ArticleImplementation research and practice
Utilizing the Practical Robust, Implementation and Sustainability Model to Explore the Primary Care Setting Contextual Determinants of Implementing Patient-Reported Outcomes Measures to Support Opioid Use Disorder Care.
Article in Implementation research and practice. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) experience low treatment retention in primary care. Measurement-based care informed by patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) is an evidence-based intervention to improve OUD outcomes. The study explored the key contextual factors to support the future planning of a PROM-based intervention package to improve primary care-based OUD treatment retention. Method: A qualitative contextual inquiry used the Practical, Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model to assess the following contextual domains: Perspective of Intervention Characteristics, Partner Characteristics, and Implementation and Sustainability Infrastructure. Data were collected through interviews with system administrators, clinicians, and patients. Prioritized themes were triangulated with focus groups of community members with lived experience or interest in substance use care. Rapid thematic analysis identified emergent themes. Results: We conducted 21 interviews (6 administrators, 10 clinicians, 5 patients) and two focus groups (22 community members). Fifteen themes emerged which fell into three categories: (1) maintaining patient trust while PROMs are integrated into workflows, (2) perspectives on PROM content and use, and (3) implementation considerations. PROMs were viewed as tools for enhancing communication, tracking recovery in a holistic and individualized way, and informing care decisions at the individual- and system-level. Patients emphasized trust, confidentiality, and potential negative consequences of PROM results being stored in health records. Clinicians highlighted the need for workflow integration and result interpretation support. All groups recommended PROMs be embedded in the electronic health record with collection managed by the integrated substance use treatment counselors. Conclusions: The qualitative contextual inquiry identified partner perspectives relevant to the implementation of PROMs in primary care settings. The patient desire for trust and confidentiality may be at odds with integrating PROM results into existing systems. Continued engagement with implementation partners in a process of co-creation may improve implementation to support patient-centered, recovery-oriented care and enhance retention in primary care settings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.