An Unconditional Cash Transfer Program for Low-Income New Yorkers Affected by COVID-19.

Early in the pandemic, New York City's public hospital system partnered with multiple philanthropic foundations to offer an unconditional cash transfer program for low-income New Yorkers affected by COVID-19. The $1000 cash transfers were designed to help people meet their most immediate health and social needs and were incorporated into healthcare delivery and contact tracing workflows as a response to the public health emergency. To better understand program recipients' experiences, researchers conducted 150 telephone surveys with randomly sampled cash transfer recipients and 20 in-depth qualitative interviews with purposefully sampled survey participants. Survey participants were predominantly Latinx (87%) and women (65%). The most common reported uses of the $1000 were food and rent. Most participants (79%) reported that without the $1000 cash transfer they would have had difficulty paying for basic expenses or making ends meet, with specific positive effects reported related to food, housing, and ability to work. The majority of survey participants reported that receiving the cash assistance somewhat or greatly improved their physical health (83%) and mental health (89%). Qualitative interview results generally supported the survey findings.

Patients' Perspectives on the Shift to Telemedicine in Primary and Behavioral Health Care during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Studies specifically focused on patients' perspectives on telemedicine visits in primary and behavioral health care are fairly limited and have often focused on highly selected populations or used overall satisfaction surveys. OBJECTIVE: To examine patient perspectives on the shift to telemedicine, the remote delivery of health care via the use of electronic information and communications technology, in primary and behavioral health care in Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs) during COVID-19. DESIGN: Semi-structured interviews were conducted using video conference with patients and caregivers between October and December 2020. PARTICIPANTS: Providers from 6 FQHCs nominated participants. Eighteen patients and caregivers were interviewed: 6 patients with only primary care visits; 5 with only behavioral health visits; 3 with both primary care and behavioral health visits; and 4 caregivers of children with pediatric visits. APPROACH: Using a protocol-driven, rapid qualitative methodology, we analyzed the interview data and assessed the quality of care, benefits and challenges of telemedicine, and use of telemedicine post-pandemic. KEY RESULTS: Respondents broadly supported the option of home-based synchronous telemedicine visits in primary and behavioral health care. Nearly all respondents appreciated remote visits, largely because such visits provided a safe option during the pandemic. Patients were generally satisfied with telemedicine and believed the quality of visits to be similar to in-person visits, especially when delivered by a provider with whom they had established rapport. Although most respondents planned to return to mostly in-person visits when considered safe to do so, they remained supportive of the continued option for remote visits as remote care addresses some of the typical barriers faced by low-income patients. CONCLUSIONS: Addressing digital literacy challenges, enhancing remote visit privacy, and improving practice workflows will help ensure equitable access to all patients as we move to a new post-COVID-19 "normal" marked by increased reliance on telemedicine and technology.

Social needs screening and referral in pediatric primary care clinics: a multiple case study.

BACKGROUND: Unmet social risks such as housing, food insecurity and safety concerns are associated with adverse health outcomes in adults and children. Experimentation with social needs screening in primary care is currently underway throughout the United States. Pediatric primary care practices are well-positioned to amplify the effects of social needs screening and referral programs because all members of the household have the potential to benefit from connection to needed social services; however, more research is needed to determine effective implementation strategies. METHODS: To describe common implementation barriers and facilitators, we conducted 48 in-depth qualitative interviews with leadership, providers and staff between November 2018 and June 2019 as part of a multiple case study of social needs screening and referral programs based out of four pediatric ambulatory care clinics in New York City. Interviews were recorded, transcribed and coded using a protocol-driven, template-based rapid analysis approach designed for pragmatic health services research. In addition to analyzing content for our study, we delivered timely findings to each site individually in order to facilitate quality improvement changes in close-to-real time. RESULTS: Effective implementation strategies included tailoring screening tools to meet the needs of families seen at the clinic and reflect the resources available in the community, hiring dedicated staff to manage the program, building strong and lasting partnerships with community-based organizations, establishing shared communication methods between partners, and utilizing technology for efficient tracking of screening data. Respondents were enthusiastic about the value of their programs and the impact on families, but remained concerned about long-term sustainability after the grant period. CONCLUSION: Implementation of social needs screening and referral interventions is dependent on contextual factors including the nature of family needs and the availability of intraorganizational and community resources to address those needs. Additional research is needed to prospectively test promising implementation strategies that were found to be effective across sites in this study. Sustainability of programs is challenging, and future research should also explore measurable outcomes and payment structures to support such interventions in pediatric settings, as well as aim to better understand caregiver perspectives to improve engagement.

