My Goals Are Not Their Goals: Barriers and Facilitators to Delivery of Patient-Centered Care for Patients with Multimorbidity.

BACKGROUND: Patient-centered care reflecting patient preferences and needs is integral to high-quality care. Individualized care is important for psychosocially complex or high-risk patients with multiple chronic conditions (i.e., multimorbidity), given greater potential risks of interventions and reduced benefits. These patients are increasingly prevalent in primary care. Few studies have examined provision of patient-centered care from the clinician perspective, particularly from primary care physicians serving in integrated, patient-centered medical home settings within the US Veterans Health Administration. OBJECTIVE: We sought to clarify facilitators and barriers perceived by primary care physicians in the Veterans Health Administration to delivering patient-centered care for high-risk or complex patients with multimorbidity. DESIGN: We conducted semi-structured telephone interviews from April to July 2020 among physicians across 20 clinical sites. Findings were analyzed with deductive content analysis based on conceptual models of patient-centeredness and hierarchical factors affecting care delivery. PARTICIPANTS: Of 23 physicians interviewed, most were female (n = 14/23, 61%), serving in hospital-affiliated outpatient clinics (n = 14/23, 61%). Participants had a mean of 21 (SD = 11.3) years of experience. KEY RESULTS: Facilitators included the following: effective physician-patient communication to individualize care, prioritize among multiple needs, and elicit goals to improve patient engagement; access to care, enabled by interdisciplinary teams, and dictating personalized care planning; effortful but worthwhile care coordination and continuity; meeting complex needs through effective teamwork; and integrating medical and non-medical care aspects in recognition of patients' psychosocial contexts. Barriers included the following: intra- and interpersonal (e.g., perceived patient reluctance to engage in care); organizational (e.g., limited encounter time); and community or policy impediments (e.g., state decisional capacity laws) to patient-centered care. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians perceived individual physician-patient interactions were the greatest facilitators or barriers to patient-centered care. Efforts to increase primary care patient-centeredness for complex or high-risk patients with multimorbidity could focus on targeting physician-patient communication and reducing interpersonal conflict.

The role of organizational learning and resilience for change in building quality improvement capacity in primary care.

BACKGROUND: The extent that organizational learning and resilience for the change process, that is, adaptive reserve (AR), is a component of building practice capacity for continuous quality improvement (QI) is unknown. PURPOSE: The aim of the study was to examine the association of AR and development of QI capacity. METHODOLOGY: One hundred forty-two primary care practices were evaluated at baseline and 12 months in a randomized trial to improve care quality. Practice AR was measured by staff survey along with a validated QI capacity assessment (QICA). We assessed the association of baseline QICA with baseline AR and both baseline and change in AR with change in QICA from 0 to 12 months. Effect modification by presence of QI infrastructure in parent organizations and trial arm was examined. RESULTS: Mean QICA increased from 6.5 to 8.1 (p < .001), and mean AR increased from 71.8 to 73.9 points (p < .001). At baseline, there was a significant association between AR and QICA scores: The QICA averaged 0.34 points higher (95% CI [0.04, 0.64], p = .03) per 10-point difference in AR. There was a significant association between baseline AR and 12-month QICA-which averaged 0.30 points higher (95% CI [0.02, 0.57], p = .04) per 10 points in baseline AR. There was no association between changes in AR and the QICA from 0 to 12 months and no effect modification by trial arm or external QI infrastructure. CONCLUSIONS: Baseline AR was positively associated with both baseline and follow-up QI capacity, but there was no association between change in AR and change in the QICA, suggesting AR may be a precondition to growth in QI capacity. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Findings suggest that developing AR may be a valuable step prior to undertaking QI-oriented growth, with implications for sequencing of development strategies, including added gain in QI capacity development from building AR prior to engaging in transformation efforts.

High-Risk Patient Experiences Associated With an Intensive Primary Care Management Program in the Veterans Health Administration.

Intensive management programs may improve health care experiences among high-risk and complex patients. We assessed patient experience among (1) prior enrollees (n = 59) of an intensive management program (2014-2018); (2) nonenrollees (n = 356) at program sites; and (3) nonprogram site patients (n = 728), using a patient survey based on the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems in 2019. Outcomes included patient ratings of patient-centered care; overall health care experience; and satisfaction with their usual outpatient care provider. In multivariate models, enrollees were more satisfied with their current provider versus nonenrollees within program sites (adjusted odds ratio 2.36; 95% confidence interval 1.15-4.85).

Factors affecting primary care physician decision-making for patients with complex multimorbidity: a qualitative interview study.

BACKGROUND: Patients with multiple chronic conditions (multimorbidity) and additional psychosocial complexity are at higher risk of adverse outcomes. Establishing treatment or care plans for these patients must account for their disease interactions, finite self-management abilities, and even conflicting treatment recommendations from clinical practice guidelines. Despite existing insight into how primary care physicians (PCPs) approach care decisions for their patients in general, less is known about how PCPs make care planning decisions for more complex populations particularly within a medical home setting. We therefore sought to describe factors affecting physician decision-making when care planning for complex patients with multimorbidity within the team-based, patient-centered medical home setting in the integrated healthcare system of the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, the Veterans Health Administration (VHA). METHODS: This was a qualitative study involving semi-structured telephone interviews with PCPs working > 40% time in VHA clinics. Interviews were conducted from April to July, 2020. Content was analyzed with deductive and inductive thematic analysis. RESULTS: 23 physicians participated in interviews; most were MDs (n = 21) and worked in hospital-affiliated clinics (n = 14) across all regions of the VHA's national clinic network. We found internal, external, and relationship-based factors, with developed subthemes describing factors affecting decision-making for complex patients with multimorbidity. Physicians described tailoring decisions to individual patients; making decisions in keeping with an underlying internal style or habit; working towards an overarching goal for care; considering impacts from patient access and resources on care plans; deciding within boundaries provided by organizational structures; collaborating on care plans with their care team; and impacts on decisions from their own emotions and relationship with patient. CONCLUSIONS: PCPs described internal, external, and relationship-based factors that affected their care planning for high-risk and complex patients with multimorbidity in the VHA. Findings offer useful strategies employed by physicians to effectively conduct care planning for complex patients in a medical home setting, such as delegation of follow-up within multidisciplinary care teams, optimizing visit time vs frequency, and deliberate investment in patient-centered relationship building to gain buy-in to care plans.

Primary Care Physician Perspectives on the Influence of Patient Values, Health Priorities, and Preferences on Clinical Decision-Making for Complex Patients with Multimorbidity: A Qualitative Study.

Introduction: The prevalence of patients with multimorbidity (ie, multiple chronic conditions) is increasing. Clinical decision-making guided by patients' values, health priorities and goals, and treatment preferences is particularly important in the context of interacting diseases and psychosocial needs. Physicians face challenges incorporating patient perspectives into care plans. We examined primary care physician (PCP) views on the influence of patients' values, health priorities and goals, and preferences on clinical decisions for patients with multimorbidity and increased psychosocial complexity. Methods: We conducted semi-structured telephone interviews with 23 PCPs within patient-centered medical home teams in a nationally integrated health system in the United States between May and July 2020. Data were analyzed via thematic analysis with deductive and inductive coding. Results: Three major themes emerged: 1. Patient personal values were rarely explicitly discussed in routine clinical encounters but informed more commonly discussed concepts of patient priorities, goals, and preferences; 2. Patient values, health priorities and goals, and preferences were sources of divergent views about care plans between healthcare teams, patients, and families; 3. Physicians used explicit strategies to communicate and negotiate about patient values, health priorities and goals, and preferences when developing care plans, including trust-building; devoting extra effort to individualizing care; connecting patient values to healthcare recommendations; deliberate elicitation and acknowledgement of patient concerns; providing "space" for patient perspectives; incorporating family into care planning; pairing physician to patient priorities; and collaborative teamwork. Conclusion: Primary care physicians perceive patient values, health priorities and goals, and preferences as influential during clinical decision-making for complex patients with multimorbidity. Participants used concrete strategies to negotiate alignment of these aspects when physician-patient divergence occurred. While rarely discussed directly in clinical encounters, personal values affected patient health priorities, goals, and preferences during care planning, suggesting a clinical role for more deliberate elicitation and discussion of patient values for this population.

