Is primary care ready for a potential new public health emergency in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, now subsided?

INTRODUCTION: The lingering burden of the COVID-19 pandemic on primary care clinicians and practices poses a public health emergency for the United States. This study uses clinician-reported data to examine changes in primary care demand and capacity. METHODS: From March 2020 to March 2022, 36 electronic surveys were fielded among primary care clinicians responding to survey invitations as posted on listservs and identified through social media and crowd sourcing. Quantitative and qualitative analyses were performed on both closed- and open-ended survey questions. RESULTS: An average of 937 respondents per survey represented family medicine, pediatrics, internal medicine, geriatrics, and other specialties. Responses reported increases in patient health burden, including worsening chronic care management and increasing volume and complexity. A higher frequency of dental- and eyesight-related issues was noted by respondents, as was a substantial increase in mental or emotional health needs. Respondents also noted increased demand, "record high" wait times, and struggles to keep up with patient needs and the higher volume of patient questions. Frequent qualitative statements highlighted the mismatch of patient needs with practice capacity. Staffing shortages and the inability to fill open clinical positions impaired clinicians' ability to meet patient needs and a substantial proportion of respondents indicated an intention to leave the profession or knew someone who had. CONCLUSION: These data signal an urgent need to take action to support the ability of primary care to meet ongoing patient and population health care needs.

A novel methodological approach to participant engagement and policy relevance for community-based primary medical care research during the COVID-19 pandemic in Australia and New Zealand.

Community-based primary care, such as general practice (GP) or urgent care, serves as the primary point of access to healthcare for most Australians and New Zealanders. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has created significant and ongoing disruptions to primary care. Traditional research methods have contributed to gaps in understanding the experiences of primary care workers during the pandemic. This paper describes a novel research design and method that intended to capture the evolving impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on primary care workers in Australia and New Zealand. Recurrent, rapid cycle surveys were fielded from May 2020 through December 2021 in Australia, and May 2020 through February 2021 in New Zealand. Rapid survey development, fielding, triangulated analysis and dissemination of results allowed close to real-time communication of relevant issues among general practice workers, researchers and policy-makers. A conceptual model is presented to support longitudinal analysis of primary care worker experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic in Australia and New Zealand, and key learnings from applying this novel method are discussed. This paper will assist future research teams in development and execution of policy-relevant research in times of change and may inform further areas of interest for COVID-19 research in primary care.

You Cannot Function in "Overwhelm": Helping Primary Care Navigate the Slow End of the Pandemic.

GOAL: This study was developed to explicate underlying organizational factors contributing to the deterioration of primary care clinicians' mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Using data from the Larry A. Green Center for the Advancement of Primary Health Care for the Public Good's national survey of primary care clinicians from March 2020 to March 2022, a multidisciplinary team analyzed more than 11,150 open-ended comments. Phase 1 of the analysis happened in real-time as surveys were returned, using deductive and inductive coding. Phase 2 used grounded theory to identify emergent themes. Qualitative findings were triangulated with the survey's quantitative data. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: The clinicians shifted from feelings of anxiety and uncertainty at the start of the pandemic to isolation, lack of fulfillment, moral injury, and plans to leave the profession. The frequency with which they spoke of depression, burnout, and moral injury was striking. The contributors to this distress included crushing workloads, worsening staff shortages, and insufficient reimbursement. Consequences, both felt and anticipated, included fatigue and demoralization from the inability to manage escalating workloads. Survey findings identified responses that could alleviate the mental health crisis, namely: (1) measuring and customizing workloads based on work capacity; (2) quantifying resources needed to return to sufficient staffing levels; (3) promoting state and federal support for sustainable practice infrastructures with less administrative burden; and (4) creating patient visits of different lengths to rebuild relationships and trust and facilitate more accurate diagnoses. PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS: Attention to clinicians' mental health should be rapidly directed to on-demand, confidential mental health support so they can receive the care they need and not worry about any stigma or loss of license for accepting that help. Interventions that address work-life balance, workload, and resources can improve care, support retention of the critically important primary care workforce, and attract more trainees to primary care careers.

