Safety Net Primary Care Capabilities After the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Importance: Federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) provide care to 30 million patients in the US and have shown better outcomes and processes than other practice types. Little is known about how the COVID-19 pandemic contributed to FQHC capabilities compared with other practices. Objective: To compare postpandemic operational characteristics and capabilities of FQHCs with non-FQHC safety net practices and non-FQHC, non-safety net practices. Design, Setting, and Participants: This nationally representative survey conducted from June 2022 to February 2023 with an oversampling of safety net practices in the US included practice leaders working in stratified random selection of practices based on FQHC status, Area Deprivation Index category, and ownership type per a health care network dataset. Exposures: Practice type: FQHC vs non-FQHC safety net and non-FQHC practices. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary care capabilities, including 2 measures of access and 11 composite measures. Results: A total of 1245 practices (221 FQHC and 1024 non-FQHC) responded of 3498 practices sampled. FQHCs were more likely to be independently owned and have received COVID-19 funding. FQHCs and non-FQHC safety net practices were more likely to be in rural areas. FQHCs significantly outperformed non-FQHCs on several capabilities even after controlling for practice size and ownership, including behavioral health provision (mean score, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.51-0.56), culturally informed services (mean score, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.53-0.58), screening for social needs (mean score, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.39-0.47), social needs referrals (mean score, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.48-0.57), social needs referral follow-up (mean score, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.27-0.36), and shared decision-making and motivational interviewing training (mean score, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.51-0.56). No differences were found in behavioral and substance use screening, care processes for patients with complex and high levels of need, use of patient-reported outcome measures, decision aid use, or after-hours access. Across all practices, most of the examined capabilities showed room for improvement. Conclusions and Relevance: The results of this survey study suggest that FQHCs outperformed non-FQHC practices on important care processes while serving a patient population with lower incomes who are medically underserved compared with patients in other practice types. Legislation to expand funding for the FQHC program should improve services for underserved populations and target current non-FQHC safety net practices to serve these populations. Increased support for these practices could improve primary care for rural populations.

Primary Care Practice Characteristics Associated With Medical Assistant Staffing Ratios.

This study characterized adult primary care medical assistant (MA) staffing. National Survey of Healthcare Organizations and Systems (n = 1,252) data were analyzed to examine primary care practice characteristics associated with MA per primary care clinician (PCC) staffing ratios. In 2021, few practices (11.4%) had ratios of 2 or more MAs per PCCs. Compared with system-owned practices, independent (odds ratio [OR] = 1.76, P <0.05) and medical group-owned (OR = 2.09, P <0.05) practices were more likely to have ratios of 2 or more MAs per PCCs, as were practices with organizational cultures oriented to innovation (P <0.05). Most primary care practices do not have adequate MA staffing.

Conjoint Analysis of Telemedicine Preferences for Hypertension Management Among Adult Patients.

Background: Telemedicine has been differentially utilized by different demographic groups during COVID-19, exacerbating inequities in health care. We conducted conjoint and latent class analyses to understand factors that shape patient preferences for hypertension management telemedicine appointments. Methods: We surveyed 320 adults, oversampling participants from households that earned <$50K per year (77.2%) and speak a language other than English at home (68.8%). We asked them to choose among 2 hypothetical appointments through 12 conjoint tasks measuring 6 attributes. Individual utilities for attributes were constructed using logit estimation, and latent classes were identified and compared by demographic and clinical characteristics. Results: Respondents preferred in-person visits (0.353, standard error [SE] = 0.039) and video appointments conducted through a secure patient portal (0.002, SE = 0.040). Respondents also preferred seeing a clinician with whom they have an established relationship (0.168, SE = 0.021). We found four latent classes: "in-person" (26.5% of participants) who strongly weighted in-person appointments, "cost conscious" (8.1%) who prioritized the lowest copay ($0 to $10), "expedited" (19.7%) who prioritized getting the earliest appointment possible (same/next day or at least within the next week), and "comprehensive" (45.6%) who had preferences for in-person care and telemedicine appointments through a secure portal, low copayments, and the ability to see a familiar clinician. Conclusions: Appointment preferences for hypertension management can be segmented into four groups that prioritize (1) in-person care, (2) low copayments, (3) expedited care, and (4) balanced preferences for in-person and telemedicine appointments. Evidence is needed to clarify whether aligning appointment offerings with patients' preferences can improve care quality, equity, and efficiency.