A Strategy to Prepare Primary Care Clinicians for Discussing Stopping Cancer Screening With Adults Older Than 75 Years.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Adults older than 75 years are overscreened for cancer, especially those with less than 10-year life expectancy. This study aimed to learn the effects of providing primary care providers (PCPs) with scripts for discussing stopping mammography and colorectal cancer (CRC) screening and with information on patient's 10-year life expectancy on their patients' intentions to be screened for these cancers. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Patient participants, identified via PCP appointment logs, completed a questionnaire pre- and postvisit. Primary care providers were given scripts for discussing stopping screening and information on patient's 10-year life expectancy before these visits. Primary care providers completed a questionnaire at the end of the study. Patients and PCPs were asked about discussing stopping cancer screening and patient life expectancy. Patient screening intentions (1-15 Likert scale; lower scores suggest lower intentions) were compared pre- and postvisit using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. RESULTS: Ninety patients older than 75 years (47% of eligible patients reached by phone) from 45 PCPs participated. Patient mean age was 80.0 years (SD = 2.9), 43 (48%) were female, and mean life expectancy was 9.7 years (SD = 2.4). Thirty-seven PCPs (12 community-based) completed a questionnaire. Primary care providers found the scripts helpful (32 [89%]) and thought they would use them frequently (29 [81%]). Primary care providers also found patient life expectancy information helpful (35 [97%]). However, only 8 PCPs (22%) reported feeling comfortable discussing patient life expectancy. Patients' intentions to undergo CRC screening (9.0 [SD = 5.3] to 6.5 [SD = 6.0], p < .0001) and mammography screening (12.9 [SD = 3.0] to 11.7 [SD = 4.9], p = .08) decreased from pre- to postvisit (significantly for CRC). Sixty-three percent of patients (54/86) were interested in discussing life expectancy with their PCP previsit and 56% (47/84) postvisit. DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS: PCPs found scripts for discussing stopping cancer screening and information on patient life expectancy helpful. Possibly, as a result, their patients older than 75 years had lower intentions of being screened for CRC. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03480282.

Testing a self-directed lifestyle intervention among veterans: The D-ELITE pragmatic clinical trial.

Nearly half of Veterans have obesity, fueling chronic diseases. The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) offers an evidence-based behavioral weight management intervention called MOVE!, mostly delivered through in-person group sessions. Few eligible Veterans participate due to factors like distance and preferences, mirroring barriers in the general population. Practical alternatives to standard in-person programs are needed to improve access and engagement. A self-directed lifestyle intervention called D-ELITE-delivered through pre-recorded videos by DVD or online streaming-previously efficacious in a general primary care population, may provide such an alternative. This pragmatic clinical trial will evaluate whether D-ELITE improves weight and general health status among Veterans with obesity, relative to VA usual care. The yearlong intervention includes one orientation by phone, supplemental lifestyle coaching primarily via technology-based messages, 12 DVD or online streaming sessions over 3 months, and continued self-directed weight management for months 4-12. Participants use MyFitnessPal.com or paper booklets for self-monitoring weight, diet, and physical activity. Follow-up assessments at 12 and 24 months are administered by mail or phone. The study hypothesis is that compared with usual care, D-ELITE will lead to greater improvements in 12-month weight loss, per VA electronic health records, and general physical health status, assessed using the self-reported SF-12 physical composite score. We will also explore D-ELITE's effects on secondary biometric (e.g., HbA1c) and intermediate (e.g., diet) outcomes, reach, and budget impact. If effective, D-ELITE will offer a potentially scalable, low-cost alternative to VA's existing weight loss interventions by mitigating barriers presented by distance and technology.

REDUCING ER USE THROUGH A TRAINEE-DESIGNED, INTERPROFESSIONAL CARE GROUP FOR HIGH-UTILIZING CHRONICALLY ILL PATIENTS: A PILOT PROGRAM.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare utilization is skewed to a subset of high-need, high-use patients, but optimal models of care are not known. PURPOSE: To reduce emergency room (ER) use and hospital readmissions, trainees designed an innovative model of care delivery for chronically ill, high-utilizing adult patients. METHODS: Enrolled patients (N = 65) joined an interprofessional care program (nutrition, behavioral health, pharmacy, and care coordination), located in a single ambulatory clinic with extended hours. RESULTS: Evaluated by generalized linear mixed-effects models, the primary outcome of all-cause ER visits showed a significant decreasing trend after enrollment, from an increasing odds of ER visits (OR 1.07) in the 12-months prior to the program, compared to a decreasing trend post-enrollment (OR 0.88). Implementation and completion of the program was cost neutral. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: This pilot supports team-based ambulatory care models that address the diverse needs of chronically ill patients, with a focus on improving select health services utilization.