Lessons learned from CMS's National Partnership to Improve Dementia Care: a thematic synthesis of multiple stakeholder-engaged studies.

BACKGROUND: Antipsychotic prescribing in United States nursing homes (NHs) has decreased since the Center for Medicare & Medicaid Service debuted the National Partnership to Improve Dementia Care in Nursing Homes (NP); however, reductions have stalled. To help explain persistent antipsychotic use despite the NP's reduction efforts, the perspectives of diverse NP stakeholders were qualitatively assessed. This study aimed to re-evaluate these individual perspectives in combined thematic synthesis to discover NP improvement opportunities undetectable in single stakeholder assessments. METHODS: Thematic synthesis. Through immersive crystallisation, original source coding results were organised into related descriptive themes. Similarities and differences were identified, and descriptive themes were regrouped into new, increasingly abstract, analytical themes. This cycle continued until variances were resolved and analytic themes sufficiently described and explained all initial descriptive themes. RESULTS: Three analytic themes emerged regarding NP improvement opportunities. The NP's positive impacts would be augmented by: (i) a deeper and expanded appreciation of stakeholder perspectives; (ii) more urgent and rapid adaptation to unintended adverse outcomes; and (iii) greater recognition of the contextual and environmental factors influencing decisions to prescribe or not prescribe antipsychotic medications. Stakeholder groups described: perspectives they perceived as inadequately considered by the NP; insufficient NP engagement with the stakeholders capable of creating evidenced, affordable, and available non-pharmacologic therapies for dementia symptoms; recognition that dementia interventions effective for a specific individual at a specific time in a specific community may not generalise; and diverse ongoing undesirable outcomes from NP policies that could be mitigated by NP modifications. CONCLUSIONS: The NP has done much to advance dementia care in NHs. Notwithstanding, these results suggest the NP would only be improved through increasingly comprehensive inclusion of stakeholder perspectives, enhanced incorporation of individual contextual factors, and a more decisive mechanism for ongoing and continual adaptation.

Understanding Long-Stay Gabapentin Use Increases: A National Nursing Home Clinician Survey on Prescribing Intent.

OBJECTIVES: Explore the indications for long-stay gabapentin use and elucidate the factors spurring the rapid increase in gabapentin prescribing in nursing homes (NHs). METHODS: National cross-sectional survey of NH prescribers distributed anonymously using SurveyMonkey. Sampling for convenience was obtained through crowdsourcing, leveraging collaborations with NH clinician organizations. Developed by a multidisciplinary team, pilot data/existing literature informed survey content. RESULTS: A total of 131 surveys completed. Participants: 71% white, 52% female, 71% physicians. Off-label gabapentin prescribing was ubiquitous. Nearly every clinician used gabapentin for neuropathic pain, most for any form of pain. Many clinicians also prescribe gabapentin to moderate psychiatric symptoms and behaviors. Clinicians' prescribing was influenced by opioid, antipsychotic, and anxiolytic reduction policies because gabapentin was perceived as an unmonitored and safer alternative. CONCLUSIONS: Off-label gabapentin increases are closely linked to opioid reduction efforts as more NH clinicians utilize gabapentin as an unmonitored opioid alternative. Our results highlight, however, the less recognized significance of long-stay prescribing for psychiatric symptoms and the similar contribution of psychotropic reduction initiatives, a phenomenon warranting further scrutiny. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Clinicians perceive gabapentin as safer than the drugs it is replacing. Whether this is true remains unclear; the individual- and population-level risks of increased gabapentin use are largely unknown.

The Role of Primary Care in Improving Population Health.

Policy Points Systems based on primary care have better population health, health equity, and health care quality, and lower health care expenditure. Primary care can be a boundary-spanning force to integrate and personalize the many factors from which population health emerges. Equitably advancing population health requires understanding and supporting the complexly interacting mechanisms by which primary care influences health, equity, and health costs.

