Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request, 14370-14373 [2012-5574]
Download as PDF
14370
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 47 / Friday, March 9, 2012 / Notices
EARLY TERMINATIONS GRANTED FEBRUARY 1, 2012 THRU FEBRUARY 29, 2012—Continued
20120505 .........................................................
G
Alfred E. Mann MannKind Corporation; Alfred E. Mann.
02/14/2012
20120477 .........................................................
20120496 .........................................................
20120498 .........................................................
G
G
G
GTCR Fund IX/A, L.P.; Universal American Corp.; GTCR Fund IX/A, L.P.
Amgen Inc.; Micromet, Inc.; Amgen Inc.
The Weir Group PLC; Starr L. Pitzer and Christine H. Pitzer; The Weir Group PLC.
02/15/2012
20120501 .........................................................
20120506 .........................................................
G
G
KEMET Corporation; Denham Commodity Partners IV LP; KEMET Corporation.
Redtop Holdings Limited; Intermediate Capital Group plc; Redtop Holdings Limited.
02/16/2012
20111164 .........................................................
20111389 .........................................................
20111423 .........................................................
G
G
G
Apple Inc.; Rockstar Bidco, L.P.; Apple Inc.
Microsoft Corporation; Rockstar Bidco, LP; Microsoft Corporation.
Research In Motion Limited; Rockstar Bidco, LP; Research In Motion Limited.
02/17/2012
20111146 .........................................................
20120508 .........................................................
20120510 .........................................................
G
G
G
20120513 .........................................................
20120516 .........................................................
G
G
Apple Inc.; CPTN Holdings LLC; Apple Inc.
Medical Properties Trust, Inc.; FFC Partners II, L.P.; Medical Properties Trust, Inc.
GS Engineering & Construction Corporation; Inmobiliaria Espacio, S.A.; GS Engineering &
Construction Corporation.
Archipelago Holdings; CDC Corporation; Archipelago Holdings.
Gores Capital Partners HI, L.P.; The Pep Boys-Manny, Moe & Jack; Gores Capital Partners III, L.P.
02/23/2012
20120338 .........................................................
20120469 .........................................................
20120519 .........................................................
G
G
G
TE Connectivity Ltd.; Wendel SA; TE Connectivity Ltd.
Raymond James Financial, Inc.; Regions Financial Corp.; Raymond James Financial, Inc.
Molibdenos y Metales S.A.; Molycorp, Inc.; Molibdenos y Metales S.A.
02/24/2012
20120502
20120522
20120523
20120524
20120529
.........................................................
.........................................................
.........................................................
.........................................................
.........................................................
G
G
G
G
G
CVS Caremark Corporation; Health Net, Inc.; CVS Caremark Corporation.
Innovative Interfaces Holdings Ltd.; Gerald M. Kline; Innovative Interfaces Holdings Ltd.
KRG Capital Fund IV. L.P.; Frontenac VIII Limited Partnership; KRG Capital Fund IV. L.P.
Roger S. Penske; Roger S. Penske; Roger S. Penske.
Fidelity National Financial. Inc.; O’Charley’s Inc.; Fidelity National Financial, Inc.
02/27/2012
20120536 .........................................................
G
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
AHRQ invites the public to comment on
this proposed information collection.
Agency for Healthcare Research and
Quality
DATES:
Renee Chapman, Contact
Representative, or Theresa Kingsberry,
Legal Assistant, Federal Trade
Commission, Premerger Notification
Office, Bureau of Competition, Room H–
303, Washington, DC 20580, (202) 326–
3100.
By Direction of the Commission.
Donald S. Clark,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012–5606 Filed 3–8–12; 8:45 a.m.]
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
16:21 Mar 08, 2012
Agency Information Collection
Activities; Proposed Collection;
Comment Request
Agency for Healthcare Research
and Quality, HHS.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
This notice announces the
intention of the Agency for Healthcare
Research and Quality (AHRQ) to request
that the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) approve the proposed
information collection project:
‘‘Workflow Assessment for Health IT
Toolkit Evaluation.’’