Associations Between Lean IT Management and Financial Performance in US Hospitals.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: To understand the relationship between Lean implementation in information technology (IT) departments and hospital performance, particularly with respect to operational and financial outcomes. METHODS: Primary data were sourced from 1222 hospitals that responded to the National Survey of Lean (NSL)/Transformational Performance Improvement, which was fielded to 4500 general medical-surgical hospitals across the United States. Secondary sources included hospital performance data from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS). We performed 2 sets of multivariable regressions using data gathered from US hospitals, linked to AHRQ and CMS performance outcomes. We examined 10 different outcomes measuring financial performance, quality of care, and patient experience, and their associations with Lean adoption within hospital IT departments. We then focused only on those hospitals that adopted Lean in IT to identify specific practices associated with performance. RESULTS: Controlling for other factors, adoption of Lean IT management was associated with lower length of stay ( b = -0.098, P = .018) and inpatient expense per discharge ( b = -0.112, P = .090). Specifically, use of visual management tools (eg, A3 storyboards, status sheets) was associated with lower adjusted inpatient expense per discharge ( b = -0.176, P = .034) and higher earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization margin ( b = 0.124, P = .042). Such tools were also associated with hospital participation in bundled payment programs (odds ratio = 2.326; P = .046; 95% confidence interval, 0.979-5.527) and percentage of net revenue paid on a shared risk basis ( b = 0.188, P = .031). CONCLUSIONS: Lean IT management was associated with positive financial performance, particularly with hospital participation in value-based payment. More detailed study is needed to understand other influential factors and types of work processes, activities, or mechanisms by which high-functioning IT can contribute to financial outcomes.

Lean Performance Indicators and Facilitators of Outcomes in U.S. Public Hospitals.

GOAL: This study investigated the association between Lean and performance outcomes in U.S. public hospitals. Public hospitals face substantial pressure to deliver high-quality care with limited resources. Lean-based management systems can provide these hospitals with alternative approaches to improve efficiency and effectiveness. Prior research shows that Lean can have positive impacts in hospitals ranging in ownership type, but more study is needed, specifically in publicly owned hospitals. METHODS: We performed multivariable regressions using data from the 2017 National Survey of Lean/Transformational Performance Improvement. The data were linked to publicly available hospital performance data from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. We examined 11 outcomes measuring financial performance, quality of care, and patient experience and their associations with Lean adoption. We also explored potential drivers of positive outcomes by examining Lean implementation in each hospital, measured as the number of units using Lean tools and practices; leader commitment to Lean principles; Lean training and education among physicians, nurses, and managers; and use of a daily management system among C-suite leaders and managers. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Lean adoption and implementation were associated with improved performance in U.S. public hospitals. Compared with hospitals that did not adopt Lean, those that did had significantly lower adjusted inpatient expenses per discharge and higher-than-average national scores on the appropriate use of medical imaging and timeliness of care. The study results also showed marginally significant improvements in patient experience and hospital earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization margins. Focusing on these select outcomes, we found that drivers of such improvements involved the extent of Lean implementation, as reflected by leadership commitment, daily management, and training/education while controlling for the number of years using Lean. PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS: Lean is a method of continuous improvement centered around a culture of providing high-value care for patients. Our findings provide insight into the potential benefits of Lean in U.S. public hospitals. Notably, they suggest that leader buy-in is key to success. When executives and managers support Lean initiatives and provide proper training for the workforce, improved financial and operational performance can result. This commitment, starting with upper management, may also play a broader role in the effort to reform healthcare while having a positive impact on patient care in U.S. public hospitals.