Ten Common Structures and Processes of High-Performing Primary Care Practices.

Structures (context of care delivery) and processes (actions aimed at delivery care) are posited to drive patient outcomes. Despite decades of primary care research, there remains a lack of evidence connecting specific structures/processes to patient outcomes to determine which of the numerous recommended structures/processes to prioritize for implementation. The objective of this study was to identify structures/processes most commonly present in high-performing primary care practices for chronic care management and prevention. We conducted key informant interviews with a national sample of 22 high-performing primary care practices. We identified the 10 most commonly present structures/processes in these practices, which largely enable 2 core functions: mobilizing staff to conduct patient outreach and helping practices avoid gaps in care. Given the costs of implementing and maintaining numerous structures/processes, our study provides a starting list for providers to prioritize and for researchers to investigate further for specific effects on patient outcomes.

Rapid Transition to Telehealth and the Digital Divide: Implications for Primary Care Access and Equity in a Post-COVID Era.

Policy Points Telehealth has many potential advantages during an infectious disease outbreak such as the COVID-19 pandemic, and the COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated the shift to telehealth as a prominent care delivery mode. Not all health care providers and patients are equally ready to take part in the telehealth revolution, which raises concerns for health equity during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. Without proactive efforts to address both patient- and provider-related digital barriers associated with socioeconomic status, the wide-scale implementation of telehealth amid COVID-19 may reinforce disparities in health access in already marginalized and underserved communities. To ensure greater telehealth equity, policy changes should address barriers faced overwhelmingly by marginalized patient populations and those who serve them. CONTEXT: The COVID-19 pandemic has catalyzed fundamental shifts across the US health care delivery system, including a rapid transition to telehealth. Telehealth has many potential advantages, including maintaining critical access to care while keeping both patients and providers safe from unnecessary exposure to the coronavirus. However, not all health care providers and patients are equally ready to take part in this digital revolution, which raises concerns for health equity during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: The study analyzed data about small primary care practices' telehealth use and barriers to telehealth use collected from rapid-response surveys administered by the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene's Bureau of Equitable Health Systems and New York University from mid-April through mid-June 2020 as part of the city's efforts to understand how primary care practices were responding to the COVID-19 pandemic following New York State's stay-at-home order on March 22. We focused on small primary care practices because they represent 40% of primary care providers and are disproportionately located in low-income, minority or immigrant areas that were more severely impacted by COVID-19. To examine whether telehealth use and barriers differed based on the socioeconomic characteristics of the communities served by these practices, we used the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Social Vulnerability Index (SVI) to stratify respondents as being in high-SVI or low-SVI areas. We then characterized respondents' telehealth use and barriers to adoption by using means and proportions with 95% confidence intervals. In addition to a primary analysis using pooled data across the five waves of the survey, we performed sensitivity analyses using data from respondents who only took one survey, first wave only, and the last two waves only. FINDINGS: While all providers rapidly shifted to telehealth, there were differences based on community characteristics in both the primary mode of telehealth used and the types of barriers experienced by providers. Providers in high-SVI areas were almost twice as likely as providers in low-SVI areas to use telephones as their primary telehealth modality (41.7% vs 23.8%; P <.001). The opposite was true for video, which was used as the primary telehealth modality by 18.7% of providers in high-SVI areas and 33.7% of providers in low-SVI areas (P <0.001). Providers in high-SVI areas also faced more patient-related barriers and fewer provider-related barriers than those in low-SVI areas. CONCLUSIONS: Between April and June 2020, telehealth became a prominent mode of primary care delivery in New York City. However, the transition to telehealth did not unfold in the same manner across communities. To ensure greater telehealth equity, policy changes should address barriers faced overwhelmingly by marginalized patient populations and those who serve them.

A qualitative study of high-performing primary care practices during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Primary care practices have remained on the frontline of health care service delivery throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. The purpose of our study was to understand the early pandemic experience of primary care practices, how they adapted care processes for chronic disease management and preventive care, and the future potential of these practices' service delivery adaptations. METHODS: We interviewed 44 providers and staff at 22 high-performing primary care practices located throughout the United States between March and May 2020. Interviews were transcribed and coded using a modified rapid assessment process due to the time-sensitive nature of the study. RESULTS: Practices reported employing a variety of adaptations to care during the COVID-19 pandemic including maintaining safe and socially distanced access through increased use of telehealth visits, using disease registries to identify and proactively outreach to patients, providing remote patient education, and incorporating more home-based monitoring into care. Routine screening and testing slowed considerably, resulting in concerns about delayed detection. Patients with fewer resources, lower health literacy, and older adults were the most difficult to reach and manage during this time. CONCLUSION: Our findings indicate that primary care structures and processes developed for remote chronic disease management and preventive care are evolving rapidly. Emerging adapted care processes, most notably remote provision of care, are promising and may endure beyond the pandemic, but issues of equity must be addressed (e.g., through payment reform) to ensure vulnerable populations receive the same benefit.

Impact of a Primary Care Provider Tele-Mentoring and Community Health Worker Intervention on Utilization in Medicaid Patients with Diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: The Endocrinology ECHO intervention utilized a tele-mentoring model that connects primary care providers (PCPs) and community health workers (CHWs) with specialists for training in diabetes care. We evaluated the impact of the Endo ECHO intervention on healthcare utilization and care for Medicaid patients with diabetes in New Mexico. METHODS: Between January 2015 and April 2017, patients with complex diabetes from 10 health centers in NM were recruited to receive diabetes care from a PCP and CHW upskilled through Endo ECHO. We matched intervention patients in the NM Medicaid claims database to comparison Medicaid beneficiaries using 5:1 propensity matching. We used a difference-in-difference (DID) approach to compare utilization and processes of care between intervention and comparison patients. RESULTS: Of 541 Medicaid patients enrolled in Endo ECHO, 305 met inclusion criteria and were successfully matched. Outpatient visits increased with Endo ECHO for intervention patients as compared to comparison patients (rate ratio, 1.57; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.43 to 1.72). The intervention was associated with an increase in emergency department (ED) visits (rate ratio, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.04 to 1.63) but no change in hospitalizations (rate ratio, 1.47; 95% CI, 0.95 to 2.23). Among intervention patients, utilization of metformin increased from 57.1% to 60.7%, with a DID between groups of 8.8% (95% CI, 4.0% to 13.6%). We found similar increases in use of statins (DID, 8.5%; 95% CI, 3.2% to 13.8%), angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (DID, 9.5%; 95% CI, 3.5% to 15.4%), or antidepressant therapies (DID, 9.4%; 95% CI, 1.1% to 18.1%). CONCLUSION: Patient enrollment in Endo ECHO was associated with increased outpatient and ED utilization and increased uptake of prescription-related quality measures. No impact was observed on hospitalization.

Clinician Perspectives on the Benefits of Practice Facilitation for Small Primary Care Practices.

PURPOSE: Small independent primary care practices (SIPs) often lack the resources to implement system changes. HealthyHearts NYC, funded through the EvidenceNOW initiative of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, studied the effectiveness of practice facilitation to improve cardiovascular disease- related care in 257 SIPs. We sought to understand SIP clinicians' perspectives on the benefits of practice facilitation. METHODS: We conducted in-depth interviews with 19 SIP clinicians enrolled in HealthyHearts NYC. Interviews were transcribed and coded using deductive and inductive approaches. To understand whether the perceived benefits of practice facilitation differ based on the availability of internal staff for quality improvement (QI), we compared themes pertaining to benefits between practices with 3 or fewer office staff vs more than 3 office staff. RESULTS: Clinicians perceived 2 main benefits of practice facilitation. First, facilitators served as a connection to the external health care environment for SIPs, often through teaching and information sharing. Second, facilitators provided electronic health record (EHR)/data expertise, often by teaching functionality and completing technical assistance and tasks. SIPs with more than 3 office staff felt that facilitators provided benefits primarily through teaching, whereas SIPs with 3 or fewer staff felt that facilitators also provided hands-on support. At the intersections of these benefits, there emerged 3 central practice facilitation benefits: (1) creating awareness of quality gaps, (2) connecting practices to information, resources, and strategies, and (3) optimizing the EHR for QI goals. CONCLUSIONS: SIP clinicians perceived practice facilitation to be an important resource for connecting their practice to the external health care environment and resources, and helping their practice build QI capacity through teaching, hands-on support, and EHR-driven solutions.

