1,720,991 research outputs found
Specifying sickle cell disease interventions: a study protocol of the Sickle Cell Disease Implementation Consortium (SCDIC)
Full text linkAbstract Background Sickle cell disease (SCD) is an inherited blood disorder that results in a lifetime of anemia, severe pain, and end-organ damage that can lead to premature mortality. While the SCD field has made major medical advances, much needs to be done to improve the quality of care for people with SCD. This study capitalizes on the Sickle Cell Disease Implementation Consortium (SCDIC), a consortium of eight academic sites aiming to test implementation strategies that could lead to more accelerated application of the NHLBI guidelines for treating SCD. This report documents the process to support the consortium by specifying the interventions being developed. Methods This study consists of three steps. The Principal Investigator of each site and two site representatives who are knowledgeable of the intervention (e.g., study coordinator or the person delivering the intervention) will answer an online survey aiming to capture components of the interventions. This survey will be completed by the site representatives three times during the study: during the development of the interventions, after one year of the interventions being implemented, and at the end of this study (after 2 years). A site visit and semi-structured interview (Step 2) in the first year of the process will capture the context of the sites. Step 3 comprises of the development of a framework with the details of the multi-component SCDIC interventions at the sites. Discussion The outcome of this study, a framework of the SCDIC, will enable accurate replication and extension of published research, facilitating the translation of SCD studies to diverse populations and settings and allowing for theory testing of the effects of the intervention components across studies in different contexts and for different populations. Trial registration ClinicalTrial.Gov (#NCT03380351). Registered December 21, 2017
Publication of data collection forms from NHLBI funded sickle cell disease implementation consortium (SCDIC) registry
Full text linkBackground: Sickle cell disease (SCD) is an autosomal recessive blood disorder affecting approximately 100,000 Americans and 3.1 million people globally. The scarcity of relevant knowledge and experience with rare diseases creates a unique need for cooperation and infrastructure to overcome challenges in translating basic research advances into clinical advances. Despite registry initiatives in SCD, the unavailability of descriptions of the selection process and copies of final data collection tools, coupled with incomplete representation of the SCD population hampers further research progress. This manuscript describes the SCDIC (Sickle Cell Disease Implementation Consortium) Registry development and makes the SCDIC Registry baseline and first follow-up data collection forms available for other SCD research efforts.
Results: Study data on 2400 enrolled patients across eight sites was stored and managed using Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap). Standardized data collection instruments, recruitment and enrollment were refined through consensus of consortium sites. Data points included measures taken from a variety of validated sources (PHENX, PROMIS and others). Surveys were directly administered by research staff and longitudinal follow-up was coordinated through the DCC. Appended registry forms track medical records, event-related patient invalidation, pregnancy, lab reporting, cardiopulmonary and renal functions.
Conclusions: The SCDIC Registry strives to provide an accurate, updated characterization of the adult and adolescent SCD population as well as standardized, validated data collecting tools to guide evidence-based research and practice
Recommended from our members
Mortality in adults with sickle cell disease: Results from the sickle cell disease implementation consortium (SCDIC) registry
No full textThe cause of death in people affected by sickle cell disease (SCD) is often challenging to define as prior studies have used retrospective or administrative data for analysis. We used a prospective longitudinal registry to assess mortality and clinical co-morbidities among subjects enrolled in the Sickle Cell Disease Implementation Consortium (SCDIC) registry. At enrollment, we collected the following data: patient-reported demographics, SCD phenotype, baseline laboratory values, comorbidities, and current medications. Subjects were followed for a median of 4.7 years before the present analysis. The relationship of clinical co-morbidities (at time of enrollment) to mortality was determined using survival analysis, adjusting for SCD phenotype and gender. There was a total of 2439 people with SCD enrolled in the SCDIC registry. One hundred and twenty-eight participants (5%) died during the observation period (2017-2022). Six people died from trauma and were excluded from further analysis. Proximate cause of death was unwitnessed in 17% of the deaths, but commonest causes of death include cardiac (18%), acute chest or respiratory failure (11%), sudden unexplained death (8%). Enrollment characteristics of the individuals who died (n = 122) were compared to those of survivors (n = 2317). Several co-morbidities at enrollment increased the odds of death on univariate analysis. All co-morbidities were included in a multivariable model. After backward elimination, iron overload, pulmonary hypertension, and depression, remained statistically significant predictors of the risk of death. SCD reduces life expectancy. Improved comprehensive and supportive care to prevent end-organ damage and address comorbidities is needed for this population
