Role of Nurse Practitioners in Caring for Patients With Complex Health Needs.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to estimate trends in the percentage of Medicare beneficiaries cared for by nurse practitioners from 2012 to 2017, to characterize beneficiaries cared for by nurse practitioners in 2017, and to examine how the percentage of beneficiaries cared for by nurse practitioners varies by practice characteristics. DESIGN: An observational study of 2012-2017 Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries' ambulatory visits. We computed the percentage of beneficiaries with 1 or more ambulatory visits from nurse practitioners and the percentage of beneficiaries receiving the plurality of their ambulatory visits from a nurse practitioner versus a physician (ie, predominant provider). We compared beneficiary demographics, clinical characteristics, and utilization by the predominant provider. We then characterized the predominant provider by practice characteristics. KEY RESULTS: In 2017, 28.9% of beneficiaries received any care from a nurse practitioner and 8.0% utilized nurse practitioners as their predominant provider-an increase from 4.4% in 2012. Among beneficiaries cared for by nurse practitioners in 2017, 25.9% had 3 or more chronic conditions compared with 20.8% of those cared for by physicians. Beneficiaries cared for in practices owned by health systems were more likely to have a nurse practitioner as their predominant provider compared with those attending practices that were independently owned (9.3% vs. 7.0%). CONCLUSIONS: Nurse practitioners are caring for Medicare beneficiaries with complex needs at rates that match or exceed their physician colleagues. The growing role of nurse practitioners, especially in health care systems, warrants attention as organizations embark on payment and delivery reform.

Using Machine Learning to Predict Primary Care and Advance Workforce Research.

PURPOSE: To develop and test a machine-learning-based model to predict primary care and other specialties using Medicare claims data. METHODS: We used 2014-2016 prescription and procedure Medicare data to train 3 sets of random forest classifiers (prescription only, procedure only, and combined) to predict specialty. Self-reported specialties were condensed to 27 categories. Physicians were assigned to testing and training cohorts, and random forest models were trained and then applied to 2014-2016 data sets for the testing cohort to generate a series of specialty predictions. Comparing the predicted specialty to self-report, we assessed performance with F1 scores and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) values. RESULTS: A total of 564,986 physicians were included. The combined model had a greater aggregate (macro) F1 score (0.876) than the prescription-only (0.745; P <.01) or procedure-only (0.821; P <.01) model. Mean F1 scores across specialties in the combined model ranged from 0.533 to 0.987. The mean F1 score was 0.920 for primary care. The mean AUROC value for the combined model was 0.992, with values ranging from 0.982 to 0.999. The AUROC value for primary care was 0.982. CONCLUSIONS: This novel approach showed high performance and provides a near real-time assessment of current primary care practice. These findings have important implications for primary care workforce research in the absence of accurate data.

A Comparison of Electronic Patient-Portal Use Among Patients with Resident and Attending Primary Care Providers.

BACKGROUND: Electronic patient-portals offer the potential to enhance patient-physician communication and health outcomes but differential use may create or worsen disparities. While prior studies identified patient characteristics associated with patient-portal use, the role of physician factors is less known. We investigated differences in overall and patterns of portal use for patients with resident and attending primary care providers (PCPs). METHODS: Cross-sectional study of all established patients with a resident or attending PCP seen at an academic internal medicine practice (two sites) between May 1, 2014, and April 30, 2015. We defined patient-portal use as having accessed any "active" (secure messaging, medication refill request), or "passive" (viewing labs, after visit summaries, or appointments) patient-portal function more than once over the study period. We used generalized linear models clustered on PCP to examine the odds of patient-portal use by PCP type, adjusted for patient age, gender, preferred language, race/ethnicity, insurance, and visits. Among patient-portal users, we examined the association of PCP type with "active use" utilizing the same method. RESULTS: The mean patient age (n = 17,699) was 54.2 (SD 17.5), with 47.2% White, 23.6% Asian, 8.8% Black, 8.4% Latino, and 12% other/unknown. The majority (61.8%) had private insurance, and attending PCPs (76.9%). Although 72.3% enrolled in the patient-portal, only 53.4% were portal users; 40.0% were active users. There were 47 attending and 62 resident physicians. Patients with resident PCPs had lower odds of using the portal compared to those with attending PCPs (OR = 0.54, 95% CI 0.50-0.59). Similarly, among portal users, residents' patients had lower odds of being active users of the portal (OR = 0.76, 95% CI 0.68-0.87). CONCLUSION: Given the lower patient-portal use among residents' patients, residency programs should develop curricula to bolster trainee competence in using the patient-portal for communication and to enhance the patient-physician relationship. Future research should explore additional physician factors that impact portal use.

Burnout Among Physicians, Advanced Practice Clinicians and Staff in Smaller Primary Care Practices.

BACKGROUND: Burnout among primary care physicians, advanced practice clinicians (nurse practitioners and physician assistants [APCs]), and staff is common and associated with negative consequences for patient care, but the association of burnout with characteristics of primary care practices is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To examine the association between physician-, APC- and staff-reported burnout and specific structural, organizational, and contextual characteristics of smaller primary care practices. DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis of survey data collected from 9/22/2015-6/19/2017. SETTING: Sample of smaller primary care practices in the USA participating in a national initiative focused on improving the delivery of cardiovascular preventive services. PARTICIPANTS: 10,284 physicians, APCs and staff from 1380 primary care practices. MAIN MEASURE: Burnout was assessed with a validated single-item measure. KEY RESULTS: Burnout was reported by 20.4% of respondents overall. In a multivariable analysis, burnout was slightly more common among physicians and APCs (physician vs. non-clinical staff, adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 1.26; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.05-1.49, APC vs. non-clinical staff, aOR = 1.34, 95% CI, 1.10-1.62). Other multivariable correlates of burnout included non-solo practice (2-5 physician/APCs vs. solo practice, aOR = 1.71; 95% CI, 1.35-2.16), health system affiliation (vs. physician/APC-owned practice, aOR = 1.42; 95%CI, 1.16-1.73), and Federally Qualified Health Center status (vs. physician/APC-owned practice, aOR = 1.36; 95%CI, 1.03-1.78). Neither the proportion of patients on Medicare or Medicaid, nor practice-level patient volume (patient visits per physician/APC per day) were significantly associated with burnout. In analyses stratified by professional category, practice size was not associated with burnout for APCs, and participation in an accountable care organization was associated with burnout for clinical and non-clinical staff. CONCLUSIONS: Burnout is prevalent among physicians, APCs, and staff in smaller primary care practices. Members of solo practices less commonly report burnout, while members of health system-owned practices and Federally Qualified Health Centers more commonly report burnout, suggesting that practice level autonomy may be a critical determinant of burnout.

Protocol of a cluster randomized trial to investigate the impact of a type 2 diabetes risk prediction model on change in physical activity in primary care.

BACKGROUND: Little evidence exists on the impact of diabetes risk scores, e.g. on physicians and patient's behavior, perceived risk of persons, shared-decision making and particularly on patient's health. The aim of this study is to investigate the impact of a non-invasive type 2 diabetes risk prediction model in the primary health care setting as component of routine health checks on change in physical activity. METHODS: Parallel group cluster randomized controlled trial including 30 primary care physicians (PCPs) and 300 participants in the region of Düsseldorf and surrounding urban and rural municipalities, West Germany. On cluster level, PCPs will be randomized into intervention or control group using a biased coin minimization technique. Participants in the control group are going to have a routine health check "Check-up 35" which is recommended biannually for all people ≥35 years of age in Germany. In the intervention group, the routine health check is expanded by usage of a non-invasive diabetes risk prediction model (German Diabetes Risk Score). Primary outcome is change in physical activity after 1 year. Secondary outcomes include aspects of targeted counseling, motivation of participant's to change lifestyle, perceived and objectively measured diabetes risk, acceptance of diabetes risk scores, quality of life, depression and anxiety. Patients will be followed over 12 months. Hierarchical or mixed models will be conducted, including a random intercept to adjust for cluster, the respective baseline value, and covariates to compare the groups. DISCUSSION: This pragmatic cluster randomized controlled trial will enhance our knowledge on the clinical impact of diabetes risk scores for the first time in the real-life primary health care setting. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03234322 , registered on July 28, 2017.

