Article

Practice Benefit from Participating in a Practice-based Research Network Study of Postpartum Depression: A National Research Network (NRN) Report

Department of Research, Olmsted Medical Center, Rochester, MN 55904, USA.
The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine (Impact Factor: 1.85). 07/2010; 23(4):455-64. DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.2010.04.090246
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT At the midpoint of a large clinical trial taking place in a practice-based research network (PBRN), we asked leaders of the enrolled practices about the impact of participating in a PBRN study.
Using semistructured interviews, the lead study nurse and physician from each site were queried about the impact of study participation on issues related to the study topic of postpartum depression (PPD) as well as any other impacts on the practice not directly related to PPD. From the results, initial themes were identified by 3 of the investigators (BPY, SB, MK) and confirmed by all the authors. Interviewee responses were grouped by theme.
Forty-eight study leaders from 28 solo, moderately sized group and residency practices were interviewed during a period of 60 days. Practices were located in 20 different states, and 54% were in rural communities. Six major themes emerged. Study participation led to: ((1)) the recognition of the need for systematic approaches; ((2)) more effective teamwork and communication within the practice; ((3)) adaptation and extension of the PPD study tools and a systematic approach to the care of other chronic conditions; ((4)) increased professional self-worth and community recognition; ((5)) opportunity and support for staff members to "stretch" into new roles; and ((6)) increased research literacy within the practice.
Participating in a PBRN research study can provide advantages to practices that extend beyond the study's specific purpose and content. These results provide further support for the value of PBRN research funding.

0 Followers
 · 
108 Views
  • Source
    The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine 07/2010; 23(4):440-1. DOI:10.3122/jabfm.2010.04.100104 · 1.85 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: While primary care Practice-based Research Networks are best known for their original, research purpose, evidence accumulating over the last several years is demonstrating broader values of these collaborations. Studies have demonstrated their role in quality improvement and practice change, in continuing professional education, in clinician retention in medically underserved areas, and in facilitating transition of primary care organization. A role in informing and facilitating health policy development is also suggested. Taking into account this more robust potential, we propose a new title, the Health Improvement Network, and a new vision for Practice-based Research Networks.
    The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine 09/2011; 24(5):485-8. DOI:10.3122/jabfm.2011.05.110102 · 1.85 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Only about half of eligible Americans are adherent with colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. Because patients generally access CRC screening via their primary care physicians, interventions to improve screening should be tested in the primary care setting. This article describes the recruitment and baseline characteristics of patients from 16 practice-based research network practices for a study to improve CRC screening. A total of 8327 invitations were mailed to patients of these practices, and 1685 returned consent forms and baseline surveys. Of those who consented, 942 were up to date with screening, which indicates that office databases were unable to provide information about those who were already screened. The 743 due for screening were younger (mean age, 61 vs. 63 years), less likely to have an immediate family member with CRC (11% vs. 19%), less likely to have Medicare (29% vs. 40%), more likely to have no insurance (5% vs. 1%), and less likely to report a physician/nurse recommendation for CRC screening (63% vs. 92%) for all comparisons. Our experiences for this practice-based research network randomized clinical intervention trial may be useful to others. Practice and patient recruitment processes were onerous with institutional review board issues, poorly prepared patient databases, and discarding of mail by the US Postal Service.
    The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine 01/2012; 25(1):63-72. DOI:10.3122/jabfm.2012.01.110054 · 1.85 Impact Factor