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

E XHIBIT 

### 1—E STIMATED 

### A NNUALIZED 

### B URDEN 

### H OURS

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



### E XHIBIT 

### 2—E STIMATED 

### A NNUALIZED 

### C OST 

### B URDEN

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 $22.01 a$8,804 One Month Patient Follow-up .................................................................................. 1,200 200 22.01 a4,402 Three Month Patient Follow-up ............................................................................... 240 20 22.01 a440

**Post Pilot Test Focus Groups and Interviews**

EDT Implementers Focus Group ............................................................................. 16 32 27.42 b 877 Patient Focus Group ................................................................................................ 8 16 22.01 a352 Post-ED Care Providers Focus Group .................................................................... 8 16 45.36 c726 EDT Implementer Interview ..................................................................................... 8 8 27.42 b 219 Patient Interview ...................................................................................................... 8 8 22.0 1 a176 Post-ED Care Providers Interview ........................................................................... 8 8 45.36 c363

Total .................................................................................................................. 2,696 70 8 na 16,359

* National Compensation Survey: Occupational wages in the United States May 2012, ‘‘U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Sta tistics.’’

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 assist ants (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


### 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 toolsand 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 implementand 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.


### 52929 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 166 / Tuesday, August 27, 2013 / Notices

E XHIBIT 

### 1—E STIMATED 

### A NNUALIZED 

### B URDEN 

### H OURS

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



### E XHIBIT 

### 2—E STIMATED 

### A NNUALIZED 

### C OST 

### B URDEN

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 38,92 3
* 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 EffectiveHealth 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: