BackgroundIt is challenging to conduct and quickly disseminate findings from in-depth qualitative analyses, which can impede timely implementation of interventions because of its time-consuming methods. To better understand tradeoffs between the need for actionable results and scientific rigor, we present our method for conducting a framework-guided rapid analysis (RA) and a comparison of these findings to an in-depth analysis of interview transcripts.MethodsSet within the context of an evaluation of a successful academic detailing (AD) program for opioid prescribing in the Veterans Health Administration, we developed interview guides informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) and interviewed 10 academic detailers (clinical pharmacists) and 20 primary care providers to elicit detail about successful features of the program. For the RA, verbatim transcripts were summarized using a structured template (based on CFIR); summaries were subsequently consolidated into matrices by participant type to identify aspects of the program that worked well and ways to facilitate implementation elsewhere. For comparison purposes, we later conducted an in-depth analysis of the transcripts. We described our RA approach and qualitatively compared the RA and deductive in-depth analysis with respect to consistency of themes and resource intensity.ResultsIntegrating the CFIR throughout the RA and in-depth analysis was helpful for providing structure and consistency across both analyses. Findings from the two analyses were consistent. The most frequently coded constructs from the in-depth analysis aligned well with themes from the RA, and the latter methods were sufficient and appropriate for addressing the primary evaluation goals. Our approach to RA was less resource-intensive than the in-depth analysis, allowing for timely dissemination of findings to our operations partner that could be integrated into ongoing implementation.ConclusionsIn-depth analyses can be resource-intensive. If consistent with project needs (e.g., to quickly produce information to inform ongoing implementation or to comply with a policy mandate), it is reasonable to consider using RA, especially when faced with resource constraints. Our RA provided valid findings in a short timeframe, enabling identification of actionable suggestions for our operations partner.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s13012-019-0853-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Objective To examine sociodemographic characteristics associated with use of My HealtheVet (MHV) by veterans living with HIV. Materials and Methods Veterans Health Administration administrative data were used to identify a cohort of veterans living with HIV in fiscal years 2011–2017. Descriptive analyses were conducted to examine demographic characteristics and racial/ethnic differences in MHV registration and tool use. Chi-Square tests were performed to assess associations between race/ethnicity and MHV registration and tool use. Results The highest proportion of registrants were non-Hispanic White veterans living with HIV (59%), followed by Hispanic/Latino (55%) and Black veterans living with HIV (40%). Chi-Square analyses revealed that: (1) MHV account registration was significantly lower for both Black and Hispanic/Latino veterans in comparison to White veterans and (2) Black MHV registrants were less likely to utilize any MHV tool compared with White MHV registrants including Blue Button record download, medication refills, secure messaging, lab, and appointment views. Discussion In line with prior research on personal health record (PHR) use among non-veteran populations, these findings show racial and ethnic inequities in MHV use among veterans living with HIV. Racial and ethnic minorities may be less likely to use PHRs for a myriad of reasons, including PHR privacy concerns, decreased educational attainment, and limited access to the internet. Conclusion This is the first study to examine racial and ethnic disparities in use of MHV tools by veterans living with HIV and utilizing Veterans Health Administration health care. Future research should examine potential moderating factors linked to decreased PHR use among racial and ethnic minority veterans, which could inform strategies to increase PHR use among vulnerable populations.