In accordance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501–3521,
SUMMARY:
BILLING CODE 6750–01–M
VerDate Mar<15>2010
Oracle Corporation; Taleo Corporation; Oracle Corporation.
Jkt 226001
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Comments on this notice must be
received by May 8, 2012.
Written comments should
be submitted to: Doris Lefkowitz,
Reports Clearance Officer, AHRQ, by
email at doris.lefkowitz@AHRQ.hhs.gov.
Copies of the proposed collection plans,
data collection instruments, and specific
details on the estimated burden can be
obtained from the AHRQ Reports
Clearance Officer.
ADDRESSES:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Doris Lefkowitz, AHRQ Reports
Clearance Officer, (301) 427–1477, or by
email at doris.lefkowitz@AHRQ.hhs.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
E:\FR\FM\09MRN1.SGM
09MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 47 / Friday, March 9, 2012 / Notices
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Proposed Project
Workflow Assessment for Health IT
Toolkit Evaluation
AHRQ is a lead Federal agency in
developing and disseminating evidence
and evidence-based tools on how health
IT can improve health care quality,
safety, efficiency, and effectiveness.
Understanding clinical work practices
and how they will be affected by
practice innovations such as
implementing health IT has become a
central focus of health IT research.
While much of the attention of health IT
research and development had been
directed at the technical issues of
building and deploying health IT
systems, there is growing consensus that
deployment of health IT has often had
disappointing results, and while
technical challenges remain, there is a
need for greater attention to
sociotechnical issues and the problems
of modeling workflow.
The implementation of health IT in
practice is costly in time and effort and
less is known about these issues in
small- and medium-sized practices
where the impact of improved or
disrupted workflows may have
especially significant consequences
because of limited resources. Practices
would derive great benefit from effective
tools for assessing workflow during
many types of health IT
implementation, such as creating
disease registries, collecting quality
measures, using patient portals, or
implementing a new electronic health
record system. To that end, in 2008,
AHRQ funded the development of the
Workflow Assessment for Health IT
toolkit (Workflow toolkit). Through this
toolkit, end users should obtain a better
understanding of the impact of health IT
on workflow in ambulatory care for each
of the following stages of health IT
implementation: (1) Determining system
requirements, (2) selecting a vendor, (3)
preparing for implementation, or (4)
using the system post implementation.
They should also be able to effectively
utilize the publicly available workflow
tools and methods before, during, and
after health IT implementation while
recognizing commonly encountered
issues in health IT implementation. In
the current project AFIRQ is conducting
an evaluation to ensure that the newly
developed Workflow toolkit is useful to
small- and medium-sized ambulatory
care clinic managers, clinicians, and
staff.
The evaluation will consist of field
assessments of use of the Workflow
toolkit in 18 small- and medium-sized
practices and gathering feedback from
two Health IT Regional Extension
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:21 Mar 08, 2012
Jkt 226001
Centers (RECs) who are providing
support to some of these practices. The
evaluation will address the issues of
system validation as classically defined
in software engineering: determining
whether the software or system actually
meets the requirements of the user to
perform the relevant tasks. The
evaluation will answer the following
questions:
• Are results correct? Are individual
tools included in the Workflow toolkit
accurate? Does workflow assessment
with the Workflow toolkit provide
accurate information the practice can
act upon?
• Does knowledge change? Does user
knowledge and capacity change? Does
user knowledge of workflow in their
own practice change?
• Do decisions change? Do user
decisions about workflow assessment
change? Do user decisions about health
information technology (health IT)
implementation change?
• Do outcomes change? Are changes
in workflow favorable? Are changes in
clinical practices favorable? Are changes
to the practice favorable? Are changes
for patients favorable?
To answer these questions the
proposed evaluation will be conducted
to examine usefulness of the Workflow
toolkit in small- and medium-sized
practices. The evaluation will be
conducted with 18 practices affiliated
with one of two Practice-based Research
Networks (PBRNs) in Oregon and
Wisconsin, and with the Health IT
Regional Extension Centers (RECs) in
those States. Participants will be
recruited who agree to use the Workflow
toolkit in their specific health IT project
for a minimum of 10 weeks. This will
provide an opportunity to observe use of
the Workflow toolkit amongst its
intended end users, who are best
positioned to provide critical feedback
to improve the functionality of the
Workflow toolkit.
