Measuring Equity in the Hospital Setting: An HCAHPS Application of the Health Equity Summary Score.

BACKGROUND: Health care quality varies by patient factors, including race-and-ethnicity and preferred language. Addressing inequities requires identifying them and incentivizing equity. OBJECTIVES: We apply an approach first implemented in the Medicare Advantage setting to measure equity in patient experiences by race-and-ethnicity [Asian American and Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander (AA and NHPI), Black, Hispanic, vs. White] and language preference (English-preferring vs. another-language-preferring). We identify characteristics of hospitals providing high-quality equitable care. RESEARCH DESIGN: We estimated, standardized, and combined performance measures into a Health Equity Summary Score (HESS) using 2016-2019 Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) survey data. The HCAHPS HESS considered current cross-sectional performance, within-hospital improvement, and overall improvement by race-and-ethnicity and language preference. SUBJECTS: A total of 3333 US hospitals with 2019 HCAHPS Star Ratings. RESULTS: The HCAHPS HESS was calculable for 44% of hospitals. High-scoring (4-5 diamonds on a 1-diamond to 5-diamond scale) hospitals tended to be smaller than intermediate-scoring [3 diamonds (14% of high-scoring hospitals had <100 beds vs. 7% of intermediate-scoring hospitals, P <0.001) and were less often for-profit (20% vs. 31%, P <0.001)]. While a significant percentage (29%) of patients served by high-scoring hospitals were AA and NHPI, Black, or Hispanic, and 9% were another-language-preferring, there were smaller proportions of Black and Hispanic patients in high-scoring versus other hospitals. HESS performance was negatively associated with the percentage of patients preferring another language to English. HESS scores were moderately correlated with overall Star Ratings ( r =0.70). CONCLUSIONS: The HCAHPS HESS and practices of high-scoring hospitals could promote more equitable patient experiences.

A Cluster Randomized Trial of Primary Care Practice Redesign to Integrate Behavioral Health for Those Who Need It Most: Patients With Multiple Chronic Conditions.

PURPOSE: Patient outcomes can improve when primary care and behavioral health providers use a collaborative system of care, but integrating these services is difficult. We tested the effectiveness of a practice intervention for improving patient outcomes by enhancing integrated behavioral health (IBH) activities. METHODS: We conducted a pragmatic, cluster randomized controlled trial. The intervention combined practice redesign, quality improvement coaching, provider and staff education, and collaborative learning. At baseline and 2 years, staff at 42 primary care practices completed the Practice Integration Profile (PIP) as a measure of IBH. Adult patients with multiple chronic medical and behavioral conditions completed the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS-29) survey. Primary outcomes were the change in 8 PROMIS-29 domain scores. Secondary outcomes included change in level of integration. RESULTS: Intervention assignment had no effect on change in outcomes reported by 2,426 patients who completed both baseline and 2-year surveys. Practices assigned to the intervention improved PIP workflow scores but not PIP total scores. Baseline PIP total score was significantly associated with patient-reported function, independent of intervention. Active practices that completed intervention workbooks (n = 13) improved patient-reported outcomes and practice integration (P ≤ .05) compared with other active practices (n = 7). CONCLUSION: Intervention assignment had no effect on change in patient outcomes; however, we did observe improved patient outcomes among practices that entered the study with greater IBH. We also observed more improvement of integration and patient outcomes among active practices that completed the intervention compared to active practices that did not. Additional research is needed to understand how implementation efforts to enhance IBH can best reach patients.

Measuring Inconsistency in Quality Across Patient Groups to Target Quality Improvement.

BACKGROUND: Quality improvement (QI) may be aimed at improving care for all patients, or it may be targeted at only certain patient groups. Health care providers have little guidance when determining when targeted QI may be preferred. OBJECTIVES: The aim was to develop a method for quantifying performance inconsistency and guidelines for when inconsistency indicates targeted QI, which we apply to the performance of health plans for different patient groups. RESEARCH DESIGN AND MEASURES: Retrospective analysis of 7 Health Care Effectiveness Data and Information Set (HEDIS) measures of clinical care quality. SUBJECTS: All Medicare Advantage (MA) beneficiaries eligible for any of 7 HEDIS measures 2015-2018. RESULTS: MA plans with higher overall performance tended to be less inconsistent in their performance (r=-0.2) across groups defined by race-and-ethnicity and low-income status (ie, dual eligibility for Medicaid or receipt of Low-Income Subsidy). Plan characteristics were usually associated with only small differences in inconsistency. The characteristics associated with differences in consistency [eg, size, Health Maintenance Organization (HMO) status] were also associated with differences in overall performance. We identified 9 (of 363) plans that had large inconsistency in performance across groups (>0.8 SD) and investigated the reasons for inconsistency for 2 example plans. CONCLUSIONS: This newly developed inconsistency metric may help those designing and evaluating QI efforts to appropriately determine when targeted QI is preferred. It can be used in settings where performance varies across groups, which can be defined by patient characteristics, geographic areas, hospital wards, etc. Effectively targeting QI efforts is essential in today's resource-constrained health care environment.

Follow-up Post-discharge and Readmission Disparities Among Medicare Fee-for-Service Beneficiaries, 2018.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have identified disparities in readmissions among Medicare beneficiaries hospitalized for the Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program's (HRRP's) priority conditions. Evidence suggests timely follow-up is associated with reduced risk of readmission, but it is unknown whether timely follow-up reduces disparities in readmission. OBJECTIVE: To assess whether follow-up within 7 days after discharge from a hospitalization reduces risk of readmission and mitigates identified readmission disparities. DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study using Cox proportional hazards models to estimate the associations between sociodemographic characteristics (race and ethnicity, dual-eligibility status, rurality, and area social deprivation), follow-up, and readmission. Mediation analysis was used to examine if disparities in readmission were mitigated by follow-up. PARTICIPANTS: We analyzed data from 749,402 Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries hospitalized for acute myocardial infarction, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, heart failure, or pneumonia, and discharged home between January 1 and December 1, 2018. MAIN MEASURE: All-cause unplanned readmission within 30 days after discharge. KEY RESULTS: Post-discharge follow-up within 7 days of discharge was associated with a substantially lower risk of readmission (HR: 0.52, 95% CI: 0.52-0.53). Across all four HRRP conditions, beneficiaries with dual eligibility and beneficiaries living in areas with high social deprivation had a higher risk of readmission. Non-Hispanic Black beneficiaries had higher risk of readmission after hospitalization for pneumonia relative to non-Hispanic Whites. Mediation analysis suggested that 7-day follow-up mediated 21.2% of the disparity in the risk of readmission between dually and non-dually eligible beneficiaries and 50.7% of the disparity in the risk of readmission between beneficiaries living in areas with the highest and lowest social deprivation. Analysis suggested that after hospitalization for pneumonia, 7-day follow-up mediated nearly all (97.5%) of the increased risk of readmission between non-Hispanic Black and non-Hispanic White beneficiaries. CONCLUSIONS: Improving rates of follow-up could be a strategy to reduce readmissions for all beneficiaries and reduce disparities in readmission based on sociodemographic characteristics.

Integrating behavioral health & primary care for multiple chronic diseases: Clinical trial of a practice redesign toolkit.

Context: Most patients in need of behavioral health (BH) care are seen in primary care, which often has difficulty responding. Some practices integrate behavioral health care (IBH), with medical and BH providers at the same location, working as a team. However, it is difficult to achieve high levels of integration. Objective: Test the effectiveness of a practice intervention designed to increase BH integration. Study Design: Pragmatic, cluster-randomized controlled trial. Setting: 43 primary care practices with on-site BH services in 13 states. Population: 2,460 adults with multiple chronic medical and behavioral conditions. Intervention: 24-month practice change process including an online curriculum, a practice redesign and implementation workbook, remote quality improvement coaching services, and an online learning community. Outcomes: Primary outcomes were changes in the 8 Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS-29) domain scores. Secondary outcomes were changes in medication adherence, self-reported healthcare utilization, time lost due to disability, cardiovascular capacity, patient centeredness, provider empathy, and several condition-specific measures. A sample of practice staff completed the Practice Integration Profile at each time point to estimate the degree of BH integration in that site. Practice-level case studies estimated the typical costs of implementing the intervention. Results: The intervention had no significant effect on any of the primary or secondary outcomes. Subgroup analyses showed no convincing patterns of effect in any populations. COVID-19 was apparently not a moderating influence of the effect of the intervention on outcomes. The intervention had a modest effect on the degree of practice integration, reaching statistical significance in the Workflow domain. The median cost of the intervention was $18,204 per practice. In post-hoc analysis, level of BH integration was associated with improved patient outcomes independent of the intervention, both at baseline and longitudinally. Conclusions: The specific intervention tested in this study was inexpensive, but had only a small impact on the degree of BH integration, and none on patient outcomes. However, practices that had more integration at baseline had better patient outcomes, independent of the intervention. Although this particular intervention was ineffective, IBH remains an attractive strategy for improving patient outcomes.

