Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 166 / Tuesday, August 27, 2013 / Notices 52927 

EXHIBIT 1—ESTIMATED ANNUALIZED BURDEN HOURS

Form name Number of 

respondents 

Number of 

responses 

per 

respondent 

Hours per 

response 

Total 

burden 

hours 

Pilot Test of the Emergency Department Discharge Tool (EDT) 

EDT .......................................................................................................................... 1,200 1 20/60 400 

One Month Patient Follow-up .................................................................................. 1,200 1 10/60 200 

Three Month Patient Follow-up ............................................................................... 240 1 5/60 20 

Post Pilot Test Focus Groups and Interviews 

EDT Implementers Focus Group ............................................................................. 16 1 2 32 

Patient Focus Group ................................................................................................ 8 1 2 16 

Post-ED Care Providers Focus Group .................................................................... 8 1 2 16 

EDT Implementer Interview ..................................................................................... 8 1 1 8 

Patient Interview ...................................................................................................... 8 1 1 8 

Post-ED Care Providers Interview ........................................................................... 8 1 1 8 

Total .................................................................................................................. 2,696 na na 708 

EXHIBIT 2—ESTIMATED ANNUALIZED COST BURDEN

Form name Number of 

respondents 

Total 

burden hours 

Average 

hourly wage 

rate*

Total cost 

burden hours 

Pilot Test of the Emergency Department Discharge Tool (EDT) 

EDT .......................................................................................................................... 1,200 400 $22.01a $8,804 

One Month Patient Follow-up .................................................................................. 1,200 200 22.01a 4,402 

Three Month Patient Follow-up ............................................................................... 240 20 22.01a 440 

Post Pilot Test Focus Groups and Interviews 

EDT Implementers Focus Group ............................................................................. 16 32 27.42b 877 

Patient Focus Group ................................................................................................ 8 16 22.01a 352 

Post-ED Care Providers Focus Group .................................................................... 8 16 45.36c 726 

EDT Implementer Interview ..................................................................................... 8 8 27.42b 219 

Patient Interview ...................................................................................................... 8 8 22.01a 176 

Post-ED Care Providers Interview ........................................................................... 8 8 45.36c 363 

Total .................................................................................................................. 2,696 708 na 16,359 

*

National Compensation Survey: Occupational wages in the United States May 2012, ‘‘U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics.’’ a—based on the mean wages for All Occupations (00–0000) 

b—salary based upon average of: 2 nurses (29–1141), 2 case managers (29–1141), 2 social workers (21–1022), and 2 research assistants 

(19–4061) c—salary based upon average of: 2 physicians (29–1060), 2 nurses (29–1141), 2 case managers (29–1141), 2 social workers (21–1022). 

Request for Comments 

In accordance with the above-cited 

Paperwork Reduction Act legislation, 

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 health care research, quality 

improvement and 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: August 8, 2013. 

Carolyn M. Clancy, 

Director. 

[FR Doc. 2013–20825 Filed 8–26–13; 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: 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: 

‘‘Assessing the Impact of the National 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
52928 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 166 / Tuesday, August 27, 2013 / Notices 

Implementation of TeamSTEPPS Master 

Training Program.’’ In accordance with 

the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 

3501–3520, AHRQ invites the public to 

comment on this proposed information 

collection. 

DATES: Comments on this notice must be 

received by October 28, 2013. 

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: 

Proposed Project 

Assessing the Impact of the National 

Implementation of TeamSTEPPS Master 

Training Program 

As part of their effort to fulfill their 

mission goals, AHRQ, in collaboration 

with the Department of Defense’s (DoD) 

Tricare Management Activity (TMA), 

developed TeamSTEPPS® (aka Team 

Strategies and Tools for Enhancing 

Performance and Patient Safety) to 

provide an evidence-based suite of tools 

and strategies for training teamworkbased patient safety to health care 

professionals. In 2007, AHRQ and DoD 

coordinated the national 

implementation of the TeamSTEPPS 

program. The main objective of this 

program is to improve patient safety by 

training a select group of stakeholders 

such as Quality Improvement 

Organization (QIO) personnel, High 

Reliability Organization (HRO) staff, and 

health care system staff in various 

teamwork, communication, and patient 

safety concepts, tools, and techniques 

and ultimately helping to build national 

capacity for supporting teamwork-based 

patient safety efforts in health care 

organizations and at the state level. The 

implementation includes the 

availability of voluntary training of 

Master Trainers in various health care 

systems capable of stimulating the 

utilization and adoption of 

TeamSTEPPS in their health care 

delivery systems, providing technical 

assistance and consultation on 

implementing TeamSTEPPS, and 

developing various channels of learning 

(e.g., user networks, various educational 

venues) for continuation support and 

improvement of teamwork in health 

care. During this effort, AHRQ has 

trained more than 2400 participants to 

serve as the Master Trainer 

infrastructure supporting national 

adoption of TeamSTEPPS. Participants 

in training become Master Trainers in 

TeamSTEPPS and are afforded the 

opportunity to observe the tools and 

strategies provided in the program in 

action. In addition to developing Master 

Trainers, AHRQ has also developed a 

series of support mechanisms for this 

effort including a data collection Web 

tool, a TeamSTEPPS call support center, 

and a monthly consortium to address 

any challenges encountered by 

implementers of TeamSTEPPS. 

To understand the extent to which 

this expanded patient safety knowledge 

and skills have been created, AHRQ will 

conduct an evaluation of the National 

Implementation of TeamSTEPPS Master 

Training program. The goals of this 

evaluation are to examine the extent to 

which training participants have been 

able to: 

(1) Implement the TeamSTEPPS 

products, concepts, tools, and 

techniques in their home organizations 

and, 

(2) spread that training, knowledge, 

and skills to their organizations, local 

areas, regions, and states. 

This study is being conducted by 

AHRQ through its contractor, Health 

Research & Educational Trust (HRET), 

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 quality 

measurement and improvement. 42 

U.S.C. 299a(a)(1) and (2). 

Method of Collection 

To achieve the goals of this 

assessment the following two data 

collections will be implemented: 

(1) Web-based questionnaire to 

examine post-training activities and 

teamwork outcomes as a result of 

training from multiple perspectives. The 

questionnaire is directed to all master 

training participants. Items will cover 

post-training activities, implementation 

experiences, facilitators and barriers to 

implementation encountered, and 

perceived outcomes as a result of these 

activities. 

(2) Semi-structured interviews will be 

conducted with members from 

organizations who participated in the 

TeamSTEPPS Master Training program. 

Information gathered from these 

interviews will be analyzed and used to 

draft a ‘‘lessons learned’’ document that 

will capture additional detail on the 

issues related to participants’ and 

organizations’ abilities to implement 

and disseminate the TeamSTEPPS posttraining. The organizations will vary in 

terms of type of organization (e.g., QIO 

or hospital associations versus health 

care systems) and region (i.e., Northeast, 

Midwest, Southwest, Southeast, MidAtlantic, and West Coast). In addition, 

we will strive to ensure 

representativeness of the sites by 

ensuring that the distribution of 

organizations mirrors the distribution of 

organizations in the master training 

population. For example, if the 

distribution of organizations is such that 

only one out of every five organizations 

is a QIO, we will ensure that a 

maximum of two organizations in the 

sample are QIOs. The interviews will 

more accurately reveal the degree of 

training spread for the organizations 

included. Interviewees will be drawn 

from qualified individuals serving in 

one of two roles (i.e., implementers or 

facilitators). The interview protocol will 

be adapted for each role based on the 

respondent group and to some degree, 

for each individual, based on their 

training and patient safety experience. 

Estimated Annual Respondent Burden 

Exhibit 1 shows the estimated 

annualized burden hours for the 

respondent’s time to participate in the 

study. Semi-structured interviews will 

be conducted with a maximum of 9 

individuals from each of 9 participating 

organizations and will last about one 

hour each. The training participant 

questionnaire will be completed by 

approximately 10 individuals from each 

of about 240 organizations and is 

estimated to require 20 minutes to 

complete. The total annualized burden 

is estimated to be 881 hours. 