This study is being conducted by
AHRQ through its contractors, the
Oregon Rural Practice-based Research
Network (ORPRN) and the Wisconsin
Research & Education Network (WREN),
pursuant to AHRQ’s statutory authority
to conduct and support research on
health care and on systems for the
delivery of such care, including
activities with respect to the quality,
effectiveness, efficiency,
appropriateness, and value of health
care services and with respect to health
care technologies, facilities, and
equipment. 42 U.S.C. 299a(a)(1) and (5).
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
14371
Method of Collection
To achieve the goals of this project the
following data collections will be
implemented:
(1) Pre-Workflow Toolkit Interview:
these will consist of semi-structured
interviews with practice staff and with
three specialists from each Health IT
Regional Extension Center. These
interviews are designed to examine the
knowledge, attitudes, and barriers to
and facilitators of workflow assessment
for implementation of health IT.
Respondents will be asked to define
workflow, to rate its importance to the
practice or REC and to health IT
implementation, to describe factors
motivating use of the Workflow toolkit,
to describe previous experience with
assessing or redesigning workflow, and
to describe previous experience with
health IT implementation and the effect
of this implementation on work
processes in their practice (practices) or
for their clients (RECs).
(2) Observations: Participating
practices will form small teams (Clinic
Study Teams) who will use the
Workflow toolkit. A member of the
project staff will join each Clinic Study
Team or the three specialists at each of
the two RECs, as participant-observer
and will meet with the team at times to
be determined by the teams, but at least
every two weeks after the Pre-Workflow
Toolkit Interview for at least four visits.
During these visits project staff will
participate in and keep field notes
regarding the practice’s or REC’s
workflow assessment activities.
(3) Usage Logs: As part of their
workflow assessment process, Clinic
Study Teams, and REC staff, will be
asked to meet weekly. For weekly
meetings at which a project staff
member is not present, Clinic Study
Teams and REC staff will keep a record
of workflow assessment activities
including use of the workflow
assessment toolkit, recording in a freeform journal the purpose and results of
the activity as well as issues that arose
in the process.
(4) Post-Workflow Toolkit Interview:
This final interview will consist of
individual semi-structured interviews of
practice staff and three specialists from
each Health IT Regional Extension
Center. These interviews will (a) reexamine their knowledge and attitudes
about workflow assessment; (b) revisit
the barriers to and facilitators of
workflow assessment; (c) discuss
changes that have taken place as a result
of the process; (d) explore outcomes in
terms of: (d.1) for practices, the
perceived impacts on clinicians, the
practice staff, the practice, and the
E:\FR\FM\09MRN1.SGM
09MRN1
14372
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 47 / Friday, March 9, 2012 / Notices
patients; and (d.2) for RECs, technician
confidence in guiding affiliated clinics
in understanding workflow; and finally
(e) assess the overall impressions about
the usefulness of the Workflow toolkit
as well as any suggested changes.
The outcome of the evaluation will be
a report including recommendations for
enhancing and improving the Workflow
toolkit. The report will provide results
about the perceived usefulness of the
Workflow toolkit. Results will be
produced separately for practices and
RECs as well as for both user groups as
a whole. The report will also include
specific suggestions on how to revise
Workflow toolkit to make it more useful
to its intended audiences.
Estimated Annual Respondent Burden
Exhibit 1 shows the estimated annual
burden hours for each respondent’s time
to participate in this evaluation. The
Pre-Workflow interview will be
completed by a total of up to 248
persons (about 12 per practice) and
requires one hour. Up to four
observations will be conducted for up to
248 persons and they are each estimated
to take two hours. Ten usage logs will
be completed by a total of up to 248
persons (one per week of study activity)
and completion of a single usage log
should take no longer than 15 minutes.
The Post-Workflow interview will be
completed by a total of up to 248
persons and requires one hour.
The total annual burden is estimated
to be 3,100 hours or 155 hours per
practice or Regional Extension Center.