Improving Hepatitis C Identification: Technology Alone Is Not the Answer.

An estimated 3 to 5 million Americans are chronically infected with hepatitis C virus (HCV), and approximately 75% of those persons were born between 1945 and 1965 (the so-called baby boomer generation). Because of the largely asymptomatic nature of HCV, up to 50% of those infected are unaware of their disease. Risk-based testing has been largely ineffective. Based on prevalence data, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and other organizations recommend a onetime HCV antibody test for all baby boomers. However, uptake of this recommendation requires significant changes in clinical practice for already busy primary care clinicians. We studied the effectiveness of a quality improvement initiative based on continuous audit and feedback combined with education for improving testing in alignment with guidelines; the control group was a cohort of clinicians whose only reminder was an institution-wide electronic health record prompt. Our data show improved testing rates among all clinician groups, but more significant improvement occurred among providers who received continuous feedback about their clinical performance coupled with education.

Pain Management in Long-Term Care Communities: A Quality Improvement Initiative.

Pain is underrecognized and undertreated in the long-term care (LTC) setting. To improve the management of pain for LTC residents, the authors implemented a quality improvement (QI) initiative at one LTC facility. They conducted a needs assessment to identify areas for improvement and designed a 2-hour educational workshop for facility staff and local clinicians. Participants were asked to complete a survey before and after the workshop, which showed significant improvement in their knowledge of pain management and confidence in their ability to recognize and manage residents' pain. To measure the effectiveness of the QI initiative, the authors performed a chart review at baseline and at 3 and 8 months after the workshop and evaluated relevant indicators of adequate pain assessment and management. The post-workshop chart reviews showed significant improvement in how consistently employees documented pain characteristics (ie, location, intensity, duration) in resident charts and in their use of targeted pain assessments for residents with cognitive dysfunction. The proportion of charts that included a documented plan for pain assessment was high at baseline and remained stable throughout the study. Overall, the findings suggest a QI initiative is an effective way to improve pain care practices in the LTC setting.

Quality of care of patients with non-small-cell lung cancer: a report of a performance improvement initiative.

BACKGROUND: Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer deaths in the United States. In recent years, significant advancements have been made in the molecular characterization of tumors, and the availability of new agents to treat non-small-cell lung cancer has increased. Despite these achievements, optimal care of patients with this condition remains less than ideal. Although national quality measures and guideline recommendations provide the necessary framework for patient care, routine self-assessment of adherence to these measures is required for physician practice improvement. To this end, a performance improvement initiative that met national continuing medical education standards was designed. METHODS: Focusing on non-small-cell lung cancer patient care, oncologists underwent a three-step process that included a self-assessment of predetermined performance measures, the development and implementation of an actionable plan for improvement, and a second round of assessment to measure practice change. RESULTS: A total of 440 unique patient charts were reviewed by 22 practicing oncologists. Participants demonstrated high baseline performance levels of established quality measures, such as inclusion of the patient's pathology report and assessment of smoking history. Significant gains were observed in the areas of supportive care, including assessment of the patient's emotional well-being and the use of molecular markers in diagnostic and treatment decision making. CONCLUSIONS: Data from this study support the value of performance improvement initiatives to help increase physician delivery of evidence-based care to patients.

Patient-centered medical home among small urban practices serving low-income and disadvantaged patients.

PURPOSE: Research on the patient-centered medical home (PCMH) model and practice redesign has not focused on the unique challenges and strengths of very small primary care practices serving disadvantaged patient populations. We analyzed the practice characteristics, prior experiences, and dimensions of the PCMH model that exist in such practices participating in the Primary Care Information Project (PCIP) of the New York City Department of Mental Health and Hygiene. METHODS: We obtained descriptive data, focusing on PCMH, for 94 primary care practices with 5 or fewer clinicians serving high volumes of Medicaid and minority patient populations in New York City. Data included information extracted from PCIP administrative data and survey data collected specifically for this study. RESULTS: Survey results indicated substantial implementation of key aspects of the PCMH among small practices serving disadvantaged patient populations, despite considerable potential challenges to achieving PCMH implementation. Practices tended to use few formal mechanisms, such as formal care teams and designated care or case managers, but there was considerable evidence of use of informal team-based care and care coordination nonetheless. It appears that many of these practices achieved the spirit, if not the letter, of the law in terms of key dimensions of PCMH. CONCLUSIONS: Small practices can achieve important aspects of the PCMH model of primary care, often with informal rather than formal mechanisms and strategies. The use of flexible, less formal strategies is important to keep in mind when considering implementation and assessment of PCMH-like initiatives in small practices.

Utilization and Staff Perspectives on an On-Demand Telemedicine Model for People with Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities Who Reside in Certified Group Residences.

Background: Non-emergent medical problems that arise when a usual provider is unavailable can often result in emergency department or urgent care visits, which can be particularly distressing to people with intellectual and developmental disabilities (PIDD). On-demand, synchronous telemedicine may be a promising supplement when immediate care from usual sources is unavailable. Prior research demonstrated that high-quality telemedicine can be effectively delivered to PIDD. The aim of this article is to describe the utilization and staff perspectives on the implementation of the Telemedicine Triage Project (TTP), an innovative model that provides telemedicine consultations for PIDD who reside in state-certified group residences and present with an urgent but non-emergent medical concern when their usual provider is unavailable. Methods: Call frequency data for calendar years 2020 and 2021 were reviewed. The study team conducted semi-structured interviews, with 19 key informants representing organizational- and agency-level leadership and staff. The interview data were analyzed using a protocol-driven, rapid qualitative methodology. Results: Telemedicine consultations increased from 7953 in 2020 to 15,011 calls in 2021, and call volume peaked between 10 am and 1 pm. Key informants reported high satisfaction with TTP; universal benefits and a few barriers to implementation; and strong interest in maintaining the program beyond the grant period. Discussion: Over the first 2 years of its implementation, the TTP program was widely utilized and proved extremely feasible and acceptable to staff. This model is a promising and highly feasible way to provide equitable access to telemedicine for PIDD by addressing barriers to and disparities in access to health care that affect PIDD.

Comparison of Care Provided to Underserved Patients With Diabetes by a Telementoring Model of Care to Care Provided by a Specialty Clinic: Endo ECHO Versus an Academic Specialty Clinic.

PURPOSE: The purpose of the study was to examine differences among adult patients with diabetes who receive care through a telementoring model versus care at an academic specialty clinic on guideline-recommended diabetes care and self-management behaviors. METHODS: Endocrinology-focused Extension for Community Healthcare Outcomes (ECHO Endo) patients completed surveys assessing demographics, access to care, health care quality, and self-management behaviors at enrollment and 1 year after program enrollment. Diabetes Comprehensive Care Center (DCCC) patients completed surveys at comparable time points. RESULTS: At baseline, ECHO patients were less likely than DCCC patients to identify English as their primary language, have postsecondary education, and private insurance. One year postenrollment, ECHO patients visited their usual source of diabetic care more frequently. There were no differences in A1C testing or feet checking by health care professionals, but ECHO patients were less likely to report eye exams and smoking status assessment. ECHO and DCCC patients did not differ in consumption of high-fat foods and soda, physical activity, or home feet checks. ECHO patients were less likely to space carbohydrates evenly and test glucose levels and more likely to have smoked cigarettes. CONCLUSIONS: Endo ECHO is a suitable alternative to specialty care for patients in underserved communities with restricted access to specialty care. Results support the value of the Project ECHO telementoring model in addressing barriers to high-quality care for underserved communities.

A Project ECHO and Community Health Worker Intervention for Patients with Diabetes.

BACKGROUND: Both community health workers and the Project ECHO model of specialist telementoring are innovative approaches to support primary care providers in the care of complex patients with diabetes. We studied the effect of an intervention that combined these 2 approaches on glycemic control. METHODS: Patients with diabetes were recruited from 10 federally qualified health centers in New Mexico. We used electronic health record (EHR) data to compare HbA1c levels prior to intervention enrollment with HbA1c levels after 3 months (early follow-up) and 12 months (late follow-up) following enrollment. We propensity matched intervention patients to comparison patients from other sites within the same electronic health records databases to estimate the average treatment effect. RESULTS: Among 557 intervention patients with HbA1c data, mean HbA1c decreased from 10.5% to 9.3% in the pre- versus postintervention periods (P < .001). As compared to the comparison group, the intervention was associated with a change in HbA1c of -0.2% (95% confidence interval [CI] -0.4%-0.5%) and -0.3 (95% CI -0.5-0.0) in the early and late follow-up cohorts, respectively. The intervention was associated with a significant increase in percentage of patients with HbA1c <8% in the late follow-up cohort (8.1%, 95% CI 2.2%-13.9%) but not the early follow-up cohort (3.6%, 95% CI -1.5% to 8.7%) DISCUSSION: The intervention was associated with a substantial decrease in HbA1c in intervention patients, although this improvement was not different from matched comparison patients in early follow-up. Although combining community health workers with Project ECHO may hold promise for improving glycemic control, particularly in the longer term, further evaluations are needed.

Organizational Factors Associated with Guideline Concordance of Chronic Disease Care and Management Practices.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines for managing and preventing chronic disease tend to be well-known. Yet, translation of this evidence into practice is inconsistent. We identify a combination of factors that are connected to guideline concordant delivery of evidence-informed chronic disease care in primary care. METHODS: Cross-sectional observational study; purposively selected 22 practices to vary on size, ownership and geographic location, using National Quality Forum metrics to ensure practices had a ≥ 70% quality level for at least 2 of the following: aspirin use in high-risk individuals, blood pressure control, cholesterol and diabetes management. Interviewed 2 professionals (eg, medical director, practice manager) per practice (n = 44) to understand staffing and clinical operations. Analyzed data using an iterative and inductive approach. RESULTS: Community Health Centers (CHCs) employed interdisciplinary clinical teams that included a variety of professionals as compared with hospital-health systems (HHS) and clinician-owned practices. Despite this difference, practice members consistently reported a number of functions that may be connected to clinical chronic care quality, including: having engaged leadership; a culture of teamwork; engaging in team-based care; using data to inform quality improvement; empaneling patients; and managing the care of patient panels, with a focus on continuity and comprehensiveness, as well as having a commitment to the community. CONCLUSIONS: There are mutable organizational attributes connected-guideline concordant chronic disease care in primary care. Research and policy reform are needed to promote and study how to achieve widespread adoption of these functions and organizational attributes that may be central to achieving equity and improving chronic disease prevention.

Organizational Factors Associated with Guideline Concordance of Chronic Disease Care and Management Practices.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines for managing and preventing chronic disease tend to be well-known. Yet, translation of this evidence into practice is inconsistent. We identify a combination of factors that are connected to guideline concordant delivery of evidence-informed chronic disease care in primary care. METHODS: Cross-sectional observational study; purposively selected 22 practices to vary on size, ownership and geographic location, using National Quality Forum metrics to ensure practices had a ≥ 70% quality level for at least 2 of the following: aspirin use in high-risk individuals, blood pressure control, cholesterol and diabetes management. Interviewed 2 professionals (eg, medical director, practice manager) per practice (n = 44) to understand staffing and clinical operations. Analyzed data using an iterative and inductive approach. RESULTS: Community Health Centers (CHCs) employed interdisciplinary clinical teams that included a variety of professionals as compared with hospital-health systems (HHS) and clinician-owned practices. Despite this difference, practice members consistently reported a number of functions that may be connected to clinical chronic care quality, including: having engaged leadership; a culture of teamwork; engaging in team-based care; using data to inform quality improvement; empaneling patients; and managing the care of patient panels, with a focus on continuity and comprehensiveness, as well as having a commitment to the community. CONCLUSIONS: There are mutable organizational attributes connected-guideline concordant chronic disease care in primary care. Research and policy reform are needed to promote and study how to achieve widespread adoption of these functions and organizational attributes that may be central to achieving equity and improving chronic disease prevention.