Exhibit 2 shows the estimated 

annualized cost burden based on the 

respondents’ time to participate in the 

study. The total cost burden is estimated 

to be $38,923. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 166 / Tuesday, August 27, 2013 / Notices 52929 

EXHIBIT 1—ESTIMATED ANNUALIZED BURDEN HOURS

Form name Number of respondents 

Number of responses per 

respondent 

Hours per response Total burden 

hours 

Semi-structured interview ................................................................................ 9 9 60/60 81 

Training participant questionnaire ................................................................... 240 10 20/60 800 

Total .......................................................................................................... 249 NA NA 881 

EXHIBIT 2—ESTIMATED ANNUALIZED COST BURDEN

Form name Number of respondents 

Total burden 

hours 

Average hourly wage rate * Total cost burden 

Semi-structured interview ................................................................................ 9 81 $44.18 $3,579 

Training participant questionnaire ................................................................... 240 800 44.18 35,344 

Total .......................................................................................................... 249 881 NA 38,923 

* Based upon the mean of the average wages for all health professionals (29–000) for the training participant questionnaire and for executives, 

administrators, and managers for the organizational leader questionnaire presented in the National Compensation Survey: Occupational Wages 

in the United States, May, 2012, U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_nat.htm#37-0000. 

Request for Comments 

In accordance with the above-cited 

Paperwork Reduction Act legislation, 

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 health care research and health 

care 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: August 16, 2013. 

Carolyn M. Clancy, 

Director. 

[FR Doc. 2013–20826 Filed 8–26–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4160–90–M 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Agency for Healthcare Research and 

Quality 

Scientific Information Request on 

Imaging Tests for the Diagnosis and 

Staging of Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma 

AGENCY: Agency for Healthcare Research 

and Quality (AHRQ), HHS. 

ACTION: Request for scientific 

information submissions. 

SUMMARY: The Agency for Healthcare 

Research and Quality (AHRQ) is seeking 

scientific information submissions from 

the public on imaging tests for the 

diagnosis and staging of pancreatic 

adenocarcinoma. Scientific information 

is being solicited to inform our review 

of Imaging Tests for the Diagnosis and 

Staging of Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma, 

which is currently being conducted by 

the Evidence-based Practice Centers for 

the AHRQ Effective Health Care 

Program. Access to published and 

unpublished pertinent scientific 

information on imaging tests for the 

diagnosis and staging of pancreatic 

adenocarcinoma will improve the 

quality of this review. AHRQ is 

conducting this comparative 

effectiveness review pursuant to Section 

1013 of the Medicare Prescription Drug, 

Improvement, and Modernization Act of 

2003, Public Law 108–173, and Section 

902(a) of the Public Health Service Act, 

42 U.S.C. 299a(a). 

DATES: Submission Deadline on or 

before September 26, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: Online submissions: http:// 

effectivehealthcare.AHRQ.gov/

index.cfm/submit-scientificinformation-packets/. Please select the 

study for which you are submitting 

information from the list to upload your 

documents. 

Email submissions: SIPS@epc-src.org. 

Print submissions: 

Mailing Address: Portland VA Research 

Foundation, Scientific Resource 

Center, ATTN: Scientific Information 

Packet Coordinator, P.O. Box 69539, 

Portland, OR 97239. 

Shipping Address (FedEx, UPS, etc.): 

Portland VA Research Foundation, 

Scientific Resource Center, ATTN: 

Scientific Information Packet 

Coordinator, 3710 SW U.S. Veterans 

Hospital Road, Mail Code: R&D 71, 

Portland, OR 97239. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Robin Paynter, Research Librarian, 

Telephone: 503–220–8262 ext. 58652 or 

Email: SIPS@epc-src.org. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Agency for Healthcare Research and 

Quality has commissioned the Effective 

Health Care (EHC) Program Evidencebased Practice Centers to complete a 

review of the evidence for Imaging Tests 

for the Diagnosis and Staging of 

Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma. 

The EHC Program is dedicated to 

identifying as many studies as possible 

that are relevant to the questions for 

each of its reviews. In order to do so, we 

are supplementing the usual manual 

and electronic database searches of the 

literature by requesting information 

from the public (e.g., details of studies 

conducted). We are looking for studies 

that report on Imaging Tests for the 

Diagnosis and Staging of Pancreatic 

Adenocarcinoma, including those that 

describe adverse events. The entire 

research protocol, including the key 

questions, is also available online at: 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES