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.

Are Pain Screening and Functional Assessment Results Associated with New Diagnoses and Treatment for Pain in Primary Care? An Observational Study.

Purpose: To determine if pain screening and functional assessment results are associated with new diagnoses and treatment for pain in primary care. Patients and Methods: Observational study at 13 primary care sites of a statewide federally qualified health center that implemented routine screening and functional assessment for all adults in primary care. The study group included 10,091 adults aged 18+ who had an in-person visit between July 2, 2018, and June 1, 2019, where they screened positive for chronic pain and completed a 3-question functional assessment with the PEG (Pain, Enjoyment of Life, General Activity). Multivariate logistic regressions quantified associations between pain frequency, diagnosis and treatment, sociodemographics, comorbidities, and self-reported severe pain impairment with pain diagnoses and treatment documented after screening. Results: Patients were mostly women (60.3%), Latinx (41.1%), English-speaking (80.1%), and Medicaid-insured (62.0%); they averaged 49.1 years old (SD = 13.7 years). Patients with severe pain impairment or who were Latinx were more likely to get a newly documented pain diagnosis (absolute risk difference [ARD]: 13.2% and 8.6%, ps < 0.0001), while patients with mental health/substance use or medical comorbidities were less likely (ARDs: -20.0% to -6.2%, ps < 0.001). Factors most consistently associated with treatment were prior treatment of the same modality (4 of 7 treatments, ARDs = 27.3% to 44.1%, ps <0.0001), new pain diagnosis (5 of 7, ARDs = 3.2% to 27.4%, ps <0.001), and severe impairment (4 of 7, ARDs = 2.6% to 6.5%, ps < 0.0001). A new diagnosis had the strongest association with non-opioid pain analgesics and physical medicine (ARD = 27.0% and 27.4%, p < 0.0001). Latinx patients were less likely to receive opioid analgesics and mental health/substance use medications and counseling (ARDs = -3.3% to 7.5%, ps <0.0001). Conclusion: Screening and assessment with patient-reported tools may influence pain care. Care for Latinx patients differed from non-Latinx white 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.

Distinguishing neighborhood and individual social risk factors in health care.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate (a) the magnitude of the independent associations of neighborhood-level and person-level social risk factors (SRFs) with quality, (b) whether neighborhood-level SRF associations may be proxies for person-level SRF associations, and (c) how the association of person-level SRFs and quality varies by neighborhood-level SRFs. DATA SOURCES: 2015-2016 Medicare Advantage HEDIS data, Medicare beneficiary administrative data, and 2016 American Community Survey (ACS). STUDY DESIGN: Mixed effects linear regression models (1) estimated overall inequities by neighborhood-level and person-level SRFs, (2) compared neighborhood-level associations to person-level associations, and (3) tested the interactions of person-level SRFs with corresponding neighborhood-level SRFs. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: Beneficiary-level SES and disability administrative data and five-year ACS neighborhood-level SRF information were each linked to HEDIS data. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: For all or nearly all HEDIS measures, quality was worse in neighborhoods lower in SES and in neighborhoods with higher proportions of residents with a disability. Quality by neighborhood racial and ethnic composition was mixed. Accounting for corresponding person-level SRFs reduced neighborhood SRF associations by 25% for disability, 43% for SES, and 74%-102% for racial and ethnic groups. Person-level SRF coefficients were not consistently reduced in models that added neighborhood-level SRFs. In 19 of 35 instances, there were significant (p < 0.05) interactions between neighborhood-level and corresponding person-level SRFs. Significant interactions were always positive for disability, SES, Black, and Hispanic, indicating more negative neighborhood effects for people with SRFs that did not match their neighborhood and more positive neighborhood effects for people with SRFs that matched their neighborhood. CONCLUSIONS: Relying solely on neighborhood-level SRF models that omit similar person-level SRFs overattributes inequities to neighborhood characteristics. Neighborhood-level characteristics account for much less variation in these measures' scores than similar person-level SRFs. Inequity-reduction programs may be most effective when targeting neighborhoods with a high proportion of people with a given SRF.