Hospital Characteristics Associated With Clinically Integrated Network Participation.

BACKGROUND: Increased integration of physician organizations and hospitals into health systems has not necessarily improved clinical integration or patient outcomes. However, federal regulators have issued favorable opinions for clinically integrated networks (CINs) as a way to pursue coordination between hospitals and physicians. Hospital organizational affiliations, including independent practice associations (IPA), physician-hospital organizations (PHOs), and accountable care organizations (ACOs), may support CIN participation. No empirical evidence, however, exists about factors associated with CIN participation. METHODS: Data from the 2019 American Hospital Association survey (n = 4405) were analyzed to quantify hospital CIN participation. Multivariable logistic regression models were estimated to examine whether IPA, PHO, and ACO affiliations were associated with CIN participation, controlling for market factors and hospital characteristics. RESULTS: In 2019, 34.6% of hospitals participated in a CIN. Larger, not-for-profit, and metropolitan hospitals were more likely to participate in CINs. In adjusted analyses, hospitals participating in CINs were more likely to have an IPA (9.5% points, P < 0.001), a PHO (6.1% points, P < 0.001), and ACO (19.3% points, P < 0.001) compared with hospitals not participating in a CIN. CONCLUSIONS: Over one-third of hospitals participate in a CIN, despite limited evidence about their effectiveness in delivering value. Results suggest that CIN participation may be a response to integrative norms. Future work should attempt to better define CIN participation and strive to disentangle overlapping organizational participation.

Multilevel influences on patient engagement and chronic care management.

OBJECTIVES: Physician practices are increasingly owned by health systems, which may support or hinder adoption of innovative care processes for adults with chronic conditions. We examined health system- and physician practice-level capabilities associated with adoption of (1) patient engagement strategies and (2) chronic care management processes for adult patients with diabetes and/or cardiovascular disease. STUDY DESIGN: We analyzed data collected from the National Survey of Healthcare Organizations and Systems, a nationally representative survey of physician practices (n = 796) and health systems (n = 247) (2017-2018). METHODS: Multivariable multilevel linear regression models estimated system- and practice-level characteristics associated with practice adoption of patient engagement strategies and chronic care management processes. RESULTS: Health systems with processes to assess clinical evidence (ß = 6.54 points on a 0-100 scale; P = .004) and with more advanced health information technology (HIT) functionality (ß = 2.77 points per SD increase on a 0-100 scale; P = .03) adopted more practice-level chronic care management processes, but not patient engagement strategies, compared with systems lacking these capabilities. Physician practices with cultures oriented to innovation, more advanced HIT functionality, and with a process to assess clinical evidence adopted more patient engagement strategies and chronic care management processes. CONCLUSIONS: Health systems may be better able to support the adoption of practice-level chronic care management processes, which have a strong evidence base for implementation, compared with patient engagement strategies, which have less evidence to guide effective implementation. Health systems have an opportunity to advance patient-centered care by expanding practice-level HIT functionality and developing processes to appraise clinical evidence for practices.

Telehealth Use, Care Continuity, and Quality: Diabetes and Hypertension Care in Community Health Centers Before and During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Community health centers (CHCs) pivoted to using telehealth to deliver chronic care during the coronavirus COVID-19 pandemic. While care continuity can improve care quality and patients' experiences, it is unclear whether telehealth supported this relationship. OBJECTIVE: We examine the association of care continuity with diabetes and hypertension care quality in CHCs before and during COVID-19 and the mediating effect of telehealth. RESEARCH DESIGN: This was a cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: Electronic health record data from 166 CHCs with n=20,792 patients with diabetes and/or hypertension with ≥2 encounters/year during 2019 and 2020. METHODS: Multivariable logistic regression models estimated the association of care continuity (Modified Modified Continuity Index; MMCI) with telehealth use and care processes. Generalized linear regression models estimated the association of MMCI and intermediate outcomes. Formal mediation analyses assessed whether telehealth mediated the association of MMCI with A1c testing during 2020. RESULTS: MMCI [2019: odds ratio (OR)=1.98, marginal effect=0.69, z=165.50, P<0.001; 2020: OR=1.50, marginal effect=0.63, z=147.73, P<0.001] and telehealth use (2019: OR=1.50, marginal effect=0.85, z=122.87, P<0.001; 2020: OR=10.00, marginal effect=0.90, z=155.57, P<0.001) were associated with higher odds of A1c testing. MMCI was associated with lower systolic (ß=-2.90, P<0.001) and diastolic blood pressure (ß=-1.44, P<0.001) in 2020, and lower A1c values (2019: ß=-0.57, P=0.007; 2020: ß=-0.45, P=0.008) in both years. In 2020, telehealth use mediated 38.7% of the relationship between MMCI and A1c testing. CONCLUSIONS: Higher care continuity is associated with telehealth use and A1c testing, and lower A1c and blood pressure. Telehealth use mediates the association of care continuity and A1c testing. Care continuity may facilitate telehealth use and resilient performance on process measures.

Health systems and telemedicine adoption for diabetes and hypertension care.

OBJECTIVES: The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated telemedicine use nationally, but differences across health systems are understudied. We examine telemedicine use for adults with diabetes and/or hypertension across 10 health systems and analyze practice and patient characteristics associated with greater use. STUDY DESIGN: Encounter-level data from the AMGA Optum Data Warehouse for March 13, 2020, to December 31, 2020, were analyzed, which included 3,016,761 clinical encounters from 764,521 adults with diabetes and/or hypertension attributed to 1 of 1207 practice sites with at least 50 system-attributed patients. METHODS: Linear spline regression estimated whether practice size and ownership were associated with telemedicine during the adoption (weeks 0-4), de-adoption (weeks 5-12), and maintenance (weeks 13-42) periods, controlling for patient socioeconomic and clinical characteristics. RESULTS: Telemedicine use peaked at 11% to 42% of weekly encounters after 4 weeks. In adjusted analyses, small practices had lower telemedicine use for adults with diabetes during the maintenance period compared with larger practices. Practice ownership was not associated with telemedicine use. Practices with higher proportions of Black patients continued to expand telemedicine use during the de-adoption and maintenance periods. CONCLUSIONS: Practice ownership was not associated with telemedicine use during first months of the pandemic. Small practices de-adopted telemedicine to a greater degree than medium and large practices. Technical support for small practices, irrespective of their ownership, could enable telemedicine use for adults with diabetes and/or hypertension.

Expert-Identified Practices for Achieving Measurable Performance Improvements With Lean Implementation.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Despite the rapid spread of Lean management in health care, few organizations have achieved measurable overall performance improvements with Lean. What differentiates these organizations from those that struggle with realizing the potential benefits of Lean management is unclear. In this qualitative study we explore measuring the impact of Lean and the recommended practices for achieving measurable performance improvements with Lean in health care organizations. METHODS: Informed by preliminary quantitative results from analyses of high- and low-performing Lean hospitals, we conducted 17 semi-structured interviews with Lean health care experts on the Lean principles and practices associated with better performance. We conducted qualitative content analyses of the interview transcripts based on grounded theory and linking to core principles and practices of the Lean management system. RESULTS: The qualitative data revealed 3 categories of metrics for measuring the impact of Lean: currently used institutional measures, measures tailored to Lean initiatives, and population-level measures. Leadership engagement/commitment and clear organizational focus/prioritization/alignment had the highest weighted averages of success factors. The lack of these 2 factors had the highest weighted averages of biggest barriers for achieving measurable performance improvements with Lean implementation. CONCLUSIONS: Leadership engagement and organizational focus can facilitate achieving the organization's performance improvement goals, whereas their absence can considerably hinder performance improvement efforts. Many different approaches have been used to quantify the impact of Lean, but currently used institutional performance measures are preferred by the majority of Lean experts.