Exhibit 2 shows the estimated annual
cost burden associated with the
organizations’ time to participate in this
research. The total annual burden is
estimated to be $96,100.
EXHIBIT 1—ESTIMATED ANNUALIZED BURDEN HOURS
Number of
respondents
Data collection
Number of
respoonses
per
respondent
Hours per
response
Total burden
hours
Pre-Workflow Toolkit Interview ........................................................................
Observations ....................................................................................................
Usage Logs ......................................................................................................
Post-Workflow Toolkit Interview .......................................................................
248
248
248
248
1
4
10
1
1
2
15/60
1
248
1,984
620
248
Total ..........................................................................................................
992
NA
NA
3,100
EXHIBIT 2—ESTIMATED ANNUALIZED COST BURDEN
Number of
respondents
Data collection
Total burden
hours
Average
hourly wage
rate*
Total cost
burden
Pre-Workflow Toolkit Interview ........................................................................
Observations ....................................................................................................
Usage Logs ......................................................................................................
Post-Workflow Toolkit Interview .......................................................................
248
248
248
248
248
1,984
620
248
$31.00
31.00
31.00
31.00
$7,688
61,504
19,220
7,688
Total ..........................................................................................................
992
147
NA
96,100
* The hourly wage for the participants across the four data collections (pre-workflow toolkit interviews, observations, usage logs, and postworkflow toolkit interview) is based upon a weighted mean of the average hourly wages for Family and General Practitioners (1.5; $87.84 per
hour); office managers (1.0; $35.18 per hour); front office staff (1.0; $15.15 per hour); medical assistants or nurses (2.5; $24.36 per hour); nurse
care managers (0.5; $33.57); social workers (0.1; $24.44 per hour); health educators (0.1; $25.12 per hour); information technology specialists
(0.25; $23.43 per hour); quality improvement directors (0.25; 25.12 per hour); and technical staff (1.0; $33.14 per hour) for Oregon and Wisconsin from the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, May 2010 National Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates for the
United States, Occupational Employment Statistics (OES), Washington, DC (Feb. 2009), https://bls.GOV/oes/2010/may/www.bls.GOVOessrcst.htm
(accessed November, 2011).
Estimated Annual Costs to the Federal
Government
The estimated total cost to the Federal
Government for this project is $793,456
over a 27-month period from September
23, 2011 to December 22, 2013. The
estimated average annual cost is
$352,646. Exhibit 3 provides a
breakdown of the estimated total and
average annual costs by category.
EXHIBIT 3—ESTIMATED TOTAL AND ANNUAL COST* TO THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Cost component
Total cost
Project Management and Coordination Activities ...................................................................................
Develop Research and Recruitment Plans .............................................................................................
Compliance with PRA ..............................................................................................................................
Obtaining IRB approval ...........................................................................................................................
Develop Data Analysis Plan ....................................................................................................................
Conduct Evaluation ..................................................................................................................................
Data analysis and Final Report ...............................................................................................................
Ensure 508-compliant deliverables .........................................................................................................
Total ..................................................................................................................................................
$96,449
78,383
12,267
10,254
18,246
534,401
23,554
19,902
793,456
* Costs are fully loaded including overhead and G&A.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:21 Mar 08, 2012
Jkt 226001
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\09MRN1.SGM
09MRN1
Annualized cost
$42,866
34,837
5,452
4,557
8,109
237,512
10,468
8,845
352,646
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 47 / Friday, March 9, 2012 / Notices
Request for Comments
In accordance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act, comments on AHRQ’s
information collection are requested
with regard to any of the following: (a)
Whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the proper
performance of AHRQ healthcare
research and healthcare information
dissemination functions, including
whether the information will have
practical utility; (b) the accuracy of
AHRQ’s estimate of burden (including
hours and costs) of the proposed
collection(s) of information; (c) ways to
enhance the quality, utility, and clarity
of the information to be collected; and
(d) ways to minimize the burden of the
collection of information upon the
respondents, including the use of
automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology.
Comments submitted in response to
this notice will be summarized and
included in the Agency’s subsequent
request for OMB approval of the
proposed information collection. All
comments will become a matter of
public record.
Dated: February 29, 2012.
Carolyn M. Clancy,
Director.
[FR Doc. 2012–5574 Filed 3–8–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160–90–M
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Agency for Healthcare Research and
Quality
Agency Information Collection
Activities; Proposed Collection;
Comment Request
Agency for Healthcare Research
and Quality, HHS.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
This notice announces the
intention of the Agency for Healthcare
Research and Quality (AHRQ) to request
that the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) approve the proposed
information collection project:
‘‘Demonstration of a Health Literacy
Universal Precautions Toolkit.’’ In
accordance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501–3521,
AHRQ invites the public to comment on
this proposed information collection.
DATES: Comments on this notice must be
received by May 8, 2012.
ADDRESSES: Written comments should
be submitted to: Doris Lefkowitz,
Reports Clearance Officer, AHRQ, by
email at doris.lefkowitz@AHRQ.hhs.gov.
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:21 Mar 08, 2012
Jkt 226001
Copies of the proposed collection
plans, data collection instruments, and
specific details on the estimated burden
can be obtained from the AHRQ Reports
Clearance Officer.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Doris Lefkowitz, AHRQ Reports
Clearance Officer, (301) 427–1477, or by
email at doris.lefkowitz@AHRQ.hhs.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Proposed Project
Demonstration of Health Literacy
Universal Precautions Toolkit
A goal of Healthy People 2020 is to
increase Americans’ health literacy,
defined as, ‘‘the degree to which
individuals have the capacity to obtain,
process, and understand basic health
information and services needed to
make appropriate health decisions.’’
The effects of limited literacy are
numerous and serious, including
medication errors resulting from
patients’ inability to read labels;
underuse of preventive measures such
as Pap smears and vaccines; poor selfmanagement of conditions such as
asthma and diabetes; and higher rates of
hospitalization and longer hospital
stays.
According to the 2003 National
Assessment of Adult Literacy (NAAL),
more than one-third of Americans—77
million people—have limited health
literacy. Although some adults are more
likely than others to have difficulty
understanding and acting upon health
information (e.g., minority Americans,
elderly), providers cannot tell by
looking which patients have limited
health literacy. Experts recommend that
providers assume all patients may have
difficulty understanding health-related
information. Known as adopting ‘‘health
literacy universal precautions,’’
providers create an environment in
which all patients benefit from clear
communication.
AHRQ contracted with the University
of North Carolina at Chapel Hill to
develop the Health Literacy Universal
Precautions Toolkit to help primary care
practices ensure that systems are in
place to promote better understanding
of health-related information by all
patients. As part of Toolkit
development, testing of a ‘‘prototype
Toolkit’’ was conducted in eight
primary care practices over an eightweek period. Testing provided
important information about
implementation and resulted in
refinement of the Toolkit, which AHRQ
made publically available in Spring
2010. At this time, the Toolkit includes
20 tools to prepare practices for health
literacy-related quality improvement
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
14373
activities and to guide them in
improving their performance related to
four domains: (1) Improving spoken
communication with patients, (2)
improving written communication with
patients, (3) enhancing patient selfmanagement and empowerment, and (4)
linking patients to supportive systems
in the community.
The tools included in the Health
Literacy Universal Precautions Toolkit
are listed below:
Tools To Start on the Path to
Improvement
Tool 1: Form a Team
Tool 2: Assess Your Practice
Tool 3: Raise Awareness
Tools To Improve Spoken
Communication
Tool 4: Tips for Communicating Clearly
Tool 5: The Teach-Back Method
Tool 6: Follow up with Patients
Tool 7: Telephone Considerations
Tool 8: Brown Bag Medication Review
Tool 9: How to Address Language
Differences
Tool 10: Culture and Other
Considerations
Tools To Improve Written
Communication
Tool 11: Design Easy-to-Read Material
Tool 12: Use Health Education Material
Effectively
Tool 13: Welcome Patients: Helpful
Attitude, Signs, and More
Tools To Improve Self-Management and
Empowerment
Tool 14: Encourage Questions
Tool 15: Make Action Plans
Tool 16: Improve Medication Adherence
and Accuracy
Tool 17: Get Patient Feedback
Tools to Improve Supportive Systems
Tool 18: Link Patients to Non-Medical
Support
Tool 19: Medication Resources
Tool 20: Use Health and Literacy
Resources in the Community
AHRQ will now conduct a
demonstration of the Health Literacy
Universal Precautions Toolkit. The
purpose of this demonstration project is
to explore whether the Toolkit helps
motivated practices to make changes
intended to improve communication
with and support for patients of all
literacy levels. Twelve primary care
practices will be recruited to implement
at least four tools from the Health
Literacy Universal Precautions Toolkit.