Telephone vs. Video Visits During COVID-19: Safety-Net Provider Perspectives.

OBJECTIVE: To review the frequency as well as the pros and cons of telephone and video-enabled telemedicine during the first 9 months of the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic as experienced by safety net providers across New York State (NYS). METHODS: Analysis of visits to 36 community health centers (CHCs) in NYS by modality (telephone vs video) from February to November 2020. Semi-structured interviews with 25 primary care, behavioral health, and pediatric providers from 8 CHCs. FINDINGS: In the week following the NYS stay-at-home order, video and telephone visits rose from 3.4 and 0% of total visits to 14.9 and 22.3%. At its peak, more than 60% of visits were conducted via telemedicine (April 2020) before tapering off to about 30% of visits (August 2020). Providers expressed a strong preference for video visits, particularly for situations when visual assessments were needed. Yet, more visits were conducted over telephone than video at all points throughout the pandemic. Video-specific advantages included enhanced ability to engage patients and use of visual cues to get a comprehensive look into the patient's life, including social supports, hygiene, and medication adherence. Telephone presented unique benefits, including greater privacy, feasibility, and ease of use that make it critical to engage with key populations and as a backup for when video was not an option. CONCLUSIONS: Despite challenges, providers reported positive experiences delivering care remotely using both telephone and video during the COVID-19 pandemic and believe both modalities are critical for enabling access to care in the safety net.

Measuring Implementation Strategy Fidelity in HealthyHearts NYC: A Complex Intervention Using Practice Facilitation in Primary Care.

Few studies have assessed the fidelity of practice facilitation (PF) as an implementation strategy, and none have used an a priori definition or conceptual framework of fidelity to guide fidelity assessment. The authors adapted the Conceptual Framework for Implementation Fidelity to guide fidelity assessment in HealthyHearts NYC, an intervention that used PF to improve adoption of cardiovascular disease evidence-based guidelines in primary care practices. Data from a web-based tracking system of 257 practices measured fidelity using 4 categories: frequency, duration, content, and coverage. Almost all (94.2%) practices received at least the required 13 PF visits. Facilitators spent on average 26.3 hours at each site. Most practices (95.7%) completed all Task List items, and 71.2% were educated on all Chronic Care Model strategies. The majority (65.8%) received full coverage. This study provides a model that practice managers and implementers can use to evaluate fidelity of PF, and potentially other implementation strategies.

A practice facilitation-guided intervention in primary care settings to reduce cardiovascular disease risk: a cost analysis.

BACKGROUND: A stepped-wedge, cluster randomized controlled trial assessed the effectiveness of practice facilitation (PF) for adoption of guidelines for prevention and treatment of cardiovascular disease risk factors. This study estimated the associated cost of PF for guideline adoption in small, private primary care practices. METHODS: The cost analysis included categories for start-up costs, intervention costs, and practice staff costs for the implemented PF-guided intervention. We estimated the total 1-year costs to operate the program and calculated the mean and range of the cost-per-practice by quarter of the intervention. We estimated the lower and upper bounds for all salary expenses, rounding to the nearest $100. RESULTS: Total 1-year intervention costs for all 261 practices ranged from $7,900,000 to $10,200,000, with program and practice salaries comprising $6,600,000-$8,400,000 of the total. Start-up costs were a small proportion (3%) of the total 1-year costs. Excluding start-up costs, quarter 1 cost-per-practice was the most expensive at $20,400-$26,700, and quarter 4 was the least expensive at about $10,000. Practice staff time (compared with program staff time) was the majority of the staffing costs at 75-84%. CONCLUSIONS: The PF strategy costs approximately $10,000 per practice per quarter for program and practice costs, once implemented and running at highest efficiency. Whether this program is "worth it" to the decision-maker depends on the relative costs and effectiveness of their other options for improving cardiovascular risk reduction. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study is retrospectively registered on January 5, 2016, at www.clinicaltrials.gov as NCT02646488 .