Last data update: May 06, 2024. (Total: 46732 publications since 2009)
Records 1-7 (of 7 Records) |
Query Trace: Koffman DM[original query] |
---|
An integrated process for co-developing and implementing written and computable clinical practice guidelines
Matson-Koffman DM , Robinson SJ , Jakhmola P , Fochtmann LJ , Willett D , Lubin IM , Burton MM , Tailor A , Pitts DL , Casey DE Jr , Opelka FG , Mullins R , Elder R , Michaels M . Am J Med Qual 2023 38 S12-s34 The goal of this article is to describe an integrated parallel process for the co-development of written and computable clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) to accelerate adoption and increase the impact of guideline recommendations in clinical practice. From February 2018 through December 2021, interdisciplinary work groups were formed after an initial Kaizen event and using expert consensus and available literature, produced a 12-phase integrated process (IP). The IP includes activities, resources, and iterative feedback loops for developing, implementing, disseminating, communicating, and evaluating CPGs. The IP incorporates guideline standards and informatics practices and clarifies how informaticians, implementers, health communicators, evaluators, and clinicians can help guideline developers throughout the development and implementation cycle to effectively co-develop written and computable guidelines. More efficient processes are essential to create actionable CPGs, disseminate and communicate recommendations to clinical end users, and evaluate CPG performance. Pilot testing is underway to determine how this IP expedites the implementation of CPGs into clinical practice and improves guideline uptake and health outcomes. |
An evaluation framework for a novel process to codevelop written and computable guidelines
Tailor A , Robinson SJ , Matson-Koffman DM , Michaels M , Burton MM , Lubin IM . Am J Med Qual 2023 38 S35-s45 Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) support individual and population health by translating new, evidence-based knowledge into recommendations for health practice. CPGs can be provided as computable, machine-readable guidelines that support the translation of recommendations into shareable, interoperable clinical decision support and other digital tools (eg, quality measures, case reports, care plans). Interdisciplinary collaboration among guideline developers and health information technology experts can facilitate the translation of written guidelines into computable ones. The benefits of interdisciplinary work include a focus on the needs of end-users who apply guidelines in practice through clinic decision support systems as part of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC's) Adapting Clinical Guidelines for the Digital Age (ACG) initiative, a group of interdisciplinary experts proposed a process to facilitate the codevelopment of written and computable CPGs, referred to as the "integrated process (IP)."1 This paper presents a framework for evaluating the IP based on a combination of vetted evaluation models and expert opinions. This framework combines 3 types of evaluations: process, product, and outcomes. These evaluations assess the value of interdisciplinary expert collaboration in carrying out the IP, the quality, usefulness, timeliness, and acceptance of the guideline, and the guideline's health impact, respectively. A case study is presented that illustrates application of the framework. |
Standards required for the development of CDC evidence-based guidelines
Carande-Kulis V , Elder RW , Koffman DM . MMWR Suppl 2022 71 (1) 1-6 CDC is the nation's premier health promotion, prevention, and preparedness agency. As such, CDC is an important source of public health and clinical guidelines. If CDC guidelines are to be trusted by partners and the public, they must be clear, valid, and reliable. Methods and processes used in CDC guideline development should follow universally accepted standards. This report describes the standards required by CDC for the development of evidence-based guidelines. These standards cover topics such as guideline scoping, soliciting external input, summarizing evidence, and crafting recommendations. Following these standards can help minimize bias and enhance the quality and consistency of CDC guidelines. |
The CDC Worksite Health ScoreCard: An assessment tool to promote employee health and well-being
Lang JE , Mummert A , Roemer EC , Kent KB , Koffman DM , Goetzel RZ . Am J Health Promot 2020 34 (3) 319-321 The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Worksite Health ScoreCard (CDC ScoreCard) is a free and publicly available tool designed and validated to help employers assess the extent to which they have implemented evidence-based health promotion interventions or strategies at their worksites to improve the health and well-being of their employees.1 The current version of the CDC ScoreCard has 154 yes/no questions that address a range of health promotion and disease prevention strategies, including lifestyle counseling services, physical/social environmental supports, workplace policies, and health plan benefits across 18 core topic areas (see Table 1). Each question represents an individual intervention, strategy, or action an employer can put into practice at the worksite. |