The project team will provide
participating practices with limited
technical assistance throughout the
implementation period. Data regarding
the assistance provided will contribute
E:\FR\FM\09MRN1.SGM
09MRN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 47 (Friday, March 9, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14370-14373]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-5574]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality
Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection;
Comment Request
AGENCY: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, HHS.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This notice announces the intention of the Agency for
Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) to request that the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) approve the proposed information collection
project: ``Workflow Assessment for Health IT Toolkit Evaluation.''
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501-
3521, AHRQ invites the public to comment on this proposed information
collection.
DATES: Comments on this notice must be received by May 8, 2012.
ADDRESSES: Written comments should be submitted to: Doris Lefkowitz,
Reports Clearance Officer, AHRQ, by email at
doris.lefkowitz@AHRQ.hhs.gov. Copies of the proposed collection plans,
data collection instruments, and specific details on the estimated
burden can be obtained from the AHRQ Reports Clearance Officer.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Doris Lefkowitz, AHRQ Reports
Clearance Officer, (301) 427-1477, or by email at
doris.lefkowitz@AHRQ.hhs.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
[[Page 14371]]
Proposed Project
Workflow Assessment for Health IT Toolkit Evaluation
AHRQ is a lead Federal agency in developing and disseminating
evidence and evidence-based tools on how health IT can improve health
care quality, safety, efficiency, and effectiveness. Understanding
clinical work practices and how they will be affected by practice
innovations such as implementing health IT has become a central focus
of health IT research. While much of the attention of health IT
research and development had been directed at the technical issues of
building and deploying health IT systems, there is growing consensus
that deployment of health IT has often had disappointing results, and
while technical challenges remain, there is a need for greater
attention to sociotechnical issues and the problems of modeling
workflow.
The implementation of health IT in practice is costly in time and
effort and less is known about these issues in small- and medium-sized
practices where the impact of improved or disrupted workflows may have
especially significant consequences because of limited resources.
Practices would derive great benefit from effective tools for assessing
workflow during many types of health IT implementation, such as
creating disease registries, collecting quality measures, using patient
portals, or implementing a new electronic health record system. To that
end, in 2008, AHRQ funded the development of the Workflow Assessment
for Health IT toolkit (Workflow toolkit). Through this toolkit, end
users should obtain a better understanding of the impact of health IT
on workflow in ambulatory care for each of the following stages of
health IT implementation: (1) Determining system requirements, (2)
selecting a vendor, (3) preparing for implementation, or (4) using the
system post implementation. They should also be able to effectively
utilize the publicly available workflow tools and methods before,
during, and after health IT implementation while recognizing commonly
encountered issues in health IT implementation. In the current project
AFIRQ is conducting an evaluation to ensure that the newly developed
Workflow toolkit is useful to small- and medium-sized ambulatory care
clinic managers, clinicians, and staff.
The evaluation will consist of field assessments of use of the
Workflow toolkit in 18 small- and medium-sized practices and gathering
feedback from two Health IT Regional Extension Centers (RECs) who are
providing support to some of these practices. The evaluation will
address the issues of system validation as classically defined in
software engineering: determining whether the software or system
actually meets the requirements of the user to perform the relevant
tasks. The evaluation will answer the following questions:
Are results correct? Are individual tools included in the
Workflow toolkit accurate? Does workflow assessment with the Workflow
toolkit provide accurate information the practice can act upon?
Does knowledge change? Does user knowledge and capacity
change? Does user knowledge of workflow in their own practice change?
