BACKGROUND: Healthcare systems are increasingly implementing programs for high-need patients, who often have multiple chronic conditions and complex social situations. Little, however, is known about quality indicators that might guide healthcare organizations and providers in improving care for high-need patients. We sought to conduct a systematic review to identify potential quality indicators for high-need patients. METHODS: This systematic review (CRD42020215917) searched PubMed, CINAHL, and EMBASE; guideline clearing houses ECRI and GIN; and Google scholar. We included publications suggesting, evaluating, and utilizing indicators to assess quality of care for high-need patients. Critical appraisal of the indicators addressed the development process, endorsement and adoption, and characteristics, such as feasibility. We standardized indicators by patient population subgroups to facilitate comparisons across different indicator groups. RESULTS: The search identified 6964 citations. Of these, 1382 publications were obtained as full text, and 53 studies met inclusion criteria. We identified over 1700 quality indicators across studies. Quality indicator characteristics varied widely. The scope of the selected indicators ranged from detailed criterion (e.g., "annual eye exam") to very broad categories (e.g., "care coordination"). Some publications suggested disease condition-specific indicators (e.g., diabetes), some used condition-independent criteria (e.g., "documentation of the medication list in the medical record available to all care agencies"), and some publications used a mixture of indicator types. DISCUSSION: We identified and evaluated existing quality indicators for a complex, heterogeneous patient group. Although some quality indicators were not disease-specific, we found very few that accounted for social determinants of health and behavioral factors. More research is needed to develop quality indicators that address patient risk factors.

Background Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine hesitancy is a growing concern in the United States, yet understudied among racial/ethnic minority parents. We conducted qualitative research to understand parental HPV vaccine hesitancy and inform community-specific, multilevel approaches to improve HPV vaccination among diverse populations in Los Angeles. Methods We recruited American Indian/Alaska Native (AI/AN), Hispanic/Latino/a (HL) and Chinese parents of unvaccinated children (9–17 years) from low-HPV vaccine uptake regions in Los Angeles for virtual focus groups (FGs). FGs were conducted in English (2), Mandarin (1), and Spanish (1) between June-August 2021. One English FG was with AI/AN-identifying parents. FGs prompted discussions about vaccine knowledge, sources of information/hesitancy, logistical barriers and interpersonal, healthcare and community interactions regarding HPV vaccination. Guided by the social-ecological model, we identified multilevel emergent themes related to HPV vaccination. Results Parents (n = 20) in all FGs reported exposure to HPV vaccine information from the internet and other sources, including in-language media (Mandarin) and health care providers (Spanish). All FGs expressed confusion around the vaccine and had encountered HPV vaccine misinformation. FGs experienced challenges navigating relationships with children, providers, and friends/family for HPV vaccine decision-making. At the community-level, historical events contributed to mistrust (e.g., forced community displacement [AI/AN]). At the societal-level, transportation, and work schedules (Spanish, AI/AN) were barriers to vaccination. Medical mistrust contributed to HPV vaccine hesitancy across the analysis levels. Conclusion Our findings highlight the importance of multilevel influences on parental HPV vaccine hesitancy and decision-making and the need for community-specific messaging to combat medical mistrust and other barriers to HPV vaccination among racial/ethnic minority communities.

HPV vaccination rates remain below target levels among adolescents in the United States, which is particularly concerning in safety-net populations with persistent disparities in HPV-associated cancer burden. Perspectives on evidence-based strategies (EBS) for HPV vaccination among key implementation participants, internal and external to clinics, can provide a better understanding of why these disparities persist. We conducted virtual interviews and focus groups, guided by the Practice Change Model, with clinic members (providers, clinic leaders, and clinic staff) and community members (advocates, parents, policy-level, and payers) in Los Angeles and New Jersey to understand common and divergent perspectives on and experiences with HPV vaccination in safety-net primary care settings. Fifty-eight interviews and seven focus groups were conducted (n = 65 total). Clinic members (clinic leaders n = 7, providers n = 12, and clinic staff n = 6) revealed conflicting HPV vaccine messaging, lack of shared motivation to reduce missed opportunities and improve workflows, and non-operability between clinic electronic health records and state immunization registries created barriers for implementing effective strategies. Community members (advocates n = 8, policy n = 11, payers n = 8, and parents n = 13) described lack of HPV vaccine prioritization among payers, a reliance on advocates to lead national agenda setting and facilitate local implementation, and opportunities to support and engage schools in HPV vaccine messaging and adolescents in HPV vaccine decision-making. Participants indicated the COVID-19 pandemic complicated prioritization of HPV vaccination but also created opportunities for change. These findings highlight design and selection criteria for identifying and implementing EBS (changing the intervention itself, or practice-level resources versus external motivators) that bring internal and external clinic partners together for targeted approaches that account for local needs in improving HPV vaccine uptake within safety-net settings.

IntroductionWe explored priorities and perspectives on health policy and payer strategies for improving HPV vaccination rates in safety-net settings in the United States.MethodsWe conducted qualitative interviews with policy and payer representatives in the greater Los Angeles region and state of New Jersey between December 2020 and January 2022. Practice Change Model domains guided data collection, thematic analysis, and interpretation.ResultsFive themes emerged from interviews with 11 policy and 8 payer participants, including: (1) payer representatives not prioritizing HPV vaccination specifically in incentive-driven clinic metrics; (2) policy representatives noting region-specific HPV vaccine policy options; (3) inconsistent motivation across policy/payer groups to improve HPV vaccination; (4) targeting of HPV vaccination in quality improvement initiatives suggested across policy/payer groups; and (5) COVID-19 pandemic viewed as both barrier and opportunity for HPV vaccination improvement across policy/payer groups.DiscussionOur findings indicate opportunities for incorporating policy and payer perspectives into HPV vaccine improvement processes. We identified a need to translate effective policy and payer strategies, such as pay-for-performance programs, to improve HPV vaccination within safety-net settings. COVID-19 vaccination strategies and community efforts create potential policy windows for expanding HPV vaccine awareness and access.

Tobacco use among cancer patients is associated with an increased mortality and poorer outcomes, yet two-thirds of patients continue using following diagnosis, with disproportionately higher use among racial/ethnic minority and low socioeconomic status patients. Tobacco treatment services that are effectively tailored and adapted to population characteristics and multilevel context specific to settings serving diverse patients are needed to improve tobacco cessation among cancer patients. We examined tobacco use screening and implementation needs for tobacco treatment services to inform equitable and accessible delivery within a large comprehensive cancer center in the greater Los Angeles region. We conducted a multi-modal, mixed methods assessment using electronic medical records (EMR), and clinic stakeholder surveys and interviews (guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research). Approximately 45% of patients (n = 11,827 of 26,030 total) had missing tobacco use history in their EMR. Several demographic characteristics (gender, age, race/ethnicity, insurance) were associated with greater missing data prevalence. In surveys (n = 32), clinic stakeholders endorsed tobacco screening and cessation services, but indicated necessary improvements for screening/referral procedures. During interviews (n = 13), providers/staff reported tobacco screening was important, but level of priority differed as well as how often and who should screen. Several barriers were noted, including patients’ language/cultural barriers, limited time during visits, lack of smoking cessation training, and insurance coverage. While stakeholders indicated high interest in tobacco use assessment and cessation services, EMR and interview data revealed opportunities to improve tobacco use screening across patient groups. Implementing sustainable system-level tobacco cessation programs at institutions requires leadership support, staff training, on routine screening, and intervention and referral strategies that meet patients’ linguistic/cultural needs.