How power shapes behavior: Evidence from physicians.

Power-the asymmetric control of valued resources-affects most human interactions. Although power is challenging to study with real-world data, a distinctive dataset allowed us to do so within the critical context of doctor-patient relationships. Using 1.5 million quasi-random assignments in US military emergency departments, we examined how power differentials between doctor and patient (measured by using differences in military ranks) affect physician behavior. Our findings indicate that power confers nontrivial advantages: "High-power" patients (who outrank their physician) receive more resources and have better outcomes than equivalently ranked "low-power" patients. Patient promotions even increase physician effort. Furthermore, low-power patients suffer if their physician concurrently cares for a high-power patient. Doctor-patient concordance on race and sex also matters. Overall, power-driven variation in behavior can harm the most vulnerable populations in health care settings.

Impact of performance-based budgeting on quality outcomes in U.S. military health care facilities.

BACKGROUND: Performance-based budgeting (PBB) is a variation of pay for performance that has been used in government hospitals but could be applicable to any integrated system. It works by increasing or decreasing funding based on preestablished performance thresholds, which incentivizes organizations to improve performance. In late 2006, the U.S. Army implemented a PBB program that tied hospital-level funding decisions to performance on key cost and quality-related metrics. PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to estimate the impact of PBB on quality improvement in U.S. Army health care facilities. APPROACH: This study used a retrospective difference-in-differences analysis of data from two Defense Health Agency data repositories. The merged data set encompassed administrative, demographic, and performance information about 428 military health care facilities. Facility-level performance data on quality indicators were compared between 187 Army PBB facilities and a comparison group of 241 non-PBB Navy and Air Force facilities before and after program implementation. RESULTS: The Army's PBB programs had a positive impact on quality performance. Relative to comparison facilities, facilities that participated in PBB programs increased performance for over half of the indicators under investigation. Furthermore, performance was either sustained or continued to improve over 5 years for five of the six performance indicators examined long term. CONCLUSION: Study findings indicate that PBB may be an effective policy mechanism for improving facility-level performance on quality indicators. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: This study adds to the extant literature on pay for performance by examining the specific case of PBB. It demonstrates that quality performance can be influenced internally through centralized budgeting processes. Though specific to military hospitals, the findings might have applicability to other public and private sector hospitals who wish to incentivize performance internally in their organizational subunits through centralized budgeting processes.

Remote patient monitoring to facilitate same-day discharge after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: a pilot evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Limited hospital inpatient capacity, exacerbated by SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) and associated staffing shortages, has driven interest in converting surgeries historically done as inpatient procedures to same-day surgeries (SDS). Remote patient monitoring (RPM) has the potential to increase safety and confidence in SDS but has had mixed success in a bariatric population. OBJECTIVES: Assess the feasibility of and adherence to a protocol offering patients same-day laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (SG) supported by RPM with an updated wearable device. Secondary outcomes were readmissions, costs, adherence, and clinical alarm rates. SETTING: Academic, military tertiary referral center (United States). METHODS: A single-center, retrospective case control study of patients undergoing SG, comparing SDS with RPM to patients admitted to the hospital for SG during this time. Patients for SDS were selected by set inclusion/exclusion criteria and patient/surgeon preference, and perioperative management was standardized. RESULTS: Twenty patients were enrolled in the SDS group, then compared with 53 inpatients. Inpatients were older (46 versus 39, P = .006), but with no significant differences in sex, preoperative body mass index, or co-morbidities. RPM wearable and blood pressure adherence was found to be 97% and 80%, respectively. Readmission rates were similar (10% versus 7.5%, P > .05). RPM alarm rates were .5 (0-1.3) per patient for each 24-hour home monitoring period. SDS patients also demonstrated the potential for cost savings over inpatient SG, depending on the number of patients monitored per day as well as the healthcare setting. CONCLUSIONS: SG as SDS with RPM was a feasible approach. It should be evaluated in other surgical procedures and higher-risk patient populations.

Financial and Clinical Impact of Virtual Care During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Difference-in-Differences Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Virtual care (VC) and remote patient monitoring programs were deployed widely during the COVID-19 pandemic. Deployments were heterogeneous and evolved as the pandemic progressed, complicating subsequent attempts to quantify their impact. The unique arrangement of the US Military Health System (MHS) enabled direct comparison between facilities that did and did not implement a standardized VC program. The VC program enrolled patients symptomatic for COVID-19 or at risk for severe disease. Patients' vital signs were continuously monitored at home with a wearable device (Current Health). A central team monitored vital signs and conducted daily or twice-daily reviews (the nurse-to-patient ratio was 1:30). OBJECTIVE: Our goal was to describe the operational model of a VC program for COVID-19, evaluate its financial impact, and detail its clinical outcomes. METHODS: This was a retrospective difference-in-differences (DiD) evaluation that compared 8 military treatment facilities (MTFs) with and 39 MTFs without a VC program. Tricare Prime beneficiaries diagnosed with COVID-19 (Medicare Severity Diagnosis Related Group 177 or International Classification of Diseases-10 codes U07.1/07.2) who were eligible for care within the MHS and aged 21 years and or older between December 2020 and December 2021 were included. Primary outcomes were length of stay and associated cost savings; secondary outcomes were escalation to physical care from home, 30-day readmissions after VC discharge, adherence to the wearable, and alarms per patient-day. RESULTS: A total of 1838 patients with COVID-19 were admitted to an MTF with a VC program of 3988 admitted to the MHS. Of these patients, 237 (13%) were enrolled in the VC program. The DiD analysis indicated that centers with the program had a 12% lower length of stay averaged across all COVID-19 patients, saving US $2047 per patient. The total cost of equipping, establishing, and staffing the VC program was estimated at US $3816 per day. Total net savings were estimated at US $2.3 million in the first year of the program across the MHS. The wearables were activated by 231 patients (97.5%) and were monitored through the Current Health platform for a total of 3474 (median 7.9, range 3.2-16.5) days. Wearable adherence was 85% (IQR 63%-94%). Patients triggered a median of 1.6 (IQR 0.7-5.2) vital sign alarms per patient per day; 203 (85.7%) were monitored at home and then directly discharged from VC; 27 (11.4%) were escalated to a physical hospital bed as part of their initial admission. There were no increases in 30-day readmissions or emergency department visits. CONCLUSIONS: Monitored patients were adherent to the wearable device and triggered a manageable number of alarms/day for the monitoring-team-to-patient ratio. Despite only enrolling 13% of COVID-19 patients at centers where it was available, the program offered substantial savings averaged across all patients in those centers without adversely affecting clinical outcomes.

Utilization Variation In Military Versus Civilian Care: Evidence From TRICARE.

The Defense Health Agency was established five years ago to integrate and centralize the provision of health care that had been managed separately by the Army, Navy, and Air Force. One favored proposal is to increase the use of private-sector or civilian health care providers. This study compared geographic variation in health care use (a common proxy for efficiency) between patients with a military (direct care) system and those with a civilian (purchased care) system primary care provider-both of which are offered in TRICARE Prime, a health plan that resembles a health maintenance organization. We found similar levels of variation across care utilization metrics with the exception of specialty care, in which the military sample had less variation than its civilian counterpart did. In the military system, risk-adjusted utilization levels were substantially lower for primary care visits and higher for specialty care visits, compared to these visits under the civilian system. Our findings suggest that expanding the use of the civilian system might not achieve the desired efficiencies. Rather, focusing on specialty care in the military system and expanding primary care in the civilian system could help achieve operational readiness and enhanced efficiency.