Prospective study of NSAIDs prescribing in Saudi Arabia: Cardiovascular and gastrointestinal risk in patients with diabetes mellitus
.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to investigate the patterns of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) prescriptions in diabetes mellitus (DM) patients and to evaluate their suitability based on patient gastrointestinal/cardiovascular (GI/CV) risk profiles. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively identified patients with DM, who were seen at a primary care facility from March 1 to 31, 2016. GI risk factors, CV histories, and current medications were recorded. Data were evaluated for appropriateness of NSAID prescribing by using current understanding and accepted guidelines. RESULTS: A total of 443 evaluable patients were reviewed. NSAIDs were prescribed in 171 patients (38.5%). Ibuprofen (23.5%) was the most frequently prescribed drug, followed by celecoxib (20%) and naproxen (14.1%). Of 171 patients, 76 (44.4%) had a previous history of CV events, while 52 patients without CV history had a moderate to very high 10-year risk of heart disease. Markedly fewer patients with CV history (19.1%) than patients without CV history were prescribed naproxen. Patients at high GI risk (22.9%) were prescribed traditional NSAIDs without a gastroprotective agent. Overall, 22.9% of patients at high GI risk and 65.8% at high CV risk were prescribed NSAIDs that were not in accordance with current guidelines or recommendations of regulatory agencies. CONCLUSION: Inappropriate prescribing of NSAIDs was found in more than half of the studied DM patients who were at risk for significant GI and CV adverse events. Assessment of GI and CV risks in DM patients is crucial to tailor NSAID selection and optimize patient outcomes.
.

Underappreciation of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease by primary care clinicians: limited awareness of surrogate markers of fibrosis.

BACKGROUND: Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is a common cause of incidental liver test abnormalities. General practitioners (GP) have a key role in identifying people with NAFLD at risk of significant liver disease. Recent specialist guidelines emphasise the use of fibrosis algorithms or serum biomarkers rather than routine liver tests, to assess advanced fibrosis. AIM: To evaluate primary care clinicians' current approach to diagnosis, management and referral of NAFLD. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey of primary care clinicians was undertaken through a structured questionnaire about NAFLD. A convenience sample of general practice clinics and general practice conferences in Metropolitan Brisbane and regional south east Queensland was selected. RESULTS: A total of 108 primary care clinicians completed the survey (participation rate 100%). Fifty-one percent of respondents considered the prevalence of NAFLD in the general population to be ≤10%. Twenty-four percent of respondents felt that liver enzymes were sufficiently sensitive to detect underlying NAFLD. Most respondents were unsure whether the Fibrosis 4 score (62.7% unsure) or Enhanced Liver Fibrosis score (63.7% unsure) could help to identify advanced fibrosis or cirrhosis. Although 47% of respondents said they would refer a patient to a Gastroenterologist/Hepatologist if they suspect the patient has NAFLD, 44.1% do not make any referrals. Of concern, 70.6% of clinicians said they were unlikely to refer a patient to Hepatology unless liver function tests are abnormal. CONCLUSION: Our findings demonstrate that many primary care clinicians underestimate the prevalence of NAFLD and under-recognise the clinical spectrum of NAFLD and how this is assessed.

Variation of polypharmacy in older primary care attenders occurs at prescriber level.

BACKGROUND: Polypharmacy is particularly important in older persons as they are more likely to experience adverse events compared to the rest of the population. Despite the relevance, there is a lack of studies on the possible association of patient, prescriber and practice characteristics with polypharmacy. Thus, the aim of this study was to determine the rate of polypharmacy among older persons attending public and private primary care clinics, and its association with patient, prescriber and practice characteristics. METHODS: We used data from The National Medical Care Survey (NMCS), a national cross-sectional survey of patients' visits to primary care clinics in Malaysia. A weighted total of 22,832 encounters of patients aged ≥65 years were analysed. Polypharmacy was defined as concomitant use of five medications and above. Multilevel logistic regression was performed to examine the association of polypharmacy with patient, prescriber and practice characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 20.3% of the older primary care attenders experienced polypharmacy (26.7%% in public and 11.0% in private practice). The adjusted odds ratio (OR) of polypharmacy were 6.37 times greater in public practices. Polypharmacy was associated with patients of female gender (OR 1.49), primary education level (OR 1.61) and multimorbidity (OR 14.21). The variation in rate of polypharmacy was mainly found at prescriber level. CONCLUSION: Polypharmacy is common among older persons visiting primary care practices. Given the possible adverse outcomes, interventions to reduce the burden of polypharmacy are best to be directed at individual prescribers.

Primary Care Providers' Opening of Time-Sensitive Alerts Sent to Commercial Electronic Health Record InBaskets.