Development and validation of the patient centeredness index for primary care.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To describe the development of the Patient Centeredness Index (PCI), evaluate its psychometric characteristics and evaluate the relationships between scores on the PCI and an established measure of empathy. BACKGROUND: Patient centeredness helps patients manage multiple chronic conditions with their providers, nurses and other team members. However, no instrument exists for evaluating patient centeredness within primary care practices treating this population. DESIGN: Multi-site instrument development and validation. STROBE reporting guidelines were followed. METHODS: To identify themes, we consulted literature on patient centeredness and engaged stakeholders who had or were caring for people with multiple chronic conditions (n = 7). We composed and refined items to represent those themes with input from clinicians and researchers. To evaluate reliability and convergent validity, we administered surveys to participants (n = 3622) with chronic conditions recruited from 44 primary care practices for a large-scale cluster randomised clinical trial of the effects of a practice-level intervention on patient and practice-level outcomes. Participants chose to complete the 16-item survey online, on paper or by phone. Surveys assessed demographics, number of chronic conditions and ratings of provider empathy. We conducted exploratory factor analysis to model the interrelationships among items. RESULTS: A single factor explained 93% of total variance. Factor loadings ranged from 0.55-0.85, and item-test correlations were ≥.67. Cronbach's alpha was .93. A moderate, linear correlation with ratings of provider's empathy (r = .65) supports convergent validity. CONCLUSIONS: The PCI is a new tool for obtaining patient perceptions of the patient centeredness of their primary care practice. The PCI shows acceptable reliability and evidence of convergent validity among patients managing chronic conditions. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: The PCI rapidly identifies patients' perspectives on patient centeredness of their practice, making it ideal for administration in busy primary care settings that aim to efficiently address patient-identified needs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.org Protocol ID: WLPS-1409-24372. TITLE: Integrating Behavioural Health and Primary Care for Comorbid Behavioural and Medical Problems (IBHPC).

Model Homes: Evaluating Approaches to Patient-centered Medical Home Implementation.

BACKGROUND: The patient-centered medical home (PCMH) model has been widely adopted, but the evidence on its effectiveness remains mixed. One potential explanation for these mixed findings is variation in how the model is implemented by practices. OBJECTIVE: To identify the impact of different approaches to PCMH adoption on health care utilization in a long-term, geographically diverse sample of patients. DESIGN: Difference-in-differences evaluation of PCMH impact on cost and utilization. SUBJECTS: A total of 5,314,284 patient-year observations from the HealthCore Integrated Research Database, and 5943 practices which adopted the PCMH model in 14 states between 2011 and 2015. INTERVENTION: PCMH adoption, as defined by the National Committee for Quality Assurance. MEASUREMENTS: Six claims-based utilization measures, plus total health care expenditures. We employ hierarchical clustering to organize practices into groups based on their PCMH capabilities, then use generalized difference-in-differences models with practice or patient fixed effects to estimate the effect of PCMH recognition (overall and separately by the groups identified by the clustering algorithm) on utilization. RESULTS: PCMH adoption was associated with a >8% reduction in total expenditures. We find significant reductions in emergency department utilization and outpatient care, and both lab and imaging services. In our by-group results we find that while the reduction in outpatient care is significant across all 3 groups, the reduction in emergency department utilization is driven entirely by 1 group with enhanced electronic communications. CONCLUSION: The PCMH model has significant impact on patterns of health care utilization, especially when heterogeneity in implementation is accounted for in program evaluation.

