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.

Shadow Coaching Improves Patient Experience With Care, But Gains Erode Later.

BACKGROUND: Health care organizations strive to improve patient care experiences. Some use one-on-one provider counseling (shadow coaching) to identify and target modifiable provider behaviors. OBJECTIVE: We examined whether shadow coaching improves patient experience across 44 primary care practices in a large urban Federally Qualified Health Center. RESEARCH DESIGN: Seventy-four providers with "medium" (ie, slightly below average) overall provider ratings received coaching and were compared with 246 uncoached providers. We fit mixed-effects regression models with random effects for provider (level of treatment assignment) and fixed effects for time (linear spline with a knot and "jump" at coaching date), patient characteristics and site indicators. By design, coached providers performed worse at selection; models account for the very small (0.2 point) regression-to-the-mean effects. We assessed differential effects by coach. SUBJECTS: A total of 46,452 patients (from 320 providers) who completed the Clinician and Group Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CG-CAHPS) Visit Survey 2.0. MEASURES: CAHPS overall provider rating and provider communication composite (scaled 0-100). RESULTS: Providers not chosen for coaching had a nonsignificant change in performance during the period when selected providers were coached. We observed a statistically significant 2-point (small-to-medium) jump among coached providers after coaching on the CAHPS overall provider rating and provider communication score. However, these gains disappeared after 2.5 years; effects differed by coach. CONCLUSIONS: Shadow coaching improved providers' overall performance and communication immediately after being coached. Regularly planned shadow coaching "booster" sessions might maintain or even increase the improvement gained in patient experience scores, but research examining additional coaching and optimal implementation is needed.

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.

Differences in Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems Clinician and Group Survey Scores by Recency of the Last Visit: Implications for Comparability of Periodic and Continuous Sampling.

BACKGROUND: Patient experience data can be collected by sampling patients periodically (eg, patients with any visits over a 1-year period) or sampling visits continuously (eg, sampling any visit in a monthly interval). Continuous sampling likely yields a sample with more frequent and more recent visits, possibly affecting the comparability of data collected under the 2 approaches. OBJECTIVE: To explore differences in Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems Clinician and Group survey (CG-CAHPS) scores using periodic and continuous sampling. RESEARCH DESIGN: We use observational data to estimate case-mix-adjusted differences in patient experience scores under 12-month periodic sampling and simulated continuous sampling. SUBJECTS: A total of 29,254 adult patients responding to the CG-CAHPS survey regarding visits in the past 12 months to any of 480 physicians, 2007-2009. MEASURES: Overall doctor rating and 4 CG-CAHPS composite measures of patient experience: doctor communication, access to care, care coordination, and office staff. RESULTS: Compared with 12-month periodic sampling, simulated continuous sampling yielded patients with more recent visits (by definition), more frequent visits (92% of patients with 2+ visits, compared with 76%), and more positive case-mix-adjusted CAHPS scores (2-3 percentage points higher). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with more frequent visits reported markedly higher CG-CAHPS scores, but this causes only small to moderate changes in adjusted physician-level scores between 12-month periodic and continuous sampling schemes. Caution should be exercised in trending or comparing scores collected through different schemes.

Medicare Beneficiaries With a Specialist as Their Personal Doctor Report Better Experiences With Care.

BACKGROUND: Health plans often require that patients have a personal doctor. Older adults rely on specialists for much of their care and may use a specialist in this role, but little is known about how many or which Medicare beneficiaries use specialists as their personal doctor and how their care experiences differ from others'. OBJECTIVE: To examine the prevalence and characteristics of Medicare beneficiaries with a specialist as a personal doctor and compare their patient experiences and immunization to other beneficiaries'. RESEARCH DESIGN: Logistic regression predicted having a specialist as a personal doctor from beneficiary characteristics. Doubly-robust models compared 7 patient experience and 2 immunization measures for beneficiaries with and without a specialist as their personal doctor. Interactions of a specialist indicator and beneficiary characteristics tested for moderators. STUDY POPULATION: A total of 227,642 Medicare beneficiaries aged 65+ who reported having a personal doctor on the 2014 Medicare CAHPS survey. RESULTS: In total, 20% of beneficiaries reported that their personal doctor was a specialist, fewer than previously reported for the most frequently visited physician (43%); beneficiaries who were older, less healthy, less educated, racial/ethnic minorities, had fee-for-service coverage, or had lower income were more likely to do so. They also reported better patient experiences than those with nonspecialist personal physicians on 6 of 7 measures and more immunizations; the largest difference was for care coordination. Having a specialist personal doctor was associated with particularly positive patient experience for low income, Black, Hispanic, and less healthy beneficiaries. CONCLUSION: Future research should investigate whether specialists as personal doctors may reduce patient-experience disparities for vulnerable patients.

Differences in Hospitalizations Between Fee-for-Service and Medicare Advantage Beneficiaries.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies found lower hospitalization rates for enrollees in Medicare Advantage (MA) plans than for beneficiaries with fee-for-service (FFS) coverage. MA enrollment is increasing, especially for those newly eligible for Medicare, but little is known about how service use in FFS or MA differs for new beneficiaries. OBJECTIVE: To compare differences in rates of hospitalization between MA and FFS. RESEARCH DESIGN: A retrospective study of hospitalization among FFS and MA respondents to the Medicare Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (MCAHPS) survey. Differences in hospitalization rates were assessed using multivariable logistic regression models that controlled for patient sociodemographic and health characteristics. Models included an interaction between age and coverage type to determine whether patterns of care were distinct for enrollees recently eligible for Medicare. STUDY POPULATION: In total, 259,335 respondents to the 2013 MCAHPS survey. RESULTS: In total, 14% of FFS and 12% of MA enrollees had ≥1 hospitalization in the 6 months before survey administration. Models adjusted for enrollee demographics found that MA enrollees had 0.81 the odds of being hospitalized relative to those with FFS coverage (95% confidence interval, 0.78-0.84). Differences between groups were substantially reduced and no longer statistically significant when they were fully adjusted (adjusted odds ratio 1.01, 95% confidence interval, 0.97-1.08). Models with interactions indicated no significant age differences in the MA/FFS hospitalization gap. CONCLUSION: Differences in hospital admissions between those with MA and FFS coverage appear to be primarily related to differences in health status.

Care Experiences Among Medicare Beneficiaries With and Without a Personal Physician.

BACKGROUND: Having a "personal" physician is a critical element to care continuity. Little is known about which older adults are more likely to lack personal physicians and if their care experiences differ from those with a personal physician. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to describe care experiences and characteristics associated with not having a personal physician. RESEARCH DESIGN: We compare rates of lacking a personal physician across subgroups. Using doubly robust propensity-score-weighted regression, we compare patient experience among beneficiaries with and without a personal physician. SUBJECTS: A total of 272,463 nationally representative beneficiaries age 65+ responding to the 2012 Medicare CAHPS survey. MEASURES: Beneficiary characteristics, having a personal physician, 4 patient experience measures. RESULTS: Five percent of respondents reported no personal physician. Lacking a personal physician was more common for men, racial/ethnic minorities (eg, 16% of American Indian/Alaska Natives), and the younger and less educated. Those without a personal physician reported substantially poorer experiences on 4 measures (P<0.001); these differences are larger than those observed by key demographic characteristics. Beneficiaries without a personal physician were more than 3 times as likely to have not seen any health care provider in the last 6 months. CONCLUSIONS: Even with the access provided by Medicare, a small but nontrivial proportion of seniors report having no personal physician. Those without a personal physician report substantially worse patient experiences and lacking a personal physician is more common for some vulnerable groups. This may underlie some previously observed disparities. Efforts should be made to encourage and help seniors without personal physicians to select one.

Sexual minorities in England have poorer health and worse health care experiences: a national survey.

BACKGROUND: The health and healthcare of sexual minorities have recently been identified as priorities for health research and policy. OBJECTIVE: To compare the health and healthcare experiences of sexual minorities with heterosexual people of the same gender, adjusting for age, race/ethnicity, and socioeconomic status. DESIGN: Multivariate analyses of observational data from the 2009/2010 English General Practice Patient Survey. PARTICIPANTS: The survey was mailed to 5.56 million randomly sampled adults registered with a National Health Service general practice (representing 99 % of England's adult population). In all, 2,169,718 people responded (39 % response rate), including 27,497 people who described themselves as gay, lesbian, or bisexual. MAIN MEASURES: Two measures of health status (fair/poor overall self-rated health and self-reported presence of a longstanding psychological condition) and four measures of poor patient experiences (no trust or confidence in the doctor, poor/very poor doctor communication, poor/very poor nurse communication, fairly/very dissatisfied with care overall). KEY RESULTS: Sexual minorities were two to three times more likely to report having a longstanding psychological or emotional problem than heterosexual counterparts (age-adjusted for 5.2 % heterosexual, 10.9 % gay, 15.0 % bisexual for men; 6.0 % heterosexual, 12.3 % lesbian and 18.8 % bisexual for women; p < 0.001 for each). Sexual minorities were also more likely to report fair/poor health (adjusted 19.6 % heterosexual, 21.8 % gay, 26.4 % bisexual for men; 20.5 % heterosexual, 24.9 % lesbian and 31.6 % bisexual for women; p < 0.001 for each). Adjusted for sociodemographic characteristics and health status, sexual minorities were about one and one-half times more likely than heterosexual people to report unfavorable experiences with each of four aspects of primary care. Little of the overall disparity reflected concentration of sexual minorities in low-performing practices. CONCLUSIONS: Sexual minorities suffer both poorer health and worse healthcare experiences. Efforts should be made to recognize the needs and improve the experiences of sexual minorities. Examining patient experience disparities by sexual orientation can inform such efforts.