BACKGROUND: Time-sensitive alerts are among the many types of clinical notifications delivered to physicians' secure InBaskets within commercial electronic health records (EHRs). A delayed alert review can impact patient safety and compromise care. OBJECTIVE: To characterize factors associated with opening of non-interruptive time-sensitive alerts delivered into primary care provider (PCP) InBaskets. DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS: We analyzed data for 799 automated alerts. Alerts highlighted actionable medication concerns for older patients post-hospital discharge (2010-2011). These were study-generated alerts sent 3 days post-discharge to InBaskets for 75 PCPs across a multisite healthcare system, and represent a subset of all urgent InBasket notifications. MAIN MEASURES: Using EHR access and audit logs to track alert opening, we performed bivariate and multivariate analyses calculating associations between patient characteristics, provider characteristics, contextual factors at the time of alert delivery (number of InBasket notifications, weekday), and alert opening within 24 h. KEY RESULTS: At the time of alert delivery, the PCPs had a median of 69 InBasket notifications and had received a median of 379.8 notifications (IQR 295.0, 492.0) over the prior 7 days. Of the 799 alerts, 47.1% were opened within 24 h. Patients with longer hospital stays (>4 days) were marginally more likely to have alerts opened (OR 1.48 [95% CI 1.00-2.19]). Alerts delivered to PCPs whose InBaskets had a higher number of notifications at the time of alert delivery were significantly less likely to be opened within 24 h (top quartile >157 notifications: OR 0.34 [95% CI 0.18-0.61]; reference bottom quartile ≤42). Alerts delivered on Saturdays were also less likely to be opened within 24 h (OR 0.18 [CI 0.08-0.39]). CONCLUSIONS: The number of total InBasket notifications and weekend delivery may impact the opening of time-sensitive EHR alerts. Further study is needed to support safe and effective approaches to care team management of InBasket notifications.

The Association of Team-Specific Workload and Staffing with Odds of Burnout Among VA Primary Care Team Members.

BACKGROUND: Work-related burnout is common in primary care and is associated with worse patient safety, patient satisfaction, and employee mental health. Workload, staffing stability, and team completeness may be drivers of burnout. However, few studies have assessed these associations at the team level, and fewer still include members of the team beyond physicians. OBJECTIVE: To study the associations of burnout among primary care providers (PCPs), nurse care managers, clinical associates (MAs, LPNs), and administrative clerks with the staffing and workload on their teams. DESIGN: We conducted an individual-level cross-sectional analysis of survey and administrative data in 2014. PARTICIPANTS: Primary care personnel at VA clinics responding to a national survey. MAIN MEASURES: Burnout was measured with a validated single-item survey measure dichotomized to indicate the presence of burnout. The independent variables were survey measures of team staffing (having a fully staffed team, serving on multiple teams, and turnover on the team), and workload both from survey items (working extended hours), and administrative data (patient panel overcapacity and average panel comorbidity). KEY RESULTS: There were 4610 respondents (estimated response rate of 20.9%). The overall prevalence of burnout was 41%. In adjusted analyses, the strongest associations with burnout were having a fully staffed team (odds ratio [OR] = 0.55, 95% CI 0.47-0.65), having turnover on the team (OR = 1.67, 95% CI 1.43-1.94), and having patient panel overcapacity (OR = 1.19, 95% CI 1.01-1.40). The observed burnout prevalence was 30.1% lower (28.5% vs. 58.6%) for respondents working on fully staffed teams with no turnover and caring for a panel within capacity, relative to respondents in the inverse condition. CONCLUSIONS: Complete team staffing, turnover among team members, and panel overcapacity had strong, cumulative associations with burnout. Further research is needed to understand whether improvements in these factors would lower burnout.

High-risk prescribing in an Irish primary care population: trends and variation.

AIMS: The aims of the present study were to examine the prevalence of high-risk prescribing (HRP) in community-dwelling adults in Ireland from 2011-2015 using consensus-validated indicators, factors associated with HRP, and the variation in HRP between general practitioners (GPs) and in the dispensing of high-risk prescriptions between pharmacies. METHODS: A repeated cross-sectional national pharmacy claims database study was conducted. Prescribing indicators were based on those developed in formal consensus studies and applicable to pharmacy claims data. Multilevel logistic regression was used to examine factors associated with HRP and dispensing. RESULTS: There were significant reductions in the rates of most indicators over time (P < 0.001). A total of 66 022 of 300 906 patients at risk in 2011 [21.9%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 21.8, 22.1%], and 42 109 of 278 469 in 2015 (15.1%, 95% CI 15.0, 15.3%), received ≥1 high-risk prescription (P < 0.001). In 2015, indicators with the highest rates of HRP were prescription of a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) without gastroprotection in those ≥75 years (37.2% of those on NSAIDs), coprescription of warfarin and an antiplatelet agent or high-risk antibiotic (19.5% and 16.2% of those on warfarin, respectively) and prescription of digoxin ≥250 µg day-1 in those ≥65 years (14.0% of those on digoxin). Any HRP increased significantly with age and number of chronic medications (P < 0.001). a) After controlling for patient variables, the variation in the rate of HRP between GPs was significant (P < 0.05); and b) after controlling for patient variables and the prescribing GP, the variation in the rate of dispensing of high-risk prescriptions between pharmacies was significant (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: HRP in Ireland has declined over time, although some indicators persist. The variation between GPs and pharmacies suggests the potential for improvement in safe medicines use in community care, particularly in vulnerable older populations.

