Background In 2016, a short message service text messaging intervention to titrate insulin in patients with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes was implemented at two health care facilities in New York City. Objective This study aimed to conduct a qualitative evaluation assessing barriers to and the facilitators of the implementation of the Mobile Insulin Titration Intervention (MITI) program into usual care. Methods We conducted in-depth interviews with 36 patients enrolled in the MITI program and the staff involved in MITI (n=19) in the two health care systems. Interviews were transcribed and iteratively coded by two study investigators, both inductively and deductively using a codebook guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Results Multiple facilitator themes emerged: (1) MITI had strong relative advantages to in-person titration, including its convenience and time-saving design, (2) the free cost of MITI was important to the patients, (3) MITI was easy to use and the patients were confident in their ability to use it, (4) MITI was compatible with the patients’ home routines and clinic workflow, (5) the patients and staff perceived MITI to have value beyond insulin titration by reminding and motivating the patients to engage in healthy behaviors and providing a source of patient support, and (6) implementation in clinics was made easy by having a strong implementation climate, communication networks to spread information about MITI, and a strong program champion. The barriers identified included the following: (1) language limitations, (2) initial nurse concerns about the scope of practice changes required to deliver MITI, (3) initial provider knowledge gaps about the program, and (4) provider perceptions that MITI might not be appropriate for some patients (eg, older or not tech-savvy). There was also a theme that emerged during the patient and staff interviews of an unmet need for long-term additional diabetes management support among this population, specifically diet, nutrition, and exercise support. Conclusions The patients and staff were overwhelmingly supportive of MITI and believed that it had many benefits and that it was compatible with the clinic workflow and patients’ lives. Initial implementation efforts should address staff training and nurse concerns. Future research should explore options for integrating additional diabetes support for patients.

Hospital patients with serious mental illness (SMI) have high rates of smoking. There are few post-discharge treatment models available for this population and limited research on their treatment uptake following discharge. This study is a secondary analysis of an RCT that compared multi-session intensive telephone counseling versus referral to state quitline counseling at two safety net hospitals in New York City. For this analysis, we selected all trial participants with a history of schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder or bipolar disorder (N = 384) and used multivariable logistic regression to compare groups on self-reported 30-day abstinence at 6 months and to identify patient factors associated with use of tobacco treatment. Analyses found no significant group differences in abstinence 6 months (28% quitline vs. 29% intervention, p > 0.05), use of cessation medications (42% quitline vs. 47% intervention, p > 0.05) or receipt of at least one counseling call (47% quitline vs. 42% intervention, p > 0.05). Patients with hazardous drinking (p = 0.04) or perceived good health (p = 0.03) were less likely to use cessation medications. Homeless patients were less likely to use counseling (p = 0.02). Most patients did not use cessation treatment after discharge, and the intensive intervention did not improve abstinence rates over quitline referral. Interventions are needed to improve use of cessation treatment and long-term abstinence in patients with SMI.

BACKGROUND In 2016, a text-messaging intervention to titrate insulin in patients with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes was implemented at two health care systems in New York City. OBJECTIVE This study conducted a qualitative evaluation assessing barriers to, and facilitators of, implementation of the mobile insulin titration intervention (called “MITI”) into usual care. METHODS We conducted in-depth interviews with patients enrolled in the MITI program (N=36) and staff involved in MITI (N=19) at the two health care systems. Interviews were transcribed and iteratively coded by two study investigators both inductively and deductively using a codebook guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. RESULTS Multiple facilitator themes emerged: 1) MITI had strong relative advantages to in-person titration including its convenience and time-saving design; 2) the free cost of MITI was important to patients; 3) MITI was easy to use and patients were confident in their ability to use MITI; 4) MITI was compatible with patients’ home routines and clinic workflow; 5) patients and staff perceived MITI to have value beyond insulin titration by reminding and motivating patients to engage in healthy behaviors and providing a source of patient support; and 6) implementation in clinics was made easy by having a strong implementation climate, communication networks to spread information about MITI, and a strong program champion. Barriers identified included: 1) language limitations; 2) initial nurse concerns about scope of practice changes required to deliver MITI; 2) initial provider knowledge gaps about the program; and 3) provider perceptions that MITI may not be appropriate for some patients (e.g., older, not tech-savvy). There was also a theme that emerged during patient and staff interviewees of an unmet need for longer-term, additional diabetes management support among this population, specifically diet, nutrition and exercise support. CONCLUSIONS Patients and staff were overwhelmingly supportive of MITI, believed it had many benefits and believed it was compatible with the clinic workflow and patient’s lives. Initial implementation efforts should address staff training and nurse concerns. Future research should explore options for integrating additional diabetes support for patients.