Telemedicine in Primary Care: Lessons Learned About Implementing Health Care Innovations During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

PURPOSE: During the COVID-19 pandemic, telemedicine emerged as an important tool in primary care. Technology and policy-related challenges, however, revealed barriers to adoption and implementation. This report describes the findings from weekly and monthly surveys of primary care clinicians regarding telemedicine during the first 2 years of the pandemic. METHODS: From March 2020 to March 2022, we conducted electronic surveys using convenience samples obtained through social networking and crowdsourcing. Unique tokens were used to confidentially track respondents over time. A multidisciplinary team conducted quantitative and qualitative analyses to identify key concepts and trends. RESULTS: A total of 36 surveys resulted in an average of 937 respondents per survey, representing clinicians from all 50 states and multiple specialties. Initial responses indicated general difficulties in implementing telemedicine due to poor infrastructure and reimbursement mechanisms. Over time, attitudes toward telemedicine improved and respondents considered video and telephone-based care important tools for their practice, though not a replacement for in-person care. CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of telemedicine during COVID-19 identified barriers and opportunities for technology adoption and highlighted steps that could support primary care clinics' ability to learn, adapt, and implement technology.

Measuring Primary Care Across 35 OECD Countries.

PURPOSE: To examine the psychometric properties and scores of the Person-Centered Primary Care Measure (PCPCM) in 28 languages and 35 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries. METHODS: Using a paid online sampling service, we requested age- and sex-representative samples of 360 adults in each country. We administered the Person-Centered Primary Care Measure-a previously validated 11-item, patient-reported measure that was developed using what patients and clinicians said is most important about primary care. We also assessed construct validity through associations with demographics, the Patient-Enablement Instrument, number of years the person had been with their primary care physician and practice, whether the patient thought the doctor knowing the results would improve their care, and whether it was hard to complete the survey. We assessed the psychometric properties of the PCPCM in each country and report the summative and item-specific PCPCM scores for each country. RESULTS: The PCPCM exhibited solid psychometric properties across all languages and countries, with Cronbach's alphas ranging from 0.88 to 0.95, and corrected item-total correlations ranging from 0.47 to 0.81, with the vast majority of countries ranging from the low 0.50s to the high 0.70s. Multiple analyses showed strong evidence of concurrent validity. With a potential range from a low of 1 to a high of 4, the overall mean score was 2.74, with a standard deviation of 0.19. Mean PCPCM scores ranged from the lowest in Sweden (2.28) to the highest in Turkey (3.08), with Germany ranking second (3.01), and the United States third (2.99). CONCLUSION: The internal consistency and concurrent validity of the PCPCM across multiple countries provides strong evidence of the coherence of the breadth of primary care functions that patients and clinicians say are important. The diversity of total and item-specific scores across countries provokes interesting hypotheses about the influence of each different country's policies, practices, demographics, and culture on primary care, and provides a strong impetus for further ecological and individual data analyses using the Person-Centered Primary Care Measure. Annals "Online First" article.

Caregiver and Clinician Perspectives on Missed Well-Child Visits.

PURPOSE: Despite the benefits of well-child care visits, up to one-half of these visits are missed. Little is known about why children miss them, so we undertook a qualitative study to elucidate these factors. METHODS: We interviewed 17 caregivers whose children had missed well-child visits and 6 clinicians, focusing on 3 areas: the value of well-child visits, barriers to attendance, and facilitators of attendance. Transcripts were analyzed with a grounded theory approach and thematic analysis. RESULTS: Caregivers and clinicians identified similar important aspects of well-child visits: immunizations, detection of disease, and monitoring of growth and development. Both groups identified similar barriers to attendance: transportation, difficulty taking time off from work, child care, and other social stressors. CONCLUSIONS: Further work to explore how addressing social determinants of health might improve attendance of well-child visits is needed.

Reporting of paclitaxel-induced peripheral neuropathy symptoms to clinicians among women with breast cancer: a qualitative study.