Supporting a culture of health in the workplace: A review of evidence-based elements
Flynn JP , Gascon G , Doyle S , Matson Koffman DM , Saringer C , Grossmeier J , Tivnan V , Terry P . Am J Health Promot 2018 32 (8) 890117118761887 OBJECTIVE: To identify and evaluate the evidence base for culture of health elements. DATA SOURCE: Multiple databases were systematically searched to identify research studies published between 1990 and 2015 on culture of health elements. STUDY INCLUSION AND EXCLUSION CRITERIA: Researchers included studies based on the following criteria: (1) conducted in a worksite setting; (2) applied and evaluated 1 or more culture of health elements; and (3) reported 1 or more health or safety factors. DATA EXTRACTION: Eleven researchers screened the identified studies with abstraction conducted by a primary and secondary reviewer. Of the 1023 articles identified, 10 research reviews and 95 standard studies were eligible and abstracted. DATA SYNTHESIS: Data synthesis focused on research approach and design as well as culture of health elements evaluated. RESULTS: The majority of published studies reviewed were identified as quantitative studies (62), whereas fewer were qualitative (27), research reviews (10), or other study approaches. Three of the most frequently studied culture of health elements were built environment (25), policies and procedures (28), and communications (27). Although all studies included a health or safety factor, not all reported a statistically significant outcome. CONCLUSIONS: A considerable number of cross-sectional studies demonstrated significant and salient correlations between culture of health elements and the health and safety of employees, but more research is needed to examine causality. |
The Centers for Disease Control and prevention worksite health ScoreCard
Matson Koffman DM . Am J Health Promot 2013 28 (2) Tahp6-7 The CDC HSC is designed to help employers assess the extent to which they have implemented evidence-based interventions for health promotion in their worksites that are aimed at preventing heart disease, stroke, and related chronic conditions among their employees.9 Originally, the HSC assisted employers in identify-ing gaps in their health promotion programs and in prioritizing high-impact strategies across 12 topics: (1) organizational supports, (2) tobacco control, (3) nutrition, (4) physical activity, (5) weight management, (6) stress management, (7) depression, (8) high blood pressure, (9) high cholesterol, (10) diabetes, (11) signs and symptoms of heart attack and stroke, and (12) emergency response to heart attack and stroke. In 2013, in an effort to broaden the tool beyond the prevention of chronic disease, four modules were added: lactation support, occupational health and safety, vaccine-preventable diseases, and community resources and partnerships. Thus, the current set of 16 topics makes the HSC a better tool for coordination and collaboration across multiple disciplines. Inter-ventions or strategies include policies, education and lifestyle coun-seling services, and environmental supports for health promotion. The HSC differs from other worksite assessment tools in several ways: (1) It addresses multiple health topics focused on chronic disease prevention, immunizations, and occupational safety and health, as well as the worksite’s health culture; (2) the questions are weighted according to current evidence in the literature; and (3) it has been tested for its validity and reliability. |
CDC resources, tools, and programs for health promotion in the worksite
Matson Koffman DM , Lang JE , Chosewood LC . Am J Health Promot 2013 28 (2) Tahp2-5 The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 (ACA, Public Law 111-148) elevates disease prevention to the level of a national priority and provides unprecedented opportunities for health promotion and disease prevention. The ACA established the National Prevention, Health Promotion, and Public Health Council, which has aligned more than a dozen federal agencies to develop a prevention and health promotion strategy for the country, and it created the Prevention and Public Health Fund (PPHF) to support a variety of public health initiatives, including evidence- and practice-based community and clinical prevention and wellness strategies. Furthermore, the ACA requires new health plans to cover recommended preventive services at no charge. In addition, it encourages the adoption of worksite health programs as a vehicle for improving the health of the employed population through programs such as the National Healthy Worksite Program, which is funded through the PPHF. The newly released final rules on incentives in employment-based wellness programs should further strengthen and increase the uptake of workplace interventions described within the act (http://www.hhs.gov/news/press/2013pres/05/20130529a.html).1 |
- Page last reviewed:Feb 1, 2024
- Page last updated:May 06, 2024
- Content source:
- Powered by CDC PHGKB Infrastructure