Department of Public Health Sciences, Penn State College of Medicine, Hershey, PA, USA.
Penn State Cancer Institute, Hershey, PA, USA.
Transl Behav Med. 2019 Jan 1;9(1):23-31. doi: 10.1093/tbm/iby008.
State health departments commonly use quality improvement coaching as an implementation strategy for improving low human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination coverage, but such coaching can be resource intensive. To explore opportunities for improving efficiency, we compared in-person and webinar delivery of coaching sessions on implementation outcomes, including reach, acceptability, and delivery cost. In 2015, we randomly assigned 148 high-volume primary care clinics in Illinois, Michigan, and Washington State to receive either in-person or webinar coaching. Coaching sessions lasted about 1 hr and used our Immunization Report Card to facilitate assessment and feedback. Clinics served over 213,000 patients ages 11-17. We used provider surveys and delivery cost assessment to collect implementation data. This report is focused exclusively on the implementation aspects of the intervention. More providers attended in-person than webinar coaching sessions (mean 9 vs. 5 providers per clinic, respectively, p = .004). More providers shared the Immunization Report Card at clinic staff meetings in the in-person than webinar arm (49% vs. 20%; p = .029). In both arms, providers' belief that their clinics' HPV vaccination coverage was too low increased, as did their self-efficacy to help their clinics improve (p < .05). Providers rated coaching sessions in the two arms equally highly on acceptability. Delivery cost per clinic was $733 for in-person coaching versus $461 for webinar coaching. In-person and webinar coaching were well received and yielded improvements in provider beliefs and self-efficacy regarding HPV vaccine quality improvement. In summary, in-person coaching cost more than webinar coaching per clinic reached, but reached more providers. Further implementation research is needed to understand how and for whom webinar coaching may be appropriate.
州卫生部门通常将质量改进辅导作为提高低人乳头瘤病毒 (HPV) 疫苗接种率的实施策略,但这种辅导可能需要大量资源。为了探索提高效率的机会,我们比较了现场和网络研讨会两种辅导课程的实施效果,包括覆盖面、可接受性和交付成本。2015 年,我们随机将伊利诺伊州、密歇根州和华盛顿州的 148 家高容量初级保健诊所分配到现场或网络研讨会辅导组。辅导课程持续约 1 小时,并使用我们的免疫报告卡来促进评估和反馈。诊所为 213000 多名 11-17 岁的患者提供服务。我们使用提供者调查和交付成本评估来收集实施数据。本报告专门关注干预措施的实施方面。现场辅导组的参与者多于网络研讨会辅导组(平均每个诊所分别有 9 名和 5 名提供者,p =.004)。在现场辅导组中,更多的提供者在诊所员工会议上分享免疫报告卡(49%比 20%;p =.029)。在两个组中,提供者都认为他们诊所的 HPV 疫苗接种率太低,而且提高诊所疫苗接种率的信心也有所增强(p <.05)。提供者对两个组的辅导课程接受程度评价相同。每个诊所的现场辅导交付成本为 733 美元,网络研讨会辅导为 461 美元。现场和网络研讨会辅导都受到了好评,并在 HPV 疫苗质量改进方面提高了提供者的信念和自我效能感。总之,现场辅导的每个诊所覆盖人数多于网络研讨会辅导,但参与者人数更多。需要进一步的实施研究来了解网络研讨会辅导如何以及适合哪些人。