Impact of a selective narrow network with comprehensive patient navigation on access, utilization, expenditures, and enrollee experiences.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the effect of enrollee switching from a broad-network accountable care organization (ACO) health maintenance organization (HMO) to a "high performance" ACO-HMO with a selective narrow network and comprehensive patient navigation system on access, utilization, expenditures, and enrollee experiences. DATA SOURCES: Secondary administrative data were obtained for 2016-2020, and primary interview and survey data in 2021. STUDY DESIGN: Fixed-effects instrumental variable analyses of administrative data and regression analyses of survey data. Outcomes included access, utilization, expenditures, and enrollee experience. Background information was gathered via interviews. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: We obtained medical expenditure/enrollment and access data on continuously enrolled members in a broad-network ACO-HMO (n = 24,555), a subset of those who switched to a high-performance ACO-HMO in 2018 (n = 7664); interviews of organizational leaders (n = 13); and an enrollee survey (n = 512). PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Health care effectiveness data and information Set (HEDIS) access measures were not different across plans. However, annual utilization dropped by 15.5 percentage points (95% CI: 18.1, 12.9) more in the high-performance ACO-HMO, with relative annual expenditures declining by $1251 (95% CI: $1461, $1042) per person per year. High-performance ACO-HMO enrollees were 10.1 percentage points (95% CI 0.001, 0.201) more likely to access primary care usually or always as soon as needed and 11.2 percentage points (95% CI 0.007, 0.217) more likely to access specialty care usually or always as soon as needed. Plan satisfaction was 7.1 percentage points (95% CI: -0.001, 0.138) higher in the high-performance ACO-HMO. Interviewees noted the comprehensive patient navigation system was designed to ensure patients remained in the narrow network to receive care. CONCLUSIONS: ACO and HMO contracts with selective narrow networks supported by comprehensive patient navigation can reduce expenditures and improve specialty access and patient satisfaction compared to broad-network plans that lack these features. Payers should consider implementing narrow networks with comprehensive support systems.

The Better Care Plan: a blueprint for improving America's healthcare system.

The United States falls far short of its potential for delivering care that is effective, efficient, safe, timely, patient-centered, and equitable. We put forward the Better Care Plan, an overarching blueprint to address the flaws in our current system. The plan calls for continuously improving care, moving all payers to risk-adjusted prospective payment, and creating national entities for collecting, analyzing, and reporting patient safety and quality-of-care outcomes data. A number of recommendations are made to achieve these goals.

Managing Through a Pandemic: A Daily Management System for COVID-19 Response and Recovery.

GOAL: This study explored the use of a Lean daily management system (DMS) for COVID-19 response and recovery in U.S. hospitals and health systems. Originally developed in manufacturing, Lean is an evidence-based approach to quality and process improvement in healthcare. Although Lean has been studied in individual hospital units and outpatient practices, it has not been examined as a whole system response to crisis events. METHODS: We conducted qualitative interviews with 46 executive leaders, clinical leaders, and frontline staff in four hospitals and health systems across the United States. We developed a semistructured interview guide to understand DMS implementation in these care delivery organizations. As interviews took place 6-8 months following the onset of the pandemic, a subset of our interview questions centered on DMS use to meet the demands of COVID-19. Based on a deductive approach to qualitative analysis, we identified clusters of themes that described how DMS facilitated rapid system response to the public health emergency. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: There were many important ways in which U.S. hospitals and health systems leveraged their DMS to address COVID-19 challenges. These included the use of tiered huddles to facilitate rapid communication, the creation of standard work for redeployed staff, and structured problem-solving to prioritize new areas for improvement. We also discovered ways that the pandemic itself affected DMS implementation in all organizations. COVID-19 universally created greater DMS visibility by opening lines of communication among leadership, strengthening measurement and accountability, and empowering staff to develop solutions at the front lines. Many lessons learned using DMS for crisis management will carry forward into COVID-19 recovery efforts. Lessons include expanding telehealth, reactivating incident command systems as needed, and efficiently coordinating resources amid potential future shortages. PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS: Overall, the Lean DMS functioned as a robust property that enabled quick organizational response to unpredictable events. Our findings on the use of DMS are consistent with organizational resilience that emphasizes collective sense-making and awareness of incident status, team decision-making, and frequent interaction and coordination. These features of resilience are supported by DMS practices such as tiered huddles for rapid information dissemination and alignment across organizational hierarchies. When used in conjunction with plan-do-study-act methodology, huddles provide teams with enhanced feedback that strengthens their ability to make changes as needed. Moreover, gaps between work-as-imagined (how work should be done) and work-as-done (how work is actually done) may be exacerbated in the initial chaos of emergency events but can be minimized through the development of standard work protocols. As a facilitator of resilience, the Lean DMS may be used in a variety of challenging situations to ensure high standards of care.

