, and patient outcomes over the past 25 years. Current PBRN efforts to address health disparities and improve health equity will be described. New PBRN opportunities to address health disparities and approaches to advance implementation research for health equity in the practice and community will be described. Readers will be challenged to consider ways to engage practice-based research networks in their health equity ef­forts.Ethn Dis. 2019;29(Suppl 1):113-118; doi:10.18865/ed.29.S1.113.

Abstract:

Background A survey was conducted to describe the benefits of and challenges to practitioner participation in the Practitioners Engaged in Applied Research and Learning (PEARL) Network, a dental practice-based research network (PBRN). The results were compared with results from medical PBRNs across different tiers of participation (based on practitioner-investigators previous involvement with PEARL research protocols). Methods A 39-item web-based survey addressed the benefits of PBRN participation on three levels: individual/practitioner, practice (office), and community/professional. Participants were also asked to rate challenges to participation. Results A total of 153 of 216 PEARL practitioner-investigators participated, a response rate of 71%. The majority (70%) was male, with a median of 23 years in private practice. ‘Means to stay informed of new developments in my profession’ was considered a ‘very important’ benefit for nearly three-quarters of the sample (71%). ‘Opportunity to improve clinical procedures’ was considered as ‘very important’ by 73% of respondents. In terms of benefits related to the community and profession, 65% of respondents reported ‘means to directly contribute to the evidence base of dental practice’ as being ‘very important’. ‘Disruption in practice routine/clinical practice’ was considered the most important challenge to participation. Conclusions The benefits of and challenges to participation identified did not differ across tiers of participation and were similar to benefits identified by participants in medical PBRNs. The results of this study will help facilitate the design of future PBRN protocols to encourage greater participation by the profession. Results suggest that practitioners with similar interests could be recruited to collaborative studies between medicine and dentistry.

Abstract:

Community pharmacies across the United States are forming clinically integrated networks (CINs) to facilitate the provision of patient-centered care. These networks need to continually innovate and demonstrate how their patient care services positively impact health outcomes. One way to do this is to develop a practice-based research network (PBRN) in partnership with existing CINs to perform robust outcome evaluations. The objective of this study was to learn pharmacists’ opinions on participating in research to facilitate the formation of a community pharmacy PBRN in Pennsylvania. A 20-item survey gathered information on pharmacists’ research interests, perceived benefits of research participation, and preferences on communication and patient engagement. Descriptive statistics and Chi-square tests were used to analyze quantitative data. Seventy-three participants completed the survey, with 47% representing independent pharmacies. The majority (96%) were interested in research opportunities and 86% believed improving workflow and patient care was the most valuable benefit. Eighty percent of pharmacists reported it is very important to demonstrate that pharmacists care about making patients’ health better. Connecting pharmacists with other health care providers was reported as very important by 75% of respondents. Pharmacists reported face-to-face communication (76%) as their preferred way to approach patients about research and 72% supported using student pharmacists to assist with patient engagement. The results from this study can inform others who are structuring processes and developing communication strategies for community pharmacy PBRNs, particularly in partnership with CINs.

Abstract:

OBJECTIVES To evaluate the practice-based research network (PBRN) potential within the Pediatric Pharmacy Advocacy Group (PPAG) membership and to identify characteristics associated with member willingness to join a PPAG PBRN. METHODS In October 2016, a 21-question survey was sent by email to approximately 900 PPAG pharmacist members (excluding students) using contact information contained in the PPAG membership database. The survey elucidated information regarding training, clinical and research experience, practice site information, and willingness to participate in a PPAG PBRN. Descriptive statistics described the potential PBRN and multivariate logistic regression determined respondent characteristics associated with willingness to join the PBRN. RESULTS Of 145 survey respondents (a 16% survey response rate), 92 selected “yes” regarding their willingness to participate in the PPAG PBRN. Acute care general pediatrics was the most common area where respondents desired to perform research (44.6% of “yes” respondents), with over 2500 patients/day collectively available. The most common selected limitations to research were time and size of available patient populations (59.8% and 47.8% of “yes” respondents, respectively). Cumulative hours/week members would be willing to devote to the PBRN was approximately 77 to 206. Publication of a retrospective study (OR 10.4, 95% CI 2.1–51.9, p = 0.004), research protected time (OR 4.9, 95% CI 1.4–17.8, p = 0.015), and affiliation with an academic medical center (OR 3.32, 95% CI 1.05–10.45, p = 0.04) were independently associated with willingness (a “yes” response) to join a PPAG PBRN. CONCLUSIONS Within the PPAG membership, there is sufficient interest, expertise, patient exposure, and member time to develop a PBRN focused on pediatric pharmacotherapy. The identified characteristics associated with willingness to join the PBRN can help focus efforts for member involvement, education, and recruitment to ensure sustainability of the PPAG PBRN.