Recommended from our members
Sex-based differences in the manifestations and complications of sickle cell disease: Report from the Sickle Cell Disease Implementation Consortium
Full text linkIntroductionSex-based clinical outcome differences in sickle cell disease (SCD) remain largely unknown despite evidence that female sex is associated with an increased lifespan. To better characterize sex-based differences in SCD, we assessed pain, treatment characteristics, laboratory measures and complications among males and females currently enrolled in the Sickle Cell Disease Implementation Consortium (SCDIC) registry.MethodsThe SCDIC consists of eight comprehensive SCD centers and one data coordinating center that received funding from the National Heart Lung and Blood Institute to improve outcomes for individuals with SCD. Eligibility criteria included: 15 to 45 years of age and a confirmed diagnosis of SCD. Self-report surveys were completed and data were also abstracted from the participants' medical records.ResultsA total of 2,124 participants were included (mean age: 27.8 years; 56% female). The majority had hemoglobin SS SCD genotype. Females had worse reports of pain severity (mean (SD) T-score 51.6 (9.6) vs 49.3 (10), p<0.001), more vaso-occlusive episodes (p = 0.01) and a higher occurrence of 3 or more hospital admissions in the past year (30.9% vs. 25.5, p = 0.03). On multivariable analysis, males had higher odds of acute chest syndrome (odds ratio (OR) 1.4, p = 0.002), cardiovascular (OR 1.70, p<0.001) and musculoskeletal (OR 1.33, p = 0.0034) complications and lower odds of depression (OR 0.77, p = 0.0381). Females had higher fetal hemoglobin levels with and without hydroxyurea use (9.6% vs 8.5%, p = 0.03 and 3% vs 2.2%, p = 0.0005, respectively).ConclusionOur data suggests that sex differences in clinical outcomes do occur among individuals with SCD. Future research needs to explore the mechanisms underlying these differences
What does it mean to be affiliated with care?: Delphi consensus on the definition of "unaffiliation" and "specialist" in sickle cell disease.
Full text linkAccruing evidence reveals best practices for how to help individuals living with Sickle Cell Disease (SCD); yet, the implementation of these evidence-based practices in healthcare settings is lacking. The Sickle Cell Disease Implementation Consortium (SCDIC) is a national consortium that uses implementation science to identify and address barriers to care in SCD. The SCDIC seeks to understand how and why patients become unaffiliated from care and determine strategies to identify and connect patients to care. A challenge, however, is the lack of agreed-upon definition for what it means to be unaffiliated and what it means to be a "SCD expert provider". In this study, we conducted a Delphi process to obtain expert consensus on what it means to be an "unaffiliated patient" with SCD and to define an "SCD specialist," as no standard definition is available. Twenty-eight SCD experts participated in three rounds of questions. Consensus was defined as 80% or more of respondents agreeing. Experts reached consensus that an individual with SCD who is unaffiliated from care is "someone who has not been seen by a sickle cell specialist in at least a year." A sickle cell specialist was defined as someone with knowledge and experience in SCD. Having "knowledge" means: being knowledgeable of the 2014 NIH Guidelines, "Evidence-Based Management of SCD", trained in hydroxyurea management and transfusions, trained on screening for organ damage in SCD, trained in pain management and on SCD emergencies, and is aware of psychosocial and cognitive issues in SCD. Experiences that are expected of a SCD specialist include experience working with SCD patients, mentored by a SCD specialist, regular attendance at SCD conferences, and obtains continuing medical education on SCD every 2 years." The results have strong implications for future research, practice, and policy related to SCD by helping to lay a foundation for an new area of research (e.g., to identify subpopulations of unaffiliation and targeted interventions) and policies that support reaffiliation and increase accessibility to quality care
Social determinants of health and treatment center affiliation: analysis from the sickle cell disease implementation consortium registry
