WHAT'S KNOWN ON THIS SUBJECT: Despite proven health benefits, human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination rates are among the lowest of all routine immunizations. No previous largescale trial has compared the benefit of automated decision support directed at clinicians, families, or both in any context. WHAT THIS STUDY ADDS:We found that a clinician-focused intervention was most effective for initiating the HPV vaccine series, whereas a family-focused intervention supported completion. Decision support directed at both clinicians and families most effectively promotes HPV vaccine series receipt. abstract OBJECTIVE: To improve human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination rates, we studied the effectiveness of targeting automated decision support to families, clinicians, or both.METHODS: Twenty-two primary care practices were cluster-randomized to receive a 3-part clinician-focused intervention (education, electronic health record-based alerts, and audit and feedback) or none. Overall, 22 486 girls aged 11 to 17 years due for HPV vaccine dose 1, 2, or 3 were randomly assigned within each practice to receive family-focused decision support with educational telephone calls. Randomization established 4 groups: family-focused, clinician-focused, combined, and no intervention. We measured decision support effectiveness by final vaccination rates and time to vaccine receipt, standardized for covariates and limited to those having received the previous dose for HPV #2 and 3. The 1-year study began in May 2010. RESULTS:Final vaccination rates for HPV #1, 2, and 3 were 16%, 65%, and 63% among controls. The combined intervention increased vaccination rates by 9, 8, and 13 percentage points, respectively. The control group achieved 15% vaccination for HPV #1 and 50% vaccination for HPV #2 and 3 after 318, 178, and 215 days. The combined intervention significantly accelerated vaccination by 151, 68, and 93 days. The clinician-focused intervention was more effective than the familyfocused intervention for HPV #1, but less effective for HPV #2 and 3.CONCLUSIONS: A clinician-focused intervention was most effective for initiating the HPV vaccination series, whereas a family-focused intervention promoted completion. Decision support directed at both clinicians and families most effectively promotes HPV vaccine series receipt.

BackgroundDespite national recommendations, as of 2009 human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination rates were low with < 30% of adolescent girls fully vaccinated. Research on barriers to vaccination has focused separately on parents, adolescents, or clinicians and not on the decision making process among all participants at the point of care. By incorporating three distinct perspectives, we sought to generate hypotheses to inform interventions to increase vaccine receipt.MethodsBetween March and June, 2010, we conducted qualitative interviews with 20 adolescent-mother-clinician triads (60 individual interviews) directly after a preventive visit with the initial HPV vaccine due. Interviews followed a guide based on published HPV literature, involved 9 practices, and continued until saturation of the primary themes was achieved. Purposive sampling balanced adolescent ages and practice type (urban resident teaching versus non-teaching). Using a modified grounded theory approach, we analyzed data with NVivo8 software both within and across triads to generate primary themes.ResultsThe study population was comprised of 20 mothers (12 Black, 9 < high school diploma), 20 adolescents (ten 11-12 years old), and 20 clinicians (16 female). Nine adolescents received the HPV vaccine at the visit, eight of whom were African American. Among the 11 not vaccinated, all either concurrently received or were already up-to-date on Tdap and MCV4. We did not observe systematic patterns of vaccine acceptance or refusal based on adolescent age or years of clinician experience. We identified 3 themes: (1) Parents delayed, rather than refused vaccination, and when they expressed reluctance, clinicians were hesitant to engage them in discussion. (2) Clinicians used one of two strategies to present the HPV vaccine, either presenting it as a routine vaccine with no additional information or presenting it as optional and highlighting risks and benefits. (3) Teens considered themselves passive participants in decision making, even when parents and clinicians reported including them in the process.ConclusionsPrograms to improve HPV vaccine delivery in primary care should focus on promoting effective parent-clinician communication. Research is needed to evaluate strategies to help clinicians engage reluctant parents and passive teens in discussion and measure the impact of distinct clinician decision making approaches on HPV vaccine delivery.

WHAT'S KNOWN ON THIS SUBJECT: Shared decision-making (SDM) is recommended when multiple evidence-based treatments exist and families value options differently. Although national guidelines prioritize SDM in attention-deficit/ hyperactivity disorder, little is known regarding how parents and clinicians understand and implement SDM in practice. WHAT THIS STUDY ADDS:We found that practical barriers limit the consideration of evidence-based options in SDM, key participants often are excluded from the process, and, although parents and clinicians view SDM favorably, they understand SDM differently. Implications for clinical practice are discussed. abstract OBJECTIVE:The goal was to compare how parents and clinicians understand shared decision-making (SDM) in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), a prototype for SDM in pediatrics. METHODS:We conducted semi-structured interviews with 60 parents of children 6 to 12 years of age with ADHD (50% black and 43% college educated) and 30 primary care clinicians with varying experience. Open-ended interviews explored how pediatric clinicians and parents understood SDM in ADHD. Interviews were taped, transcribed, and then coded. Data were analyzed by using a modified grounded theory approach. RESULTS: Parents and clinicians both viewed SDM favorably. However, parents described SDM as a partnership between equals, with physicians providing medical expertise and the family contributing in-depth knowledge of the child. In contrast, clinicians understood SDM as a means to encourage families to accept clinicians' preferred treatment. These findings affected care because parents mistrusted clinicians whose presentation they perceived as biased. Both groups discussed how real-world barriers limit the consideration of evidence-based options, and they emphasized the importance of engaging professionals, family members, and/or friends in SDM. Although primary themes did not differ according to race, white parents more commonly received support from medical professionals in their social networks. CONCLUSIONS: Despite national guidelines prioritizing SDM in ADHD, challenges to implementing the process persist. Results suggest that, to support SDM in ADHD, modifications are needed at the practice and policy levels, including clinician training, incorporation of decision aids and improved strategies to facilitate communication, and efforts to ensure that evidence-based treatment is accessible.

To describe obesity prevention practices and environments in Head Start, the largest federally funded early childhood education program in the United States. Design: Self-administered survey as part of the Study of Healthy Activity and Eating Practices and Environments in Head Start (SHAPES).

Head Start provides early childhood education to nearly one million low-income children, through federal grants to more than 2,000 local programs. About one-third of children who enter Head Start are overweight or obese. But program directors face difficulty in implementing policies and practices to address obesity-and in our national survey, they identified the key barriers as lack of time, money, and knowledge. Also, parents and staff sometimes shared cultural beliefs that were inconsistent with preventing obesity, such as the belief that heavier children are healthier. Minimizing those barriers will require federal resources to increase staff training and technical assistance, develop staff wellness programs, and provide healthy meals and snacks.