Abstract:

Background and Objectives: A 2019 study found that between 2014 and 2017, family medicine residents had little improvement in self-assessed preparedness to lead quality improvement projects. This study explored the effectiveness of leveraging a practice-based research network (PBRN) across multiple family medicine residencies not only for implementing quality improvement projects, but also as a teaching tool designed to improve knowledge, attitudes, beliefs, and leadership skills in family medicine faculty and residents. Methods: Residents in family medicine residency programs and one community internal medicine program and family medicine teaching faculty participated in a PBRN-led quality improvement project (QIP) to improve colon cancer screening in their clinic. Of 101 participants, 79 (78%) were residents and 22 (22%) were faculty or attending physicians. Questions surveying participants’ knowledge and confidence related to QIP before and after the QIP were given. Results: Overall, participants reported an improvement in their basic understanding of QI concepts (P=.004). They also reported having sufficient staff and ancillary support to meaningfully participate (P=.033). Participants indicated they had more confidence in their ability to participate in a QI project (P=.002), initiate, design, and lead such a project (P=.001), and teach their peers and staff basic QI concepts (P<.001). Conclusions: PBRNs appear to be a unique way to subjectively improve residents’ confidence in their quality improvement skills. PBRNs should be further explored as a method for educating family medicine residents in quality improvement.

Abstract:

The NIDCR-supported Practice-based Research Network initiative presents dentistry with an unprecedented opportunity by providing a pathway for modifying and advancing the profession. It encourages practitioner participation in the transfer of science into practice for the improvement of patient care. PBRNs vary in infrastructure and design, and sustaining themselves in the long term may involve clinical trial validation by regulatory agencies. This paper discusses the PBRN concept in general and uses the New York University College of Dentistry’s Practitioners Engaged in Applied Research and Learning (PEARL) Network as a model to improve patient outcomes. The PEARL Network is structured to ensure generalizability of results, data integrity, and to provide an infrastructure in which scientists can address clinical practitioner research interests. PEARL evaluates new technologies, conducts comparative effectiveness research, participates in multidisciplinary clinical studies, helps evaluate alternative models of healthcare, educates and trains future clinical faculty for academic positions, expands continuing education to include “benchmarking” as a form of continuous feedback to practitioners, adds value to dental schools’ educational programs, and collaborates with the oral health care and pharmaceutical industries and medical PBRNs to advance the dental profession and further the integration of dental research and practice into contemporary healthcare (NCT00867997, NCT01268605).

Abstract:

The 21st Century Cures Act encourages the Food and Drug Administration to consider “real-world evidence” in its regulation of the safety and efficacy of drugs and devices. Many have interpreted this mandate to focus on non-randomized observational research. However, we suggest that regulatory science must also move from rarefied academic hospitals to community-based settings, where the vast majority of patients in fact receive care in the fragmented U.S. healthcare system. This move is especially important if innovations are to reach, and be validated in, more diverse populations. A solution can be found in the 183 Practiced-Based Research Networks (“PBRN”), i.e., groups of primary care clinicians and practices in all 50 states working to improve clinical care and translate research findings into practice. This symposium contribution seeks to (1) describe some of the common shortcomings of clinical trials, (2) explore the opportunities and challenges posed by use of real-world evidence as a basis for drug and device regulation, (3) briefly describe the history and evolution of PBRNs, and (4) articulate the challenges and opportunities for using PBRNs to fulfill the 21st Century Cures Act mandate for real-world evidence.