Quality of Buprenorphine Care for Insured Adults With Opioid Use Disorder.

AIM: The aim of this study was to characterize quality of buprenorphine care for opioid use disorder (OUD) by quantifying buprenorphine initiation, engagement, and maintenance for individuals in a large, diverse, real-world cohort in the United States. DESIGN: This was a retrospective cohort analysis. SETTING: OUD treatment in the outpatient setting. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 45,210 commercially insured and Medicare Advantage (MA) enrollees 18 years or older in the OptumLabs Data Warehouse with an index diagnosis of OUD between January 1, 2018 and December 31, 2018. INTERVENTIONS: Treatment with buprenorphine. MEASUREMENTS: We calculated 6 measures of buprenorphine treatment quality. We conducted survival analyses to characterize treatment duration and logistic regressions to evaluate the association between clinical and sociodemographic characteristics and quality. FINDINGS: Of 45,210 eligible individuals with OUD, ∼1 in 10 (n=4600, 10.2%) initiated buprenorphine within 365 days following diagnosis (Measure #1) and 2850 individuals (6.3%) initiated buprenorphine within 14 days of diagnosis (Measure #2). Of individuals initiating treatment within 14 days of diagnosis, 1769 (62.1%) had 2 or more buprenorphine claims within 34 days of initiation (Measure #3). Of the 4600 individuals who received buprenorphine, 2300 (50.0%) were maintained in care with 180 days or more of covered buprenorphine treatment during 365 days after diagnosis (Measure #4). Finally, of the 4600 individuals who received buprenorphine, 2543 (55.3%) did not fill any other concurrent opioid analgesic (Measure #5) and 2951 (64.2%) did not fill any concurrent benzodiazepine (Measure #6). Quality was generally lower for individuals with MA compared with commercial coverage and among Hispanic and Black adults compared with White adults. CONCLUSION: Widespread gaps exist in quality of buprenorphine treatment initiation, engagement, and maintenance among commercially insured and MA enrollees with OUD.

Incentivizing Excellent Care to At-Risk Groups with a Health Equity Summary Score.

BACKGROUND: Social risk factors (SRFs) such as minority race-and-ethnicity or low income are associated with quality-of-care, health, and healthcare outcomes. Organizations might prioritize improving care for easier-to-treat groups over those with SRFs, but measuring, reporting, and further incentivizing quality-of-care for SRF groups may improve their care. OBJECTIVE: To develop, as a proof-of-concept, a Health Equity Summary Score (HESS): a succinct, easy-to-understand score that could be used to promote high-quality care to those with SRFs in Medicare Advantage (MA) health plans, which provide care for almost twenty million older and disabled Americans and collect extensive quality measure and SRF data. DESIGN: We estimated, standardized, and combined performance scores for two sets of quality measures for enrollees in 2013-2016 MA health plans, considering both current levels of care, within-plan improvement, and nationally benchmarked improvement for those with SRFs (specifically, racial-and-ethnic minority status and dual-eligibility for Medicare and Medicaid). PARTICIPANTS: All MA plans with publicly reported quality scores and 500 or more 2016 enrollees. MAIN MEASURES: Publicly reported clinical quality and patient experience measures. KEY RESULTS: Almost 90% of plans measured for MA Star Ratings received a HESS; plans serving few patients with SRFs were excluded. The summary score was moderately positively correlated with publicly reported overall Star Ratings (r = 0.66-0.67). High-scoring plans typically had sizable enrollment of both racial-and-ethnic minorities (38-42%) and dually eligible beneficiaries (29-38%). CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated the feasibility of developing and estimating a HESS that is intended to promote and incentivize excellent care for racial-and-ethnic minorities and dually eligible MA enrollees. The HESS measures SRF-specific performance and does not simply duplicate overall plan Star Ratings. It also identifies plans that provide excellent care to large numbers of those with SRFs. Our methodology could be extended to other SRFs, quality measures, and settings.

Disparities in Chronic Kidney Disease Progression by Medicare Advantage Enrollees.

INTRODUCTION: The prevalence of chronic kidney disease (CKD) in Medicare beneficiaries has quadrupled in the past 2 decades, but little is known about risk factors affecting the progression of CKD. This study aims to understand the progression in Medicare Advantage enrollees and whether it differs by provider recognition of CKD, race and ethnicity, or geographic location. In a large cohort of Medicare Advantage (MA) enrollees, we examined whether CKD progression, up to 5 years after study entry, differed by demographic and clinical factors and identified additional risk factors of CKD progression. METHODS: In a cohort of 1,002,388 MA enrollees with CKD stages 1-4 based on 2013-2018 labs, progression was estimated using a mixed-effects model that adjusted for demographics, geographic location, comorbidity, urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio, clinical recognition via diagnosed CKD, and time-fixed effects. Race and ethnicity, geographic location, and clinical recognition of CKD were interacted with time in 3 separate regression models. RESULTS: Mean (median) follow-up was 3.1 (3.0) years. Black and Hispanic MA enrollees had greater kidney function at study entry than other beneficiaries, but their kidney function declined faster. MA enrollees with clinically recognized CKD had estimated glomerular filtration rate levels that were 18.6 units (95% confidence interval [CI]: 18.5-18.7) lower than levels of unrecognized patients, but kidney function declined more slowly in enrollees with clinical recognition. There were no differences in CKD progression by geography. After removal of the race coefficient from the eGFR equation in a sensitivity analysis, kidney function was much lower in all years among Black MA enrollees, but patterns of progression remained the same. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that patients with clinically recognized CKD and racial and ethnic minorities merit closer surveillance and management to reduce their risk of faster progression.

Cumulative burden of chronic health conditions among adolescent and young adult survivors of childhood cancer: Identification of vulnerable groups at key medical transitions.

The cumulative burden of chronic health conditions as childhood cancer survivors transition to adult health care and insurance systems is unknown. We estimated the cumulative burden (N = 4612 survivors, 625 controls) in the St. Jude Lifetime Cohort. At 18 and 26 years old, survivors experienced (per 100 individuals) an average of 22.3 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 17.2-27.4) and 40.3 (95% CI: 34.8-45.8) disabling conditions versus 3.5 (95% CI: 2.0-5.0) and 5.7 (95% CI: 3.7-7.7) in controls, and 128.7 (95% CI: 119.5-137.8) and 240.5 (95% CI: 229.9-251.0) lower severity conditions versus 12.4 (95% CI: 8.9-16.0) and 51.3 (95% CI: 43.1-59.4) in controls. Survivors experience a high cumulative burden at key health care transition ages, underscoring the need to optimize access to care.

Annual wellness visits and care management before and after dialysis initiation.

INTRODUCTION: Demands of dialysis regimens may pose challenges for primary care provider (PCP) engagement and timely preventive care. This is especially the case for patients initiating dialysis adjusting to new logistical challenges and management of symptoms and existing comorbid conditions. Since 2011, Medicare has provided coverage for annual wellness visits (AWV), which are primarily conducted by PCPs and may be useful for older adults undergoing dialysis. METHODS: We used the OptumLabs® Data Warehouse to identify a cohort of 1,794 Medicare Advantage (MA) enrollees initiating dialysis in 2014-2017 and examined whether MA enrollees (1) were seen by a PCP during an outpatient visit and (2) received an AWV in the year following dialysis initiation. RESULTS: In the year after initiating dialysis, 93 % of MA enrollees had an outpatient PCP visit but only 24 % received an annual wellness visit. MA enrollees were less likely to see a PCP if they had Charlson comorbidity scores between 0 and 5 than those with scores 6-9 (odds ratio (OR) = 0.59, 95 % CI: 0.37-0.95), but more likely if seen by a nephrologist (OR = 1.60, 95 % CI: 1.01-2.52) or a PCP (OR = 15.65, 95 % CI: 9.26-26.46) prior to initiation. Following dialysis initiation, 24 % of MA enrollees had an AWV. Hispanic MA enrollees were less likely (OR = 0.57, 95 % CI: 0.39-0.84) to have an AWV than White MA enrollees, but enrollees were more likely if they initiated peritoneal dialysis (OR = 1.54, 95 % CI: 1.07-2.23) or had an AWV in the year before dialysis initiation (OR = 4.96, 95 % CI: 3.88-6.34). CONCLUSIONS: AWVs are provided at low rates to MA enrollees initiating dialysis, particularly Hispanic enrollees, and represent a missed opportunity for better care management for patients with ESKD. Increasing patient awareness and provider provision of AWV use among dialysis patients may be needed, to realize better preventive care for dialysis patients.

Assessing Cancer Patient Experience of Care in Outpatient Oncology Practices in the United States.

INTRODUCTION: Cancer patients' experience of care is an important component of quality that has not previously been used for comparing performance. We administered a new patient experience survey to cancer patients receiving outpatient chemotherapy treatment. We examined its measures for sensitivity to adjustment for case-mix and response tendency (level of general optimism/pessimism) and reliability for making performance comparisons between practices. METHODS: We surveyed 2304 cancer patients who received chemotherapy at 23 medical oncology practices in Southeastern Pennsylvania, receiving 715 responses (response rate 31%; 14 practices had 10 or more responses). We aggregated patient responses to calculate practice-level scores on 5 predefined composites: Affective Communication, Shared Decision-Making, Patient Self-Management, Exchanging Information, and Access. We then ranked the practices on each composite before and after adjustment for standard case-mix variables and supplemental adjustment for response tendency (measured via the Life Orientation Test-Revised). We calculated the reliability of practice scores on each composite using hierarchical linear models and calculated minimum sample sizes necessary to achieve reliabilities exceeding 0.7. RESULTS: After adjusting responses for case-mix and converting to a 0-100 scale, composite scores ranged from 77 for the Patient Self-Management composite to 92 for the Access composite. Adjustment for response tendency had an impact on practice rankings only for the Shared Decision-Making composite. The number of responses necessary to create reliable practice-level measurements ranged from 17 (Access composite) to 96 (Affective Communication composite). CONCLUSIONS: Patient experiences at oncology practices can be measured reliably using reasonable sample sizes. Standard case-mix adjustment is adequate for making comparisons on most composites.

Lab-based and diagnosis-based chronic kidney disease recognition and staging concordance.

BACKGROUND: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is often under-recognized and poorly documented via diagnoses, but the extent of under-recognition is not well understood among Medicare beneficiaries. The current study used claims-based diagnosis and lab data to examine patient factors associated with clinically recognized CKD and CKD stage concordance between claims- and lab-based sources in a cohort of Medicare beneficiaries. METHODS: In a cohort of fee-for-service (FFS) beneficiaries with CKD based on 2011 labs, we examined the proportion with clinically recognized CKD via diagnoses and factors associated with clinical recognition in logistic regression. In the subset of beneficiaries with CKD stage identified from both labs and diagnoses, we examined concordance in CKD stage from both sources, and factors independently associated with CKD stage concordance in logistic regression. RESULTS: Among the subset of 206,036 beneficiaries with lab-based CKD, only 11.8% (n = 24,286) had clinically recognized CKD via diagnoses. Clinical recognition was more likely for beneficiaries who had higher CKD stages, were non-elderly, were Hispanic or non-Hispanic Black, lived in core metropolitan areas, had multiple chronic conditions or outpatient visits in 2010, or saw a nephrologist. In the subset of 18,749 beneficiaries with CKD stage identified from both labs and diagnoses, 70.0% had concordant CKD stage, which was more likely if beneficiaries were older adults, male, lived in micropolitan areas instead of non-core areas, or saw a nephrologist. CONCLUSIONS: There is significant under-diagnosis of CKD in Medicare FFS beneficiaries, which can be addressed with the availability of lab results.

Health care quality measures for children and adolescents in Foster Care: feasibility testing in electronic records.

