In 2012, the NIH Common Fund established the NIH Health Care Systems Research Collaboratory. The goal of the program is to improve the way clinical trials are conducted by creating an infrastructure for collaborative research with healthcare systems. The NIH Collaboratory launched with a Coordinating Center, Core Working Groups, and NIH Collaboratory Trials to conduct embedded pragmatic clinical trials (ePCTs) in partnership with healthcare system leaders and to work collaboratively with the NIH to solve problems as they arise, develop best practices, and share lessons and resources to with others conducting ePCTs.

Collaboratory Mission: Strengthen the national capacity to implement cost-effective large-scale research studies that engage healthcare delivery organizations as research partners.

With the first round of NIH Collaboratory Trials nearing completion, the project teams are beginning to publish results and share lessons with other researchers. We asked the principal investigators of the most recently completed projects to share insights about the important contributions of their studies.

Congratulations on finishing your NIH Collaboratory Trial: What do you think is the most important contribution of your study?

ABATE was conducted to determine whether routine bathing and showering with chlorhexidine soap would reduce multidrug-resistant organisms and bloodstream infections compared with usual care. The trial was conducted in 53 HCA Healthcare hospitals (194 non–critical care units) and included 340,000 patients in the intervention period.

“We found that there was no overall benefit to universal antiseptic bathing in non–intensive care units (ICUs). This is in stark contrast to the huge benefit demonstrated in ICUs in the REDUCE-MRSA trial, and may reflect the fact that non–critical care patients stay only a few days in the hospital and are less likely to develop infection. Nevertheless, we did find that antiseptic bathing and nasal decolonization reduced bloodstream infections and antibiotic-resistant organisms by over 30% in patients with devices outside of the ICU. This is important because they are 10% of the non-ICU population, but responsible for over half of bloodstream infections. They provide a valuable targeted population who appear to benefit from this intervention.”

LIRE was conducted to test the effectiveness of a simple and inexpensive intervention: inserting epidemiologic benchmarks into lumbar spine imaging reports. The goal of the trial was to reduce subsequent tests and treatments, including cross-sectional imaging (such as magnetic resonance imaging and computed tomography), opioid prescriptions, spinal injections, or surgery.

“I think that one of the most important contributions of the LIRE trial was demonstrating the feasibility of randomizing hundreds of thousands of patients to receive or not receive an intervention that we inserted into the radiology report. Before our trial began, there was a fair amount of skepticism about whether radiologists would accept routinely inserting prevalence information into their reports on a wide scale. We showed without a doubt that it was feasible.”

PPACT was designed to assess the potential benefit of helping patients adopt self-management skills for chronic pain, limit use of opioid medications, and identify factors amenable to treatment in the primary care setting in three Kaiser Permanente (Northwest, Georgia, and Hawaii) involving approximately 800 patients.

“We started a trial when everybody was still uncertain about what the trade-offs between external validity (and real-world issues that are important for implementation) and the rigor of internal validity. I don’t know if we got that right. There was an assumption that the trial needed to be cluster randomized, and I think it’s informative that only 1 of the 11 NIH-DOD-VA Pain Management Collaboratory trials was cluster randomized. We needed to be able to incubate, have embedded teams stay over time, and really shift the culture. Patients needed to get used to the idea of non-pharmacotherapy over several months, and we may have had more success if we had individually randomized our cohort. I learned a lot in this process.”

PROVEN was designed to evaluate the effectiveness of advance care planning video tools in the nursing home setting by partnering with 2 large healthcare systems that operate 492 nursing homes nationwide.

“PROVEN found an ACP Video Program did not significantly impact hospital transfers, burdensome treatments, or hospice enrollment among nursing home residents with advanced illness, however intervention fidelity was low. Nonetheless, PROVEN was one of the first large pragmatic trials conducted in US nursing homes. Thus, I feel its greatest contribution was setting a foundation of knowledge for the field in terms of methodologies that enable pragmatic trials in this setting and challenges to overcome.”

STOP CRC was conducted to determine whether EHR-embedded tools and clinic staff training in how to implement a mailed fecal immunochemical test (FIT) outreach program could increase colorectal cancer screening uptake among patients with historically lower CRC screening rates and worse CRC outcomes, such as those with low income, or who are on Medicaid or underinsured. STOP CRC was conducted in 26 Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs) in Oregon and California and involved approximately 41,000 patients.

“The ability to work with FQHCs and their new electronic data systems was an important contribution. FQHC settings are not organized healthcare systems, such as Kaiser Permanente, where research is more routine. I think we contributed to the success of this type of research and enabled the FHQCs’ ability to do more of it.” — Dr. Beverly Green

“Our study designed real-time electronic health record tools to allow clinics to mail cancer screening tests to adults who were overdue. We learned a lot about the challenges clinics faced in implementing the program. We shared our learnings with hundreds of additional community clinics in Washington, Oregon, California to help them anticipate and overcome these challenges.”— Dr. Gloria Coronado

TiME was conducted to determine whether treatment with hemodialysis sessions that are longer than many patients in the United States currently receive reduces the high rate of mortality among people being treated with thrice-weekly maintenance hemodialysis. The trial was conducted in 2 large US dialysis provider organizations, DaVita, Inc. and Fresenius Medical Care – North America, and included 266 outpatient dialysis facilities with 7035 patients.

“TiME established a model for conducting real-world research for a group of patients for whom there is very little clinical trial data. Many of the approaches and lessons from TiME are now being applied to a new set of pragmatic trials in dialysis that are being conducted in the US and internationally. In my view, TiME’s greatest contribution was to create a foundation for ongoing efficient and rigorous evidence generation in dialysis.”

Data and resources from the NIH Collaboratory Trials are posted on the NIH Collaboratory’s Data and Resource Sharing page in the coming months. As part of the program’s commitment to sharing, all NIH Collaboratory Trials are expected to share data and resources, such as protocols, consent documents, public use datasets, computable phenotypes, and analytic code.

Primary Outcome Papers for TiME, ABATE, STOP CRC, PROVEN