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.

Accountability for the Quality of Care Provided to People with Serious Illness.

BACKGROUND: Care for patients with serious illness is an emerging practice area that has gained attention as value-based purchasing has increased. While the number of programs is growing, their impact on care quality and outcomes is unknown. OBJECTIVE: With support from the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, the National Committee for Quality Assurance (NCQA) is assessing the feasibility of creating an accountability program focused on serious illness care. METHODS: This article describes the process of developing an accountability program, findings from our initial work, and our plans to develop measures for a serious illness care accountability program. We focused on three questions: 1. What patient populations should be targeted for measurement? 2. What entities have accountability for ensuring high-quality care for serious illness? 3. What structures, processes, and outcomes should be evaluated in an accountability program for serious illness care? RESULTS: Our environmental scan showed that the evidence base for specific patient populations or care models is not sufficiently mature to justify traditional structure and process measures. In visits to serious illness care programs, we observed different staffing models, care models, care settings, and payment structures. We found a gap between recommended inclusion criteria and services when compared to inclusion criteria and services offered by existing programs. CONCLUSIONS: To address the challenges, NCQA intends to develop outcome measures driven by patient and family priorities. Structure and process measures will focus on building organizations' capacity to measure outcomes, including patient engagement and outcomes, linked to patient goals.

Disparities in diabetes and hypertension care for individuals with serious mental illness.

OBJECTIVES: People with serious mental illnesses (SMI), including schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and major depression, experience early mortality, partly due to comorbid physical health conditions such as diabetes and hypertension. This study examined the quality of diabetes and hypertension care for Medicaid and Medicare enrollees with SMI. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a retrospective analysis of medical records and claims data from 3 health plans: a Medicaid plan for disabled adults, a Medicaid plan for low-income adults, and a Special Needs Plan for individuals dually enrolled in Medicaid and Medicare. The study population included 258 adults with SMI and diabetes and 241 adults with SMI and hypertension. METHODS: Existing quality measures for diabetes and hypertension from the Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set (HEDIS) were adapted and applied to the SMI population for the 2012 calendar year. The rates of diabetes care and hypertension control for people with SMI were compared with national averages for Medicaid and Medicare managed care plans to examine disparities in care. RESULTS: Adults with SMI receive poor-quality care for diabetes and hypertension. Depending on the health plan, performance on the diabetes care and hypertension control HEDIS measures was 14 to 49 percentage points lower among the SMI population than the general Medicaid and Medicare populations. CONCLUSIONS: Findings highlight disparities in care for individuals with SMI compared with the general Medicaid and Medicare populations. Health plans demonstrated substantial room for improvement on almost all diabetes and hypertension HEDIS measures for the SMI population.

Access to Care for Youth in a State Mental Health System: A Simulated Patient Approach.

OBJECTIVE: To examine access to psychiatric care for adolescents with depression in outpatient specialty clinics within a state mental health system, using a simulated patient approach. METHOD: Trained callers posed as the mother of a 14-year-old girl with depression, following a script. A stratified random sample (n = 264) of 340 state-licensed outpatient mental health clinics that serve youth was selected. Clinics were randomly assigned to season and insurance condition. We examined whether access varied by season, clinic characteristics, and caller insurance type. Weighted logistic and linear mixed effects regression models were fitted to examine associations with appointment availability and wait times. RESULTS: Among clinics at which a treatment appointment could be scheduled, appointment availability differed by season. Clinics that had participated in state-sponsored trainings targeting access were more available. Wait times for treatment appointments varied by season and region. Wait times in New York City were shorter than in some other regions. Although callers were 4.1 times more likely to be able to schedule a psychiatry appointment in the spring, wait times for psychiatry appointments were significantly longer in the spring than in the summer (49.9 vs. 36.7 days). Wait times for therapy appointments were significantly shorter in community than in hospital clinics (19.1 days vs. 35.3 days). CONCLUSION: Access to psychiatric care for youth with depression was found to be variable in a state system. State-sponsored trainings on strategies to reduce wait times appear to improve care access. The simulated patient approach has promise for monitoring the impact of health care policy reforms on care quality measures.