PURPOSE: Cases of chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) under-reporting have been sporadically described in the literature, but no studies have focused on actively examining this behavior. Our primary aim was to identify women who purposefully under-reported CIPN, along with reasons for doing so. A secondary aim was to explore factors enabling or hindering communication of CIPN to clinicians. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with women with breast cancer who had received paclitaxel in a prospective observational study. The interview guide was developed based on factors hypothesized to influence side effect disclosure to clinicians. Interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim, and thematically content analyzed. RESULTS: Thirty-four women were interviewed. Three main themes emerged from the analysis: (1) enablers of CIPN reporting (e.g., positive relationship with the oncology team, sufficient appointment time, existence of alternative communication channels to office visits, expectation of CIPN as a side effect); (2) deterrents to CIPN reporting (e.g., perception of need to complete the full course of therapy, fear of treatment discontinuation, lack of knowledge of long-term consequences of CIPN); and (3) balancing survival versus functional impairment due to CIPN. Women prioritized efficacy over CIPN until physical functioning was meaningfully affected. No patients reported purposeful CIPN under-reporting, but three women admitted having considered doing so. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the lack of evidence of CIPN withholding, women considered both the effectiveness and the toxicity of paclitaxel treatment, as well as beliefs about treatment and long-term consequences of CIPN and relationship with the oncology team, when deciding whether to report CIPN symptoms.

A New Comprehensive Measure of High-Value Aspects of Primary Care.

PURPOSE: To develop and evaluate a concise measure of primary care that is grounded in the experience of patients, clinicians, and health care payers. METHODS: We asked crowd-sourced samples of 412 patients, 525 primary care clinicians, and 85 health care payers to describe what provides value in primary care, then asked 70 primary care and health services experts in a 2½ day international conference to provide additional insights. A multidisciplinary team conducted a qualitative analysis of the combined data to develop a parsimonious set of patient-reported items. We evaluated items using factor analysis, Rasch modeling, and association analyses among 2 online samples and 4 clinical samples from diverse patient populations. RESULTS: The resulting person-centered primary care measure parsimoniously represents the broad scope of primary care, with 11 domains each represented by a single item: accessibility, advocacy, community context, comprehensiveness, continuity, coordination, family context, goal-oriented care, health promotion, integration, and relationship. Principal axes factor analysis identified a single factor. Factor loadings and corrected item-total correlations were >0.6 in online samples (n = 2,229) and >0.5 in clinical samples (n = 323). Factor scores were fairly normally distributed in online patient samples, and skewed toward higher ratings in point-of-care patient samples. Rasch models showed a broad spread of person and item scores, acceptable item-fit statistics, and little item redundancy. Preliminary concurrent validity analyses supported hypothesized associations. CONCLUSIONS: The person-centered primary care measure reliably, comprehensively, and parsimoniously assesses the aspects of care thought to represent high-value primary care by patients, clinicians, and payers. The measure is ready for further validation and outcome analyses, and for use in focusing attention on what matters about primary care, while reducing measurement burden.

Opportunities for Occupational Therapy on a Primary Care Team.

IMPORTANCE: Leaders in the occupational therapy profession have called for occupational therapy's inclusion in primary care, but little is known about the occupational needs of patients in this setting. OBJECTIVE: To explore the need for and potential role of occupational therapy in a team-based primary care clinic. DESIGN: A qualitative descriptive study using a convenience sample of clinicians and patients. Meetings and semistructured interviews were recorded, transcribed, and coded by multiple coders using a general immersion-crystallization approach to identify relevant themes. SETTING: Outpatient complex care clinic of an urban academic medical center. PARTICIPANTS: The study included a voluntary sample of clinicians and patients from the complex care clinic. Patients were recruited from a staff-provided list; eligible patients had attended the clinic for at least 1 yr. All patients had multiple chronic conditions and were uninsured or received Medicaid. RESULTS: Researchers attended 10 clinician team meetings and conducted 13 patient interviews and 10 clinician interviews. Four domains of patient need were identified by both patients and clinicians: complex medical management, patients' limited resources, mental health needs, and challenges to occupation. Clinicians also identified cognitive-behavioral challenges affecting care, including lack of engagement and poor problem solving. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The makeup of the clinic team reflected their intent to address medical, socioeconomic, and mental health domains. However, cognitive-behavioral challenges and patients' occupational limitations were not consistently addressed. Thus, patients had unmet needs that occupational therapy practitioners were qualified to address. WHAT THIS ARTICLE ADDS: This study adds to the available literature examining patient needs and clinician challenges in a primary care clinic. Patients have occupational needs that are not being addressed in primary care, indicating a need for occupational therapy in this setting.