Adoption of Patient Engagement Strategies by Physician Practices in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Patient engagement strategies can equip patients with tools to navigate treatment decisions and improve patient-centered outcomes. Despite increased recognition about the importance of patient engagement, little is known about the extent of physician practice adoption of patient engagement strategies nationally. METHODS: We analyzed data collected from the National Survey of Healthcare Organizations and Systems (NSHOS) on physician practice adoption of patient engagement strategies. Stratified-cluster sampling was used to select physician practices operating under different organizational structures. Multivariable linear regression models estimated the association of practice ownership, health information technology functionality, use of screening activities, patient responsiveness, chronic care management processes, and the adoption of patient engagement strategies, including shared decision-making, motivational interviewing, and shared medical appointments. All regression models controlled for participation in payment reforms, practice size, Medicaid revenue percentage, and geographic region. RESULTS: We found modest and varied adoption of patient engagement strategies by practices of different ownership types, with health system-owned practices having the lowest adoption of ownership types. Practice capabilities, including chronic care management processes, routine screening of medical and social risks, and patient care dissemination strategies were associated with greater practice-level adoption of patient engagement strategies. CONCLUSIONS: This national study is the first to characterize the adoption of patient engagement strategies by US physician practices. We found modest adoption of shared decision-making and motivational interviewing, and low adoption of shared medical appointments. Risk-based payment reform has the potential to motivate greater practice-level patient engagement, but the extent to which it occurs may depend on internal practice capabilities.

The Reliability of Graduate Medical Education Quality of Care Clinical Performance Measures.

Background: Graduate medical education (GME) program leaders struggle to incorporate quality measures in the ambulatory care setting, leading to knowledge gaps on how to provide feedback to residents and programs. While nationally collected quality of care data are available, their reliability for individual resident learning and for GME program improvement is understudied. Objective: To examine the reliability of the Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set (HEDIS) clinical performance measures in family medicine and internal medicine GME programs and to determine whether HEDIS measures can inform residents and their programs with their quality of care. Methods: From 2014 to 2017, we collected HEDIS measures from 566 residents in 8 family medicine and internal medicine programs under one sponsoring institution. Intraclass correlation was performed to establish patient sample sizes required for 0.70 and 0.80 reliability levels at the resident and program levels. Differences between the patient sample sizes required for reliable measurement and the actual patients cared for by residents were calculated. Results: The highest reliability levels for residents (0.88) and programs (0.98) were found for the most frequently available HEDIS measure, colorectal cancer screening. At the GME program level, 87.5% of HEDIS measures had sufficient sample sizes for reliable measurement at alpha 0.7 and 75.0% at alpha 0.8. Most resident level measurements were found to be less reliable. Conclusions: GME programs may reliably evaluate HEDIS performance pooled at the program level, but less so at the resident level due to patient volume.

Adoption of Patient-Reported Outcomes by Health Systems and Physician Practices in the USA.

BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROs) can help clinicians adjust treatments and deliver patient-centered care, but organizational adoption of PROs remains low. OBJECTIVE: This study examines the extent of PRO adoption among health systems and physician practices nationally and examines the organizational capabilities associated with more extensive PRO adoption. DESIGN: Two nationally representative surveys were analyzed in parallel to assess health system and physician practice capabilities associated with adoption of PROs of disability, pain, and depression. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 323 US health system and 2,190 physician practice respondents METHODS: Multivariable regression models separately estimated the association of health system and physician practice capabilities associated with system-level and practice-level adoption of PROs. MAIN MEASURES: Health system and physician practice adoption of PROs for depression, pain, and disability. KEY RESULTS: Pain (50.6%) and depression (43.8%) PROs were more commonly adopted by all hospitals and medical groups within health systems compared to disability PROs (26.5%). In adjusted analyses, systems with more advanced health IT functions were more likely to use disability (p<0.05) and depression (p<0.01) PROs than systems with less advanced health IT. Practice-level advanced health IT was positively associated with use of depression PRO (p<0.05), but not disability or pain PRO use. Practices with more chronic care management processes, broader medical and social risk screening, and more processes to support patient responsiveness were more likely to adopt each of the three PROs. Compared to independent physician practices, system-owned practices and community health centers were less likely to adopt PROs. CONCLUSIONS: Chronic care management programs, routine screening, and patient-centered care initiatives can enable PRO adoption at the practice level. Developing these practice-level capabilities may improve PRO adoption more than solely expanding health IT functions.

Physician Practices With Robust Capabilities Spend Less On Medicare Beneficiaries Than More Limited Practices.

No research has considered a range of physician practice capabilities for managing patient care when examining practice-level influences on quality of care, utilization, and spending. Using data from the 2017 National Survey of Healthcare Organizations and Systems linked to 2017 Medicare fee-for-service claims data from attributed beneficiaries, we examined the association of practice-level capabilities with process measures of quality, utilization, and spending. In propensity score-weighted mixed-effects regression analyses, physician practice locations with "robust" capabilities had lower total spending compared to locations with "mixed" or "limited" capabilities. Quality and utilization, however, did not differ by practice-level capabilities. Physician practice locations with robust capabilities spend less on Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries but deliver quality of care that is comparable to the quality delivered in locations with low or mixed capabilities. Reforms beyond those targeting practice capabilities, including multipayer alignment and payment reform, may be needed to support larger performance advantages for practices with robust capabilities.

Integrating network theory into the study of integrated healthcare.

Healthcare policy in the United States (U.S.) has focused on promoting integrated healthcare to combat fragmentation (e.g., 1993 Health Security Act, 2010 Affordable Care Act). Researchers have responded by studying coordination and developing typologies of integration. Yet, after three decades, research evidence for the benefits of coordination and integration are lacking. We argue that research efforts need to refocus in three ways: (1) use social networks to study relational coordination and integrated healthcare, (2) analyze integrated healthcare at three levels of analysis (micro, meso, macro), and (3) focus on clinical integration as the most proximate impact on patient outcomes. We use examples to illustrate the utility of such refocusing and present avenues for future research.

Pathways for primary care practice adoption of patient engagement strategies.

OBJECTIVE: To identify potential orderings of primary care practice adoption of patient engagement strategies overall and separately for interpersonally and technologically oriented strategies. DATA SOURCES: We analyzed physician practice survey data (n = 71) on the adoption of 12 patient engagement strategies. STUDY DESIGN: Mokken scale analysis was used to assess latent traits among the patient engagement strategies. DATA COLLECTION: Three groupings of patient engagement strategies were analyzed: (1) all 12 patient engagement strategies, (2) six interpersonally oriented strategies, and (3) six technologically oriented strategies. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We did not find scalability among all 12 patient engagement strategies, however, separately analyzing the subgroups of six interpersonally and six technologically oriented strategies demonstrated scalability (Loevinger's H coefficient of scalability [range]: interpersonal strategies, H = 0.54 [0.49-0.60], technological strategies, H = 0.42 [0.31, 0.54]). Ordered patterns emerged in the adoption of strategies for both interpersonal and technological types. CONCLUSIONS: Common pathways of practice adoption of patient engagement strategies were identified. Implementing interpersonally intensive patient engagement strategies may require different physician practice capabilities than technological strategies. Rather than simultaneously adopting multiple patient engagement strategies, gradual and purposeful practice adoption may improve the impact of these strategies and support sustainability.