Access to Psychosocial Services Prior to Starting Antipsychotic Treatment Among Medicaid-Insured Youth.

OBJECTIVE: To examine rates and predictors of receiving a psychosocial service before initiating antipsychotic treatment among young people in the Medicaid program. METHOD: A retrospective new-user cohort study of 8 state Medicaid programs focused on children and adolescents 0 to 20 years, initiating antipsychotic treatment (N = 24,372). The proportion receiving a psychosocial service in the 3 months before initiating antipsychotic treatment was calculated and stratified by socio-demographic and diagnostic characteristics arranged in 9 hierarchical groups, as follows: developmental, psychotic/bipolar, disruptive, attention-deficit/hyperactivity, obsessive-compulsive, stress, major depressive, anxiety, and other disorders. RESULTS: Less than one-half of youth received a psychosocial service before initiating antipsychotic treatment (48.8%). Compared to younger adolescents (12-17 years) initiating antipsychotic treatment (51.5%), corresponding younger children (0-5 years; 39.2%) and older adolescents (18-20 years; 40.1%), but not older children (6-11 years; 51.5%), were significantly less likely to have received a psychosocial service. In relation to youth diagnosed with psychotic or bipolar disorder (52.7%), those diagnosed with attention-deficit/hyperactivity (43.3%), developmental (41.4%), depressive (46.5%), or anxiety (35.6%) disorder were significantly less likely to have received a psychosocial service during the 3 months before antipsychotic initiation. By contrast, youth diagnosed with stress disorders (61.2%) were significantly more likely than those diagnosed with psychotic or bipolar disorders (52.7%) to have received a psychosocial service before starting an antipsychotic. CONCLUSION: A majority of Medicaid-insured youth initiating antipsychotic treatment have not received a psychosocial service in the preceding 3 months. This service pattern highlights a critical gap in access to psychosocial services.

Survey shows that fewer than a third of patient-centered medical home practices engage patients in quality improvement.

Directly involving patients and families in care improvement increasingly is viewed as an important component of patient-centered care. To assess the extent to which practices actually involve patients, we surveyed 112 patient-centered medical home practices in twenty-two states. Nearly all of these practices sought patient feedback. However, only 29 percent involved patients and families as advisers and sought feedback through surveys, and only 32 percent involved patients in a continuing role in quality improvement. Interviews showed that practices that highly value patient involvement overcame barriers to ongoing patient participation. We argue that a cultural shift is needed in how practices view patients as partners, not just in areas such as personal responsibility and self-management, but also in quality improvement and governance. Practices must gain more experience and see more examples of the benefits of engaging patients, and they may need more incentives and support for engaging them.

The role of physician gender in the evaluation of the National Centers of Excellence in Women's Health: test of an alternate hypothesis.

A 2002 evaluation of the National Centers of Excellence in Women's Health (CoE) provided evidence that women receive higher-quality primary health care, as indicated by receipt of recommended preventive care and patient satisfaction, when they receive their care in comprehensive women's health centers. A potential rival explanation for the CoE evaluation findings, however, is that the higher quality of care in the CoE may be attributable to a predominance of female physicians in CoE settings. More women who receive health care in a CoE have a female regular physician and female physicians may provide more preventive health services. Additionally, women may self-select into the CoE because of their preference for female providers. This paper presents results of an analysis examining the role of physician gender in the CoE evaluation. Women seen in three CoE clinics and women seen in other settings in the same communities who had a female physician are compared to assess the CoE effect while controlled for physician gender. The findings confirm a positive CoE effect for many of the quality of care indicators that were observed in the original evaluation. Women seen in CoEs are more likely to receive physical breast examinations and mammograms (ages > or =50). In addition, positive CoE findings for counseling on domestic violence, sexually transmitted diseases, family or relationship concerns, and sexual function or concerns were upheld. The CoE model of care delivers advantages to women that are not explained by the greater number of female physicians in these settings.