Do decisions change? Do user decisions about workflow
assessment change? Do user decisions about health information
technology (health IT) implementation change?
Do outcomes change? Are changes in workflow favorable? Are
changes in clinical practices favorable? Are changes to the practice
favorable? Are changes for patients favorable?
To answer these questions the proposed evaluation will be conducted
to examine usefulness of the Workflow toolkit in small- and medium-
sized practices. The evaluation will be conducted with 18 practices
affiliated with one of two Practice-based Research Networks (PBRNs) in
Oregon and Wisconsin, and with the Health IT Regional Extension Centers
(RECs) in those States. Participants will be recruited who agree to use
the Workflow toolkit in their specific health IT project for a minimum
of 10 weeks. This will provide an opportunity to observe use of the
Workflow toolkit amongst its intended end users, who are best
positioned to provide critical feedback to improve the functionality of
the Workflow toolkit.
This study is being conducted by AHRQ through its contractors, the
Oregon Rural Practice-based Research Network (ORPRN) and the Wisconsin
Research & Education Network (WREN), pursuant to AHRQ's statutory
authority to conduct and support research on health care and on systems
for the delivery of such care, including activities with respect to the
quality, effectiveness, efficiency, appropriateness, and value of
health care services and with respect to health care technologies,
facilities, and equipment. 42 U.S.C. 299a(a)(1) and (5).
Method of Collection
To achieve the goals of this project the following data collections
will be implemented:
(1) Pre-Workflow Toolkit Interview: these will consist of semi-
structured interviews with practice staff and with three specialists
from each Health IT Regional Extension Center. These interviews are
designed to examine the knowledge, attitudes, and barriers to and
facilitators of workflow assessment for implementation of health IT.
Respondents will be asked to define workflow, to rate its importance to
the practice or REC and to health IT implementation, to describe
factors motivating use of the Workflow toolkit, to describe previous
experience with assessing or redesigning workflow, and to describe
previous experience with health IT implementation and the effect of
this implementation on work processes in their practice (practices) or
for their clients (RECs).
(2) Observations: Participating practices will form small teams
(Clinic Study Teams) who will use the Workflow toolkit. A member of the
project staff will join each Clinic Study Team or the three specialists
at each of the two RECs, as participant-observer and will meet with the
team at times to be determined by the teams, but at least every two
weeks after the Pre-Workflow Toolkit Interview for at least four
visits. During these visits project staff will participate in and keep
field notes regarding the practice's or REC's workflow assessment
activities.
(3) Usage Logs: As part of their workflow assessment process,
Clinic Study Teams, and REC staff, will be asked to meet weekly. For
weekly meetings at which a project staff member is not present, Clinic
Study Teams and REC staff will keep a record of workflow assessment
activities including use of the workflow assessment toolkit, recording
in a free-form journal the purpose and results of the activity as well
as issues that arose in the process.
(4) Post-Workflow Toolkit Interview: This final interview will
consist of individual semi-structured interviews of practice staff and
three specialists from each Health IT Regional Extension Center. These
interviews will (a) re-examine their knowledge and attitudes about
workflow assessment; (b) revisit the barriers to and facilitators of
workflow assessment; (c) discuss changes that have taken place as a
result of the process; (d) explore outcomes in terms of: (d.1) for
practices, the perceived impacts on clinicians, the practice staff, the
practice, and the
[[Page 14372]]
patients; and (d.2) for RECs, technician confidence in guiding
affiliated clinics in understanding workflow; and finally (e) assess
the overall impressions about the usefulness of the Workflow toolkit as
well as any suggested changes.
The outcome of the evaluation will be a report including
recommendations for enhancing and improving the Workflow toolkit. The
report will provide results about the perceived usefulness of the
Workflow toolkit. Results will be produced separately for practices and
RECs as well as for both user groups as a whole. The report will also
include specific suggestions on how to revise Workflow toolkit to make
it more useful to its intended audiences.