Specialties differ in which aspects of doctor communication predict overall physician ratings.

BACKGROUND: Effective doctor communication is critical to positive doctor-patient relationships and predicts better health outcomes. Doctor communication is the strongest predictor of patient ratings of doctors, but the most important aspects of communication may vary by specialty. OBJECTIVE: To determine the importance of five aspects of doctor communication to overall physician ratings by specialty. DESIGN: For each of 28 specialties, we calculated partial correlations of five communication items with a 0-10 overall physician rating, controlling for patient demographics. PATIENTS: Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems Clinician and Group (CG-CAHPS®) 12-month Survey data collected 2005-2009 from 58,251 adults at a 534-physician medical group. MAIN MEASURES: CG-CAHPS includes a 0 ("Worst physician possible") to 10 ("Best physician possible") overall physician rating. Five doctor communication items assess how often the physician: explains things; listens carefully; gives easy-to-understand instructions; shows respect; and spends enough time. KEY RESULTS: Physician showing respect was the most important aspect of communication for 23/28 specialties, with a mean partial correlation (0.27, ranging from 0.07 to 0.44 across specialties) that accounted for more than four times as much variance in the overall physician rating as any other communication item. Three of five communication items varied significantly across specialties in their associations with the overall rating (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: All patients valued respectful treatment; the importance of other aspects of communication varied significantly by specialty. Quality improvement efforts by all specialties should emphasize physicians showing respect to patients, and each specialty should also target other aspects of communication that matter most to their patients. The results have implications for improving provider quality improvement and incentive programs and the reporting of CAHPS data to patients. Specialists make important contributions to coordinated patient care, and thus customized approaches to measurement, reporting, and quality improvement efforts are important.

Evaluating the impact of getting to outcomes-underage drinking on prevention capacity and alcohol merchant attitudes and selling behaviors.

Underage drinking is a significant problem facing US communities. Several environmental alcohol prevention (EAP) strategies (laws, regulations, responsible beverage service training and practices) successfully address underage drinking. Communities, however, face challenges carrying out these EAP strategies effectively. This small-scale, 3-year, randomized controlled trial assessed whether providing prevention coalitions with Getting To Outcomes-Underage Drinking (GTO-UD), a tool kit and implementation support intervention, helped improve implementation of two common EAP strategies, responsible beverage service training (RBS) and compliance checks. Three coalitions in South Carolina and their RBS and compliance check programs received the 16-month GTO-UD intervention, including the GTO-UD manual, training, and onsite technical assistance, while another three in South Carolina maintained routine operations. The measures, collected at baseline and after the intervention, were a structured interview assessing how well coalitions carried out their work and a survey of merchant attitudes and practices in the six counties served by the participating coalitions. Over time, the quality of some RBS and compliance check activities improved more in GTO-UD coalitions than in the control sites. No changes in merchant practices or attitudes significantly differed between the GTO-UD and control groups, although merchants in the GTO-UD counties did significantly improve on refusing sales to minors while control merchants did not.

Racial/Ethnic differences in Medicare experiences and immunization: the role of disease burden.

BACKGROUND: Although Medicare provides beneficiaries with primary access to the health care system, racial/ethnic disparities in health care experiences and preventive care are well documented in the Medicare population. OBJECTIVE: To investigate disease burden and its possible impact on racial/ethnic health disparities for measures of secondary and tertiary access to health care, such as access to health plan information, obtaining recommended care in a timely manner, and immunization. SUBJECTS: A total of 355,874 beneficiaries over the age of 64 years who responded to the 2008 Medicare Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) survey. METHODS: We fit a series of linear, case-mix adjusted models predicting Medicare CAHPS measures of patient experience and immunization from race/ethnicity, a 0 to 6 count of disease burden, and their interaction. RESULTS: Disparities between non-Hispanic whites and other racial/ethnic groups are largest among beneficiaries with no major health conditions. Disparities between whites and other racial/ethnic groups on getting care quickly and immunization are mitigated at higher levels of disease burden. Disparities persist at higher levels of disease burden for getting information from one's health plan. DISCUSSION: Whites have better overall access to care than other beneficiaries with Medicare in the absence of major health conditions. Disparities in getting care quickly and immunizations are smaller among beneficiaries with greater disease burden, perhaps as a function of integration into the health care system gained through management of health issues. These results underscore the importance of outreach to minorities with low utilization and few or no major health conditions.

Intervening with practitioners to improve the quality of prevention: one-year findings from a randomized trial of assets-getting to outcomes.

There continues to be a gap in prevention outcomes achieved in research trials versus those achieved in "real-world" practice. This article reports interim findings from a randomized controlled trial evaluating Assets-Getting To Outcomes (AGTO), a two-year intervention designed to build prevention practitioners' capacity to implement positive youth development-oriented practices in 12 community coalitions in Maine. A survey of coalition members was used to assess change on individual practitioners' prevention capacity between baseline and one year later. Structured interviews with 32 program directors (16 in the intervention group and 16 in the control group) were used to assess changes in programs' prevention practices during the same time period. Change in prevention capacity over time did not differ significantly between the intervention and control groups. However, in secondary analyses of only those assigned to the AGTO intervention, users showed greater improvement in their self-efficacy to conduct Assets-based programming and increases in the frequency with which they engaged in AGTO behaviors, whereas among non-users, self-efficacy to conduct Assets-based programming declined. Interview ratings showed improvement in several key areas of performance among intervention programs. Improvement was associated with the number of technical assistance hours received. These results suggest that, after one year, AGTO is beginning to improve the capacity of community practitioners who make use of it.

Sex differences in Medicare beneficiaries' experiences by low-income status.

OBJECTIVES: Medicare beneficiaries dually eligible for Medicaid are a low-income group who are often in poor health. Little research has examined sex differences in patient experience by dual/low-income subsidy (LIS) status. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional comparison by sex and low-income status. METHODS: We used linear regression to compare 6 case mix-adjusted patient experience measures (on a 0-100 scale) by sex within non-dual/LIS and dual/LIS beneficiary groups among 549,603 respondents 65 years and older to the 2016-2017 Medicare Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems surveys of beneficiary experience with Medicare (mail with telephone follow-up of nonrespondents, 42% response rate). RESULTS: Dual/LIS male beneficiaries reported worse patient experiences on all 6 measures than female beneficiaries, with scores 1 to 2 percentage points lower for 3 measures and less than 1 percentage point lower for the other 3 measures. For 4 of the 6 measures, sex differences among dual/LIS beneficiaries were significantly larger than those among non-dual/LIS beneficiaries. In all 4 instances, the gaps between men and women among dual/LIS beneficiaries favored women; P < .05 for all differences discussed. CONCLUSIONS: Low-income male Medicare beneficiaries are more likely to report poor patient experiences, possibly because of lower health literacy, less patient activation, and smaller social networks, along with provider responses to these characteristics. Efforts to address these patient-level factors should happen in parallel with structural-level approaches to train and prepare providers to ensure attentive, respectful patient-centered care for all patients. Additionally, targeted use of ombudsmen and interventions may help reduce inequities.

Development and Testing of an Emergency Department Quality Measure for Pediatric Suicidal Ideation and Self-Harm.

OBJECTIVE: To develop and test a new quality measure assessing timeliness of follow-up mental health care for youth presenting to the emergency department (ED) with suicidal ideation or self-harm. METHODS: Based on a conceptual framework, evidence review, and a modified Delphi process, we developed a quality measure assessing whether youth 5 to 17 years old evaluated for suicidal ideation or self-harm in the ED and discharged to home had a follow-up mental health care visit within 7 days. The measure was tested in 4 geographically dispersed states (California, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee) using Medicaid administrative data. We examined measure feasibility of implementation, variation, reliability, and validity. To test validity, adjusted regression models examined associations between quality measure scores and subsequent all-cause and same-cause hospital readmissions/ED return visits. RESULTS: Overall, there were 16,486 eligible ED visits between September 1, 2014 and July 31, 2016; 53.5% of eligible ED visits had an associated mental health care follow-up visit within 7 days. Measure scores varied by state, ranging from 26.3% to 66.5%, and by youth characteristics: visits by youth who were non-White, male, and living in an urban area were significantly less likely to be associated with a follow-up visit within 7 days. Better quality measure performance was not associated with decreased reutilization. CONCLUSIONS: This new ED quality measure may be useful for monitoring and improving the quality of care for this vulnerable population; however, future work is needed to establish the measure's predictive validity using more prevalent outcomes such as recurrence of suicidal ideation or deliberate self-harm.

The premises is the premise: understanding off- and on-premises alcohol sales outlets to improve environmental alcohol prevention strategies.

Environmental strategies to prevent the misuse of alcohol among youth--e.g., use of public policies to restrict minors' access to alcohol--have been shown to reduce underage drinking. However, implementation of policy changes often requires public and private partnerships. One way to support these partnerships is to better understand the target of many of the environmental strategies, which is the alcohol sales outlet. Knowing more about how off-premises outlets (e.g., liquor and convenience stores) and on-premises outlets (e.g., bars and restaurants) are alike and different could help community-based organizations better tailor, plan, and implement their environmental strategies and strengthen partnerships between the public and commercial sectors. We conducted a survey of managerial or supervisory staff and/or owners of 336 off- and on-premises alcohol outlets in six counties in South Carolina, comparing these two outlet types on their preferences regarding certain alcohol sales practices, beliefs toward underage drinking, alcohol sales practices, and outcomes. Multilevel logistic regression showed that while off- and on-premises outlets did have many similarities, off-premises outlets appear to engage in more practices designed to prevent sales of alcohol to minors than on-premises outlets. The relationship between certain Responsible Beverage Service (RBS) practices and outcomes varied by outlet type. This study furthers the understanding of the differences between off- and on-premises alcohol sales outlets and offers options for increasing and tailoring environmental prevention efforts to specific settings.

Associations of Mail Survey Length and Layout With Response Rates.

We assess the association between survey layout and response rates (RRs) in the 2017 Medicare Advantage Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems mail survey. Among 438 Medicare Advantage plans surveyed by six vendors, there was latitude in survey layout, and plans could add up to 12 supplemental items. Regression models predicted survey response from survey characteristics (page count, number of supplemental items, and survey attractiveness), and beneficiary sociodemographics. Beneficiary-age-by-survey-characteristic interactions assessed whether survey characteristics were more strongly related to RRs among older beneficiaries. We found that surveys with more supplemental items and less attractive layouts had lower adjusted odds of response. RRs were more sensitive to format among older beneficiaries. The difference in adjusted RRs for the most favorable versus the least favorable survey design was 14.5%. For a 65-year-old, this difference was 13.6%; for an 80-year-old, it was 21.0%. These findings suggest that even within a relatively standardized survey, formatting can substantially influence RRs.

Quality of Care for Youth Hospitalized for Suicidal Ideation and Self-Harm.

OBJECTIVE: To examine performance on quality measures for pediatric inpatient suicidal ideation/self-harm care, and whether performance is associated with reutilization. METHODS: Retrospective observational 8 hospital study of patients [N = 1090] aged 5 to 17 years hospitalized for suicidal ideation/self-harm between 9/1/14 and 8/31/16. Two medical records-based quality measures assessing suicidal ideation/self-harm care were evaluated, one on counseling caregivers regarding restricting access to lethal means and the other on communication between inpatient and outpatient providers regarding the follow-up plan. Multivariable logistic regression assessed associations between quality measure scores and 1) hospital site, 2) patient demographics, and 3) 30-day emergency department return visits and inpatient readmissions. RESULTS: Medical record documentation revealed that, depending on hospital site, 17% to 98% of caregivers received lethal means restriction counseling (mean 70%); inpatient-to-outpatient provider communication was documented in 0% to 51% of cases (mean 16%). The odds of documenting receipt of lethal means restriction counseling was higher for caregivers of female patients compared to caregivers of male patients (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.51, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.07-2.14). The odds of documenting inpatient-to-outpatient provider follow-up plan communication was lower for Black patients compared to White patients (aOR 0.45, 95% CI, 0.24-0.84). All-cause 30-day readmission was lower for patients with documented caregiver receipt of lethal means restriction counseling (aOR 0.48, 95% CI, 0.28-0.83). CONCLUSIONS: This study revealed disparities and deficits in the quality of care received by youth with suicidal ideation/self-harm. Providing caregivers lethal means restriction counseling prior to discharge may help to prevent readmission.