BACKGROUND: Preventive quality measures for the foster care population are largely untested. The objective of the study is to identify healthcare quality measures for young children and adolescents in foster care and to test whether the data required to calculate these measures can be feasibly extracted and interpreted within an electronic health records or within the Statewide Automated Child Welfare Information System. METHODS: The AAP Recommendations for Preventive Pediatric Health Care served as the guideline for determining quality measures. Quality measures related to well child visits, developmental screenings, immunizations, trauma-related care, BMI measurements, sexually transmitted infections and depression were defined. Retrospective chart reviews were performed on a cohort of children in foster care from a single large pediatric institution and related county. Data available in the Ohio Statewide Automated Child Welfare Information System was compared to the same population studied in the electronic health record review. Quality measures were calculated as observed (received) to expected (recommended) ratios (O/E ratios) to describe the actual quantity of recommended health care that was received by individual children. RESULTS: Electronic health records and the Statewide Automated Child Welfare Information System data frequently lacked important information on foster care youth essential for calculating the measures. Although electronic health records were rich in encounter specific clinical data, they often lacked custodial information such as the dates of entry into and exit from foster care. In contrast, Statewide Automated Child Welfare Information System included robust data on custodial arrangements, but lacked detailed medical information. Despite these limitations, several quality measures were devised that attempted to accommodate these limitations. CONCLUSIONS: In this feasibility testing, neither the electronic health records at a single institution nor the county level Statewide Automated Child Welfare Information System was able to independently serve as a reliable source of data for health care quality measures for foster care youth. However, the ability to leverage both sources by matching them at an individual level may provide the complement of data necessary to assess the quality of healthcare.

Health IT-Enabled Care Coordination: A National Survey of Patient-Centered Medical Home Clinicians.

PURPOSE: Health information technology (IT) offers promising tools for improving care coordination. We assessed the feasibility and acceptability of 6 proposed care coordination objectives for stage 3 of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services electronic health record incentive program (Meaningful Use) related to referrals, notification of care from other facilities, patient clinical summaries, and patient dashboards. METHODS: We surveyed physician-owned and hospital/health system-affiliated primary care practices that achieved patient-centered medical home recognition and participated in the Meaningful Use program, and community health clinics with patient-centered medical home recognition (most with certified electronic health record systems). The response rate was 35.1%. We ascertained whether practices had implemented proposed objectives and perceptions of their importance. We analyzed the association of organizational and contextual factors with self-reported use of health IT to support care coordination activities. RESULTS: Although 78% of the 350 respondents viewed timely notification of hospital discharges as very important, only 48.7% used health IT systems to accomplish this task. The activity most frequently supported by health IT was providing clinical summaries to patients, in 76.6% of practices; however, merely 47.7% considered this activity very important. Greater use of health IT to support care coordination activities was positively associated with the presence of a nonclinician responsible for care coordination and the practice's capacity for systematic change. CONCLUSIONS: Even among practices having a strong commitment to the medical home model, the use of health IT to support care coordination objectives is not consistent. Health IT capabilities are not currently aligned with clinicians' priorities. Many practices will need financial and technical assistance for health IT to enhance care coordination.

Medical home transformation: a gradual process and a continuum of attainment.

PURPOSE: The patient-centered medical home is often discussed as though there exist either traditional practices or medical homes, with marked differences between them. We analyzed data from an evaluation of certified medical homes in Minnesota to study this topic. METHODS: We obtained publicly reported composite measures for quality of care outcomes pertaining to diabetes and vascular disease for all clinics in Minnesota from 2008 to 2010. The extent of and change in practice systems over that same time period for the first 120 clinics serving adults certified as health care homes (HCHs) was measured by the Physician Practice Connections Research Survey (PPC-RS), a self-report tool similar to the National Committee for Quality Assurance standards for patient-centered medical homes. Measures were compared between these clinics and 518 non-HCH clinics in the state. RESULTS: Among the 102 clinics for which we had precertification and postcertification scores for both the PPC-RS and either diabetes or vascular disease measures, the mean increase in systems score over 3 years was an absolute 29.1% (SD = 16.7%) from a baseline score of 38.8% (SD = 16.5%, P ≤.001). The proportion of clinics in which all patients had optimal diabetes measures improved by an absolute 2.1% (SD = 5.5%, P ≤.001) and the proportion in which all had optimal cardiovascular disease measures by 4.4% (SD = 7.5%, P ≤.001), but all measures varied widely among clinics. Mean performance rates of HCH clinics were higher than those of non-HCH clinics, but there was extensive overlap, and neither group changed much over this time period. CONCLUSIONS: The extensive variation among HCH clinics, their overlap with non-HCH clinics, and the small change in performance over time suggest that medical homes are not similar, that change in outcomes is slow, and that there is a continuum of transformation.

Support and strategies for change among small patient-centered medical home practices.