Estimated Annual Respondent Burden
Exhibit 1 shows the estimated annual burden hours for each
respondent's time to participate in this evaluation. The Pre-Workflow
interview will be completed by a total of up to 248 persons (about 12
per practice) and requires one hour. Up to four observations will be
conducted for up to 248 persons and they are each estimated to take two
hours. Ten usage logs will be completed by a total of up to 248 persons
(one per week of study activity) and completion of a single usage log
should take no longer than 15 minutes. The Post-Workflow interview will
be completed by a total of up to 248 persons and requires one hour.
The total annual burden is estimated to be 3,100 hours or 155 hours
per practice or Regional Extension Center.
Exhibit 2 shows the estimated annual cost burden associated with
the organizations' time to participate in this research. The total
annual burden is estimated to be $96,100.
Exhibit 1--Estimated Annualized Burden Hours
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of
Data collection Number of respoonses per Hours per Total burden
respondents respondent response hours
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pre-Workflow Toolkit Interview.................. 248 1 1 248
Observations.................................... 248 4 2 1,984
Usage Logs...................................... 248 10 15/60 620
Post-Workflow Toolkit Interview................. 248 1 1 248
---------------------------------------------------------------
Total....................................... 992 NA NA 3,100
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Exhibit 2--Estimated Annualized Cost Burden
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of Total burden Average hourly Total cost
Data collection respondents hours wage rate* burden
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pre-Workflow Toolkit Interview.................. 248 248 $31.00 $7,688
Observations.................................... 248 1,984 31.00 61,504
Usage Logs...................................... 248 620 31.00 19,220
Post-Workflow Toolkit Interview................. 248 248 31.00 7,688
---------------------------------------------------------------
Total....................................... 992 147 NA 96,100
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The hourly wage for the participants across the four data collections (pre-workflow toolkit interviews,
observations, usage logs, and post-workflow toolkit interview) is based upon a weighted mean of the average
hourly wages for Family and General Practitioners (1.5; $87.84 per hour); office managers (1.0; $35.18 per
hour); front office staff (1.0; $15.15 per hour); medical assistants or nurses (2.5; $24.36 per hour); nurse
care managers (0.5; $33.57); social workers (0.1; $24.44 per hour); health educators (0.1; $25.12 per hour);
information technology specialists (0.25; $23.43 per hour); quality improvement directors (0.25; 25.12 per
hour); and technical staff (1.0; $33.14 per hour) for Oregon and Wisconsin from the U.S. Department of Labor,
Bureau of Labor Statistics, May 2010 National Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates for the United
States, Occupational Employment Statistics (OES), Washington, DC (Feb. 2009), https://bls.GOV/oes/2010/may/www.bls.GOVOessrcst.htm (accessed November, 2011).
Estimated Annual Costs to the Federal Government
The estimated total cost to the Federal Government for this project
is $793,456 over a 27-month period from September 23, 2011 to December
22, 2013. The estimated average annual cost is $352,646. Exhibit 3
provides a breakdown of the estimated total and average annual costs by
category.
Exhibit 3--Estimated Total and Annual Cost* to the Federal Government
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cost component Total cost Annualized cost
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Project Management and $96,449 $42,866
Coordination Activities........
Develop Research and Recruitment 78,383 34,837
Plans..........................
Compliance with PRA............. 12,267 5,452
Obtaining IRB approval.......... 10,254 4,557
Develop Data Analysis Plan...... 18,246 8,109
Conduct Evaluation.............. 534,401 237,512
Data analysis and Final Report.. 23,554 10,468
Ensure 508-compliant 19,902 8,845
deliverables...................
Total....................... 793,456 352,646
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Costs are fully loaded including overhead and G&A.
[[Page 14373]]
Request for Comments
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act, comments on AHRQ's
information collection are requested with regard to any of the
following: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is
necessary for the proper performance of AHRQ healthcare research and
healthcare information dissemination functions, including whether the
information will have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of AHRQ's
estimate of burden (including hours and costs) of the proposed
collection(s) of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility,
and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to
minimize the burden of the collection of information upon the
respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology.
Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized
and included in the Agency's subsequent request for OMB approval of the
proposed information collection. All comments will become a matter of
public record.
Dated: February 29, 2012.
Carolyn M. Clancy,
Director.
[FR Doc. 2012-5574 Filed 3-8-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-90-M