Harnessing Information Technology to Inform Patients Facing Routine Decisions: Cancer Screening as a Test Case.

PURPOSE: Technology could transform routine decision making by anticipating patients' information needs, assessing where patients are with decisions and preferences, personalizing educational experiences, facilitating patient-clinician information exchange, and supporting follow-up. This study evaluated whether patients and clinicians will use such a decision module and its impact on care, using 3 cancer screening decisions as test cases. METHODS: Twelve practices with 55,453 patients using a patient portal participated in this prospective observational cohort study. Participation was open to patients who might face a cancer screening decision: women aged 40 to 49 who had not had a mammogram in 2 years, men aged 55 to 69 who had not had a prostate-specific antigen test in 2 years, and adults aged 50 to 74 overdue for colorectal cancer screening. Data sources included module responses, electronic health record data, and a postencounter survey. RESULTS: In 1 year, one-fifth of the portal users (11,458 patients) faced a potential cancer screening decision. Among these patients, 20.6% started and 7.9% completed the decision module. Fully 47.2% of module completers shared responses with their clinician. After their next office visit, 57.8% of those surveyed thought their clinician had seen their responses, and many reported the module made their appointment more productive (40.7%), helped engage them in the decision (47.7%), broadened their knowledge (48.1%), and improved communication (37.5%). CONCLUSIONS: Many patients face decisions that can be anticipated and proactively facilitated through technology. Although use of technology has the potential to make visits more efficient and effective, cultural, workflow, and technical changes are needed before it could be widely disseminated.

Effective team-based primary care: observations from innovative practices.

BACKGROUND: Team-based care is now recognized as an essential feature of high quality primary care, but there is limited empiric evidence to guide practice transformation. The purpose of this paper is to describe advances in the configuration and deployment of practice teams based on in-depth study of 30 primary care practices viewed as innovators in team-based care. METHODS: As part of LEAP, a national program of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, primary care experts nominated 227 innovative primary care practices. We selected 30 practices for intensive study through review of practice descriptive and performance data. Each practice hosted a 3-day site visit between August, 2012 and September, 2013, where specific advances in team configuration and roles were noted. Advances were identified by site visitors and confirmed at a meeting involving representatives from each of the 30 practices. RESULTS: LEAP practices have expanded the roles of existing staff and added new personnel to provide the person power and skills needed to perform the tasks and functions expected of a patient-centered medical home (PCMH). LEAP practice teams generally include a rich array of staff, especially registered nurses (RNs), behavioral health specialists, and lay health workers. Most LEAP practices organize their staff into core teams, which are built around partnerships between providers and specific Medical Assistants (MAs), and often include registered nurses (RNs) and others such as health coaches or receptionists. MAs, RNs, and other staff are heavily involved in the planning and delivery of preventive and chronic illness care. The care of more complex patients is supported by behavioral health specialists, RN care managers, and pharmacists. Standing orders and protocols enable staff to act independently. CONCLUSIONS: The 30 LEAP practices engage health professional and lay staff in patient care to the maximum extent, which enables the practices to meet the expectations of a PCMH and helps free up providers to focus on tasks that only they can perform.

Metrics for assessing improvements in primary health care.

Metrics focus attention on what is important. Balanced metrics of primary health care inform purpose and aspiration as well as performance. Purpose in primary health care is about improving the health of people and populations in their community contexts. It is informed by metrics that include long-term, meaning- and relationship-focused perspectives. Aspirational uses of metrics inspire evolving insights and iterative improvement, using a collaborative, developmental perspective. Performance metrics assess the complex interactions among primary care tenets of accessibility, a whole-person focus, integration and coordination of care, and ongoing relationships with individuals, families, and communities; primary health care principles of inclusion and equity, a focus on people's needs, multilevel integration of health, collaborative policy dialogue, and stakeholder participation; basic and goal-directed health care, prioritization, development, and multilevel health outcomes. Environments that support reflection, development, and collaborative action are necessary for metrics to advance health and minimize unintended consequences.