Mobility of US Rural Primary Care Physicians During 2000-2014.

PURPOSE: Despite considerable investment in increasing the number of primary care physicians in rural shortage areas, little is known about their movement rates and factors influencing their mobility. We aimed to characterize geographic mobility among rural primary care physicians, and to identify location and individual factors that influence such mobility. METHODS: Using data from the American Medical Association Physician Masterfile for each clinically active US physician, we created seven 2-year (biennial) mobility periods during 2000-2014. These periods were merged with county-level "rurality," physician supply, economic characteristics, key demographic measures, and individual physician characteristics. We computed (1) mobility rates of physicians by rurality; (2) linear regression models of county-level rural nonretention (departure); and (3) logit models of physicians leaving rural practice. RESULTS: Biennial turnover was about 17% among physicians aged 45 and younger, compared with 9% among physicians aged 46 to 65, with little difference between rural and metropolitan groups. County-level physician mobility was higher for counties that lacked a hospital (absolute increase = 5.7%), had a smaller population size, and had lower primary care physician supply, but area-level economic and demographic factors had little impact. Female physicians (odds ratios = 1.24 and 1.46 for those aged 45 or younger and those aged 46 to 65, respectively) and physicians born in a metropolitan area (odds ratios = 1.75 and 1.56 for those aged 45 or younger and those aged 46 to 65, respectively) were more likely to leave rural practice. CONCLUSIONS: These flndings provide national-level evidence of rural physician mobility rates and factors associated with both county-level retention and individual-level departures. Outcomes were notably poorer in the most remote locations and those already having poorer physician supply and professional support. Rural health workforce planners and policymakers must be cognizant of these key factors to more effectively target retention policies and to take into account the additional support needed by these more vulnerable communities.

The UK experience of promoting dementia recognition and management in primary care.

BACKGROUND: The early and timely recognition of dementia syndrome is a policy imperative in many countries. In the UK the achievement of earlier and timelier recognition has been pursued through educational interventions, incentivisation of general practitioners and the promotion of a network of memory clinics. OBJECTIVE: The effectiveness of education, incentivisation and memory clinic activity are unknown. This article analyses data from different sources to evaluate the impact of these interventions on the incidence and prevalence of dementia, and the diagnostic performance of memory clinics. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Three data sources were used: 1) aggregated, anonymised data from a network of general practices using the same electronic medical record software, The Health Information Network (THIN), 2) UK Health & Social Care Information Centre data reports and 3) Responses to Freedom of Information Act requests. RESULTS: Educational interventions did not appear to change the recorded incidence of dementia syndrome. There was no apparent effect of education, incentives or memory clinic activity on the reported incidence of dementia syndrome between 1997 and 2011 but there were signs of change in the documentation of consultations with people with dementia. There was no clear impact of incentivisation and memory clinic activity in prevalence data. Memory clinics are seeing more patients but fewer are being diagnosed with dementia. CONCLUSION: It is not clear why there has been no upturn in documented incidence or prevalence of dementia syndrome despite substantial efforts and this requires further investigation to guide policy changes. The performance of memory clinics also needs further study.

When Do Primary Care Physicians Retire? Implications for Workforce Projections.