Abstract:

ObjectivesThe Australian Chiropractic Research Network (ACORN) practice-based research network (PBRN) cohort was established to provide sustainable infrastructure necessary to address lack of rigorous investigation and to bridge the research–practice gap focused on chiropractic care for future years. This paper presents the profile of chiropractors recruited to the ACORN PBRN, a nationally representative sample of chiropractors working in Australia.DesignCross-sectional analysis of baseline data from a cohort study of chiropractors in Australia.SettingAll registered chiropractors in Australia were invited to participate in the ACORN study and those who completed a practitioner questionnaire and consent form were included in the PBRN cohort.ParticipantsA total of 1680 chiropractors (36%) were recruited to the cohort database. The average age of the PBRN participants is 41.9 years and 63% are male. The vast majority of the PBRN participants hold a university degree.ResultsGeneral practitioners were identified as the most popular referral source for chiropractic care and low back pain and neck pain were the most common conditions ‘often’ treated by the PBRN chiropractors. The chiropractors in this PBRN cohort rated high velocity, low amplitude adjustment/manipulation/mobilisation as the most commonly used technique/method and soft tissue therapy as the most frequently employed musculoskeletal intervention in their patient management.ConclusionsThe ACORN PBRN cohort constitutes the largest coverage of any single healthcare profession via a national voluntary PBRN providing a sustainable resource for future follow-up. The ACORN cohort provides opportunities for further nested substudies related to chiropractic care, chiropractors, their patients and a vast range of broader healthcare issues with a view to helping build a diverse but coordinated research programme and further research capacity building around Australian chiropractic.

Abstract:

AbstractIntroduction:People aging with long-term physical disabilities (PAwLTPD), meaning individuals with onset of disability from birth through midlife, often require long-term support services (LTSS) to remain independence. The LTSS system is fragmented into aging and disability organizations with little communication between them. In addition, there are currently no evidence-based LTSS-type programs listed on the Administration for Community Living website that have been demonstrated to be effective for PAwLTPD. Because of these gaps, we have developed a community-based research network (CBRN), drawing on the practice-based research network model (PBRN), to bring together aging and disability organizations to address the lack of evidence-based programs for PAwLTPD.Materials and Methods:Community-based organizations serving PAwLTPD across the state of Missouri were recruited to join the CBRN. A formative process evaluation of the network was conducted after a year to evaluate the effectiveness of the network.Results:Nine community-based organizations across the state of Missouri joined the CBRN. CBRN members include three centers for independent living (CILs), three area agencies on aging (AAAs), one CIL/AAA hybrid, one non-CIL disability organization, and one non-AAA aging organization. To date, we have held seven meetings, provided educational opportunities for CBRN members, and launched an inaugural research study within the CBRN. Formative evaluation data indicate that CBRN members feel that participation in the CBRN is beneficial.Conclusion:The PBRN model appears to be a feasible framework for use with community-based organizations to facilitate communication between agencies and to support research aimed at addressing the needs of PAwLTPD.

Abstract:

Abstract Objectives The aim of this study is to determine the feasibility of conducting clinical research using electronic dental record (EDR) data from U.S. solo and small-group general dental practices in the National Dental Practice-Based Research Network (network) and evaluate the data completeness and correctness before performing survival analyses of root canal treatment (RCT) and posterior composite restorations (PCR). Methods Ninety-nine network general dentistry practices that used Dentrix or EagleSoft EDR shared de-identified data of patients who received PCR and/or RCT on permanent teeth through October 31, 2015. We evaluated the data completeness and correctness, summarized practice, and patient characteristics and summarized the two treatments by tooth type and arch location. Results Eighty-two percent of practitioners were male, with a mean age of 49 and 22.4 years of clinical experience. The final dataset comprised 217,887 patients and 11,289,594 observations, with the observation period ranging from 0 to 37 years. Most patients (73%) were 18 to 64 years old; 56% were female. The data were nearly 100% complete. Eight percent of observations had incorrect data, such as incorrect tooth number or surface, primary teeth, supernumerary teeth, and tooth ranges, indicating multitooth procedures instead of PCR or RCT. Seventy-three percent of patients had dental insurance information; 27% lacked any insurance information. While gender was documented for all patients, race/ethnicity was missing in the dataset. Conclusion This study established the feasibility of using EDR data integrated from multiple distinct solo and small-group network practices for longitudinal studies to assess treatment outcomes. The results laid the groundwork for a learning health system that enables practitioners to learn about their patients' outcomes by using data from their own practice.