A typology of primary care workforce innovations in the United States since 2000.

PURPOSE: Innovative workforce models are being developed and implemented to meet the changing demands of primary care. A literature review was conducted to construct a typology of workforce models used by primary care practices. METHODS: Ovid Medline, CINAHL, and PsycInfo were used to identify published descriptions of the primary care workforce that deviated from what would be expected in the typical practice in the year 2000. Expert consultants identified additional articles that would not show up in a regular computerized search. Full texts of relevant articles were read and matrices for sorting articles were developed. Each article was reviewed and assigned to one of 18 cells in the matrices. Articles within each cell were then read again to identify patterns and develop an understanding of the full spectrum of workforce innovation within each category. RESULTS: This synthesis led to the development of a typology of workforce innovations represented in the literature. Many workforce innovations added personnel to existing practices, whereas others sought to retrain existing personnel or even develop roles outside the traditional practice. Most of these sought to minimize the impact on the existing practice roles and functions, particularly that of physicians. The synthesis also identified recent innovations which attempted to fundamentally transform the existing practice, with transformation being defined as a change in practice members' governing variables or values in regard to their workforce role. CONCLUSIONS: Most conceptualizations of the primary care workforce described in the literature do not reflect the level of innovation needed to meet the needs of the burgeoning numbers of patients with complex health issues, the necessity for roles and identities of physicians to change, and the call for fundamentally redesigned practices. However, we identified 5 key workforce innovation concepts that emerged from the literature: team care, population focus, additional resource support, creating workforce connections, and role change.

Engaging primary care patients to use a patient-centered personal health record.

PURPOSE: Health care leaders encourage clinicians to offer portals that enable patients to access personal health records, but implementation has been a challenge. Although large integrated health systems have promoted use through costly advertising campaigns, other implementation methods are needed for small to medium-sized practices where most patients receive their care. METHODS: We conducted a mixed methods assessment of a proactive implementation strategy for a patient portal (an interactive preventive health record [IPHR]) offered by 8 primary care practices. The practices implemented a series of learning collaboratives with practice champions and redesigned workflow to integrate portal use into care. Practice implementation strategies, portal use, and factors influencing use were assessed prospectively. RESULTS: A proactive and customized implementation strategy designed by practices resulted in 25.6% of patients using the IPHR, with the rate increasing 1.0% per month over 31 months. Fully 23.5% of IPHR users signed up within 1 day of their office visit. Older patients and patients with comorbidities were more likely to use the IPHR, but blacks and Hispanics were less likely. Older age diminished as a factor after adjusting for comorbidities. Implementation by practice varied considerably (from 22.1% to 27.9%, P <.001) based on clinician characteristics and workflow innovations adopted by practices to enhance uptake. CONCLUSIONS: By directly engaging patients to use a portal and supporting practices to integrate use into care, primary care practices can match or potentially surpass the usage rates achieved by large health systems.

Medical Students' Views of the Future in a Rapidly Changing World.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Physicians have long been considered valued members of a solid US health care system. Significant changes in medical education, health care, and society at-large suggest that current medical students may face a different future. To help guide educators and policy makers, we set out to understand medical students' perceptions of the future of health care and their place in it. METHODS: In year one of a longitudinal study, we conducted in-depth interviews of Case Western Reserve University medical students. A multidisciplinary team performed iterative thematic analyses and sampling until reaching saturation on major themes. RESULTS: Eleven medical student participants described social and health care issues as major influences on their professional futures. Concerns included health care system failings, unsustainable costs, climate change, demographic shifts, disinformation, and public distrust in health care. Students looked forward to team practice and using technology, data, and artificial intelligence in care delivery. They hoped for greater access and equity in health care, with a focus on prevention and social, behavioral, and environmental drivers of health. Most students expected to be employed rather than in private practice and sought time/flexibility for professional and personal interests. Paying off medical school debt and advocating for patients and change were priorities. Many saw primary care as important, but fewer envisioned it as their career path of choice. CONCLUSIONS: Medical students envision a future shaped by health care systems and social issues. These findings can inform those helping students prepare for uncertainty and rapid change in their careers, their lives, and the lives of their patients.