No full textAbstract Background Adults with sickle cell disease (SCD) suffer early mortality and high morbidity. Many are not affiliated with SCD centers, defined as no ambulatory visit with a SCD specialist in 2 years. Negative social determinants of health (SDOH) can impair access to care. Hypothesis: Negative SDOH are more likely to be experienced by unaffiliated adults than adults who regularly receive expert SCD care. Methods Cross-sectional analysis of the SCD Implementation Consortium (SCDIC) Registry, a convenience sample at 8 academic SCD centers in 2017–2019. A Distressed Communities Index (DCI) score was assigned to each registry member’s zip code. Insurance status and other barriers to care were self-reported. Most patients were enrolled in the clinic or hospital setting. Results The SCDIC Registry enrolled 288 Unaffiliated and 2110 Affiliated SCD patients, ages 15-45y. The highest DCI quintile accounted for 39% of both Unaffiliated and Affiliated patients. Lack of health insurance was reported by 19% of Unaffiliated versus 7% of Affiliated patients. The most frequently selected barriers to care for both groups were “previous bad experience with the healthcare system” (40%) and “Worry about Cost” (17%). SCD co-morbidities had no straightforward trend of association with Unaffiliated status. The 8 sites’ results varied. Conclusion The DCI economic measure of SDOH was not associated with Unaffiliated status of patients recruited in the health care delivery setting. SCDIC Registrants reside in more distressed communities than other Americans. Other SDOH themes of affordability and negative experiences might contribute to Unaffiliated status. Recruiting Unaffiliated SCD patients to care might benefit from systems adopting value-based patient-centered solutions
Patient‐reported outcomes in sickle cell disease and association with clinical and psychosocial factors: Report from the sickle cell disease implementation consortium
Full text linkUnderstanding patient experiences, quality of life, and treatment needs in individuals with sickle cell disease (SCD) is essential in promoting health and well-being. We used measures from the Adult Sickle Cell Quality of Life Measurement Information System (ASCQ-Me), Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS), and Quality of Life in Neurological Disorders (NeuroQol) to evaluate pain impact, sleep impact, social functioning, depressive symptoms, tiredness, and cognitive function (collectively, patient reported outcomes [PROs]) and to identify associated demographic and clinical characteristics. Participants (n = 2201) between 18 and 45 years were recruited through the eight Sickle Cell Disease Implementation Consortium (SCDIC) sites. In multivariate models, PROs were significantly associated with one another. Pain impact was associated with age, education, employment, time since last pain attack, hydroxyurea use, opioid use, sleep impact, social functioning, and cognitive function (F = 88.74, P \u3c.0001). Sleep impact was associated with household income, opioid use, pain impact, social functioning, depressive symptoms, and tiredness (F = 101.40, P \u3c.0001). Social functioning was associated with employment, pain attacks in the past year, autoimmune/inflammatory comorbidities, pain impact, sleep impact, depressive symptoms, tiredness, and cognitive function (F = 121.73, P \u3c.0001). Depressive symptoms were associated with sex, sleep impact, social functioning, tiredness, and cognitive function (F = 239.51, P \u3c.0001). Tiredness was associated with sex, education, sleep impact, social functioning, depressive symptoms, and cognitive function (F = 129.13, P \u3c.0001). These findings reflect the baseline PRO assessments among SCDIC registry participants. Further research is needed to better understand these outcomes and new targets for interventions to improve quality of life and function in people with SCD
An evaluation of patient-reported outcomes in sickle cell disease within a conceptual model
Full text linkPURPOSE: To examine the relations between patient-reported outcomes (PROs) within a conceptual model for adults with sickle cell disease (SCD) ages 18 – 45 years enrolled in the multi-site Sickle Cell Disease Implementation Consortium (SCDIC) registry. We hypothesized that patient and SCD-related factors, particularly pain, and barriers to care would independently contribute to functioning as measured using PRO domains. METHODS: Participants (N = 2054) completed a 48-item survey including socio-demographics and PRO measures, e.g., social functioning, pain impact, emotional distress, and cognitive functioning. Participants reported on lifetime SCD complications, pain episode frequency and severity, and barriers to healthcare. RESULTS: Higher pain frequency was associated with higher odds of worse outcomes in all PRO domains, controlling for age, gender and site (OR range 1.02–1.10, 95% CI range [1.004–1.12]). Reported history of treatment for depression was associated with 5 of 7 PRO measures (OR range 1.58–3.28 95% CI range [1.18–4.32]). Fewer individual barriers to care and fewer SCD complications were associated with better outcomes in the emotion domain (OR range 0.46–0.64, 95% CI range [0.34–0.86]). CONCLUSIONS: Study results highlight the importance of the biopsychosocial model to enhance understanding of the needs of this complex population, and to design multi-dimensional approaches for providing more effective interventions to improve outcomes. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11136-022-03132-z
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Full text linkThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
- …