Abstract:

102 Background: Sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) is a quality indicator for breast cancer care. Provider-based research networks (PBRNs) promote diffusion of innovations like SLNB into clinical practice; however, evidence is limited. We examined the diffusion of SLNB for early-stage breast cancer through the Community Clinical Oncology Program (CCOP), a community-based PBRN and its interaction with medical school affiliation. Methods: We identified women undergoing breast conserving surgery with axillary staging for stage I or II breast cancer between January 2000 and December 2003 using Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results-Medicare data (n=6,226). The primary outcome was receipt of SLNB vs. ALND. Exposure was constructed by combining information on the CCOP affiliation of the preforming physician with the medical school affiliation of the hospital. Covariates included race, age, marital status, education, Medicaid eligibility, comorbidity, tumor grade, stage, estrogen receptor status, year of diagnosis, SEER region, and NCI cancer center designation. Multivariable generalized linear modeling with generalized estimating equations was used to measure association between CCOP exposure and receipt of SLNB. Results: Women who saw a CCOP physician at a hospital affiliated with a medical school had a three-fold increase in odds of receiving SLNB compared to non-CCOP women. In contrast, the odds of SLNB were equivalent when looking in women who were seen by a CCOP physician but differed only by their hospital affiliation. Conclusions: Women seen by CCOP-affiliated physicians were more likely to receive SLNB; while medical school affiliation did appear to significantly impact receipt. Innovative, high-quality cancer care can be facilitated PBRNs such as the NCI CCOP program. There must be mechanisms by which providers are exposed to advances in clinical practice outside of organizational affiliations. [Table: see text]

Abstract:

6104 Background: Sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) for breast cancer was introduced into clinical practice in the late 1990s as an alternative to axillary lymph node dissection (ALND). Provider-based research networks (PBRNs) are believed to promote diffusion of innovations like SLNB into clinical practice; however, evidence of this association is limited. This study examines the diffusion of SLNB for early-stage breast cancer through the Community Clinical Oncology Program (CCOP), a community-based PBRN. Methods: We identified women undergoing breast conserving surgery with axillary staging for stage I or II breast cancer between January 2000 and December 2003 using Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results-Medicare data (n=6,226). The primary outcome was receipt of SLNB vs. ALND, and exposure was care received from CCOP physicians or institutions between diagnosis and surgery. Exposure was quantified as both a binary measure of ever seeing a CCOP, and as a proportion of all their claims associated with a CCOP. Covariates included race, age, marital status, education, Medicaid eligibility, comorbidity, tumor grade, stage, estrogen receptor status, year of diagnosis, SEER region, and other institutional characteristics such as NCI center designation, cooperative group, and medical school affiliation. Multivariable generalized linear modeling with generalized estimating equations was used to measure association between CCOP exposure and receipt of SLNB. Results: Women who received a higher proportion of their care from a CCOP-affiliated physician or hospital were more likely to receive SLNB. A 10% increase in the proportion of CCOP-affiliated claims was associated with a greater odds of receiving SLNB (OR 1.14; 95% CI 1.08, 1.20), after controlling for covariates. Similarly, sensitivity analysis of the binary indicator of CCOP exposure also showed greater odds of receiving SLNB (OR 1.32; 95%CI 1.01, 1.74). Conclusions: The quality of cancer care delivered in community settings can be influenced by provider-based research networks. Our findings contribute to the growing body of evidence that community-based PBRNs can facilitate adoption of cancer innovations outside of academic medical centers.