Identifying optimal level-of-care placement decisions for adolescent substance use treatment.

BACKGROUND: Adolescents respond differentially to substance use treatment based on their individual needs and goals. Providers may benefit from guidance (via decision rules) for personalizing aspects of treatment, such as level-of-care (LOC) placements, like choosing between outpatient or inpatient care. The field lacks an empirically-supported foundation to inform the development of an adaptive LOC-placement protocol. This work begins to build the evidence base for adaptive protocols by estimating them from a large observational dataset. METHODS: We estimated two-stage LOC-placement protocols adapted to individual adolescent characteristics collected from the Global Appraisal of Individual Needs assessment tool (n = 10,131 adolescents). We used a modified version of Q-learning, a regression-based method for estimating personalized treatment rules over time, to estimate four protocols, each targeting a potentially distinct treatment goal: one primary outcome (a composite of ten positive treatment outcomes) and three secondary (substance frequency, substance problems, and emotional problems). We compared the adaptive protocols to non-adaptive protocols using an independent dataset. RESULTS: Intensive outpatient was recommended for all adolescents at intake for the primary outcome, while low-risk adolescents were recommended for no further treatment at followup while higher-risk patients were recommended to inpatient. Our adaptive protocols outperformed static protocols by an average of 0.4 standard deviations (95 % confidence interval 0.2-0.6) of the primary outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Adaptive protocols provide a simple one-to-one guide between adolescents' needs and recommended treatment which can be used as decision support for clinicians making LOC-placement decisions.

Gender Differences in Patient Experience Across Medicare Advantage Plans.

BACKGROUND: Medicare beneficiaries annually select fee-for-service Medicare or a private Medicare insurance (managed care) plan; information about plan performance on quality measures can inform their decisions. Although there is drill-down information available regarding quality variation by race and ethnicity, there remains a dearth of evidence regarding the extent to which care varies by other key beneficiary characteristics, such as gender. We measured gender differences for six patient experience measures and how gender gaps differ across Medicare plans. METHODS: We used data from 300,979 respondents to the 2015-2016 Medicare Advantage Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems surveys. We fit case mix-adjusted linear mixed-effects models to estimate gender differences and evaluate heterogeneity in differences across health plans. RESULTS: Nationally, women's experiences were better than men's (p < .05) by 1 percentage point on measures involving interactions with administrative staff (+1.6 percentage point for customer service) and timely access to care (+1.1 percentage point for getting care quickly), but worse on a measure that may involve negotiation with physicians (getting needed care). Gender gaps varied across plans, particularly for getting care quickly and getting needed care, where plan-level differences of up to 5 to 6 percentage points were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Although the average national differences in patient experience by gender were generally small, gender gaps were larger in some health plans and for specific measures. This finding indicates opportunities for health plans with larger gender gaps to implement quality improvement efforts.

Exploring Disparities in Influenza Immunization for Older Women.

OBJECTIVES: While women obtain most recommended preventive health interventions more often than men, evidence is mixed regarding influenza vaccination for older adults. Therefore, we evaluated sex differences in influenza vaccination among older adults. DESIGN: Nationally representative cross-sectional survey. SETTING: United States. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 1 252 705 adults, aged 65 years and older, responding to 2013 to 2017 Medicare Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems surveys. MEASUREMENTS: The dependent variable was Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set self-reported influenza immunization. The primary predictor was sex. Covariates included general health status, education, race/ethnicity, and Medicare Advantage (MA; managed care) vs Fee-for-Service (FFS) coverage. RESULTS: After adjusting for health status and other sociodemographic factors, women's immunization was 2% lower than men's immunization in MA, with no significant overall sex difference in FFS. Women were immunized less often than men in 95% of MA health plans, with the largest gaps in low-immunizing plans. Further analyses revealed variation in sex differences by health status, education, and race/ethnicity in both MA and FFS. Notably in MA, women in poor health were immunized less often than men in similar health (-4%; P < .001). Black women were immunized much less often than black men in both MA and FFS (-5%; P < .001 for each). Hispanic women were immunized less often than Hispanic men in MA (-4%; P < .001) but not within FFS. CONCLUSION: Women in MA experience small disparities overall in influenza immunization, with larger disparities for black and Hispanic women. Providers and MA plans should increase efforts to recommend and monitor immunization for older women, especially black and Hispanic women and those in poor health. Given the potential to reduce morbidity and mortality, equitable access to a critical preventive health service, such as influenza immunization, is crucial for all older adults.