PURPOSE: We aimed to determine the motivations and barriers facing small practices that seek to adopt the patient-centered medical home (PCMH) model, as well as the type of help and strategies they use. METHODS: We surveyed lead physicians at practices with fewer than 5 physicians, stratified by state and level of National Committee for Quality Assurance PCMH recognition, using a Web-based survey with telephone, fax, and mail follow-up. The response rate was 59%, yielding a total sample of 249 practices from 23 states. RESULTS: Improving quality and patient experience were the strongest motivations for PCMH implementation; time and resources were the biggest barriers. Most practices participated in demonstration projects or received financial rewards for PCMH, and most received training or other kinds of help. Practices found training and help related to completing the PCMH application to be the most useful. Training for patients was both less common and less valued. The most commonly used strategies for practice transformation were staff training, systematizing processes of care, and quality measurement/goal setting. The least commonly endorsed strategy was involving patients in quality improvement. Practices with a higher level of PCMH recognition were more likely to have electronic health records, to report barriers, and to use measurement-based quality improvement strategies. CONCLUSIONS: To spread the adoption of the PCMH model among small practices, financial support, practical training, and other help are likely to continue to be important. Few practices involved patients in their implementation, so it would be helpful to test the impact of greater patient involvement in the PCMH.

Context matters: the experience of 14 research teams in systematically reporting contextual factors important for practice change.

PURPOSE: We aimed to advance the internal and external validity of research by sharing our empirical experience and recommendations for systematically reporting contextual factors. METHODS: Fourteen teams conducting research on primary care practice transformation retrospectively considered contextual factors important to interpreting their findings (internal validity) and transporting or reinventing their findings in other settings/situations (external validity). Each team provided a table or list of important contextual factors and interpretive text included as appendices to the articles in this supplement. Team members identified the most important contextual factors for their studies. We grouped the findings thematically and developed recommendations for reporting context. RESULTS: The most important contextual factors sorted into 5 domains: (1) the practice setting, (2) the larger organization, (3) the external environment, (4) implementation pathway, and (5) the motivation for implementation. To understand context, investigators recommend (1) engaging diverse perspectives and data sources, (2) considering multiple levels, (3) evaluating history and evolution over time, (4) looking at formal and informal systems and culture, and (5) assessing the (often nonlinear) interactions between contextual factors and both the process and outcome of studies. We include a template with tabular and interpretive elements to help study teams engage research participants in reporting relevant context. CONCLUSIONS: These findings demonstrate the feasibility and potential utility of identifying and reporting contextual factors. Involving diverse stakeholders in assessing context at multiple stages of the research process, examining their association with outcomes, and consistently reporting critical contextual factors are important challenges for a field interested in improving the internal and external validity and impact of health care research.

Have racial disparities in home dialysis utilization changed over time?

OBJECTIVES: The Medicare end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) prospective payment system (PPS) for maintenance dialysis, implemented in 2011, resulted in modestly increased access to both home-based peritoneal dialysis (PD) and home hemodialysis (HHD) treatment modalities, but it is unclear whether regional disparities in home dialysis (PD and HHD) were affected. We compared regional home dialysis use by White and non-White individuals over time. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study of dialysis facilities offering home dialysis in 2006-2016 and of 1,098,579 patients with prevalent ESKD in 2006-2016. METHODS: We compared hospital referral region (HRR) utilization rates of home dialysis between White and non-White patients over time using a generalized estimating equation model with a negative binomial distribution adjusting for regional characteristics. RESULTS: The mean number of facilities offering home dialysis operating in each HRR increased from 15.6 in 2006 to 22.1 in 2016. Observed mean HRR home dialysis rates increased overall, but White patients maintained greater home dialysis use than non-White patients: 19.7% in 2006 and 26.2% in 2016 among White patients vs 13.0% in 2006 and 17.8% in 2016 among non-White patients. In adjusted analysis, there was no evidence of changes in White/non-White disparities in home dialysis use over time (P = .84) or after the Medicare ESKD PPS in 2011 (incidence rate ratio, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.92-1.02; P = .29). CONCLUSIONS: Even after modest increases in dialysis facility availability and patient utilization after the implementation of the Medicare ESKD PPS in 2011, significant racial disparities in home dialysis remain.