Abstract:

Introduction: The American Dental Association recommends that dentists use a prescription drug monitoring program (PDMP) prior to prescribing an opioid for acute pain management. Objective: The objective of this study was to examine dentists’ experiences using their state PDMP, as well as the impact that state-mandated registration policies, mandated use policies, and practice characteristics had on the frequency with which dentists used their PDMP. Methods: We conducted a web-based cross-sectional survey among practicing dentist members of the National Dental Practice-Based Research Network ( n = 805). The survey assessed prescribing practices for pain management and implementation of risk mitigation strategies, including PDMP use. Survey data were linked with network Enrollment Questionnaire data to include practitioner demographics and practice characteristics. Results: Nearly half of respondents ( n = 375, 46.6%) reported having never accessed a PDMP, with the most common reasons for nonaccess being lack of awareness ( n = 214, 57.1%) and lack of knowledge regarding registration and use ( n = 94, 25.1%). The majority of PDMP users reported the program to be very helpful (58.1%) or somewhat helpful (31.6%). Dentists reported that PDMP use most often did not change their intended prescribing behavior (40.2%), led them not to prescribe an opioid (33.5%), or led them to prescribe fewer opioid doses (25.5%). Presence of a mandated use policy was significantly associated with increased frequency of PDMP use across a variety of situations, including prior to 1) prescribing any opioid for pain management, 2) issuing refills, 3) prescribing to new patients, and 4) prescribing to patients deemed high risk. Conclusion: Findings suggest that the majority of dentists find PDMPs helpful in informing their opioid-prescribing practices. Whereas the existence of a state-mandated use policy is a consistent predictor of dentists’ PDMP use, outreach and education efforts may overcome key barriers to use identified in this study. Knowledge Transfer Statement: Findings from this national survey suggest that the majority of practicing dentists find PDMPs helpful in informing their opioid-prescribing practices; however, consistent PDMP use was not common. Whereas the existence of a state-mandated use policy is a consistent predictor of dentists’ PDMP use, outreach and education efforts may overcome key barriers to use identified in this study.

Abstract:

Background: Reserve Officers’ Training Corps (ROTC) cadets must meet the same physical standards as active duty military servicemembers and undergo organized physical training (PT). ROTC participation, like all physical activity, can result in training-related musculoskeletal injury (MSKI), and of course, cadets could sustain MSKI outside of ROTC. However, MSKI incidence in ROTC programs is largely unknown. Purpose: To describe patient and injury demographics of MSKI in 5 universities’ Army ROTC programs. Study Design: Descriptive epidemiology study. Methods: A retrospective chart review of electronic medical records was performed using the Athletic Training Practice-Based Research Network (AT-PBRN). Athletic trainers at 5 clinical practice sites within the AT-PBRN documented injury assessments via a web-based electronic medical record system. Medical records during the 2017-2018 and 2018-2019 academic years were used for analysis. Summary statistics were calculated for age, sex, height, body mass, military science year, training ability group, mechanism of injury, activity type associated with injury, anatomic location of injury, participation status, injury severity, and diagnosis. Results: A total of 364 unique injuries were documented. Cadets in the most advanced fitness group (Alpha; n = 148/364) and in their third year of training (n = 97/364) presented with the most injuries. Injuries most commonly occurred during PT (n = 165/364). Insidious onset (n = 146/364) and noncontact (n = 115/364) mechanisms of injury were prevalent. The most frequent anatomic location of injury was the knee (n = 71/364) followed by the ankle (n = 57/364). General sprain/strain was the most frequent International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification diagnosis code reported (n = 34/364). Conclusion: The knee was the most frequent location of MSKI in ROTC participants, and most MSKIs had insidious onset. Cadets with higher injury frequency were high achieving (Alpha) and in a critical time point in ROTC (military science year 3). The majority of MSKIs can be attributed to ROTC training, with PT being the most frequent activity associated with injury. Civilian health care providers, from whom ROTC cadets will most likely seek medical attention, need to be aware of ROTC physical demands as well as the characteristics of training-related injuries.