PURPOSE: Retirement of primary care physicians is a matter of increasing concern in light of physician shortages. The joint purposes of this investigation were to identify the ages when the majority of primary care physicians retire and to compare this with the retirement ages of practitioners in other specialties. METHODS: This descriptive study was based on AMA Physician Masterfile data from the most recent 5 years (2010-2014). We also compared 2008 Masterfile data with data from the National Plan and Provider Enumeration System to calculate an adjustment for upward bias in retirement ages when using the Masterfile alone. The main analysis defined retirement as leaving clinical practice. The primary outcome was construction of a retirement curve. Secondary outcomes involved comparisons of retirement interquartile ranges (IQRs) by sex and practice location across specialties. RESULTS: The 2014 Masterfile included 77,987 clinically active primary care physicians between ages 55 and 80 years. The median age of retirement from clinical activity of all primary care physicians who retired in the period from 2010 to 2014 was 64.9 years, (IQR, 61.4-68.3); the median age of retirement from any activity was 66.1 years (IQR, 62.6-69.5). However measured, retirement ages were generally similar across primary care specialties. Females had a median retirement about 1 year earlier than males. There were no substantive differences in retirement ages between rural and urban primary care physicians. CONCLUSIONS: Primary care physicians in our data tended to retire in their mid-60s. Relatively small differences across sex, practice location, and time suggest that changes in the composition of the primary care workforce will not have a remarkable impact on overall retirement rates in the near future.

[Relations with emergency medical care and primary care doctor, home health care].

Medical care for an ultra-aging society has been shifted from hospital-centered to local community-based. This shift has yielded the so-called Integrated Community Care System. In the system, emergency medical care is considered important, as primary care doctors and home health care providers play a crucial role in coordinating with the department of emergency medicine. Since the patients move depending on their physical condition, a hospital and a community should collaborate in providing a circulating service. The revision of the medical payment system in 2014 clearly states the importance of "functional differentiation and strengthen and coordination of medical institutions, improvement of home health care". As part of the revision, the subacute care unit has been integrated into the community care unit, which is expected to have more than one role in community coordination. The medical fee has been set for the purpose of promoting the home medical care visit, and enhancing the capability of family doctors. In the section of end-of-life care for the elderly, there have been many issues such as reduction of the readmission rate and endorsement of a patient's decision-making, and judgment for active emergency medical care for patient admission. The concept of frailty as an indicator of prognosis has been introduced, which might be applied to the future of emergency medicine. As described above, the importance of a primary doctor and a family doctor should be identified more in the future; thereby it becomes essential for doctors to closely work with the hospital. Advancing the cooperation between a hospital and a community for seamless patient-centered care, the emergency medicine as an integrated community care will further develop by adapting to an ultra-aging society.

The pace of change in medical practice and health policy: collision or coexistence?

Medical practice and health policy are both changing rapidly. While the adopting of changes is not new for physicians, the pace of change in standards of care, marked by advances and reversals, has accelerated over the course of the past decade. A recurring new theme in medical practice has been an emphasis on tailoring treatment plans to individual patients. Physicians have had to simultaneously absorb new processes in the health care system brought about by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health (HITECH) Act in 2009 and the Affordable Care Act (ACA) in 2010. The ability of physicians to maintain standards of care that focus on individual patients may conflict with changes resulting from new health policies that emphasize population health management. Primary care physicians may be one of the few collective voices capable of identifying areas where population-level health policies conflict with the care of individual patients, and policymakers should include practicing primary care physicians in the form of community boards in order to ensure the development of new health policies that provide sustainable high-value patient care.

Nudging physician prescription decisions by partitioning the order set: results of a vignette-based study.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare professionals are rapidly adopting electronic health records (EHRs). Within EHRs, seemingly innocuous menu design configurations can influence provider decisions for better or worse. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to examine whether the grouping of menu items systematically affects prescribing practices among primary care providers. PARTICIPANTS: We surveyed 166 primary care providers in a research network of practices in the greater Chicago area, of whom 84 responded (51% response rate). Respondents and non-respondents were similar on all observable dimensions except that respondents were more likely to work in an academic setting. DESIGN: The questionnaire consisted of seven clinical vignettes. Each vignette described typical signs and symptoms for acute respiratory infections, and providers chose treatments from a menu of options. For each vignette, providers were randomly assigned to one of two menu partitions. For antibiotic-inappropriate vignettes, the treatment menu either listed over-the-counter (OTC) medications individually while grouping prescriptions together, or displayed the reverse partition. For antibiotic-appropriate vignettes, the treatment menu either listed narrow-spectrum antibiotics individually while grouping broad-spectrum antibiotics, or displayed the reverse partition. MAIN MEASURES: The main outcome was provider treatment choice. For antibiotic-inappropriate vignettes, we categorized responses as prescription drugs or OTC-only options. For antibiotic-appropriate vignettes, we categorized responses as broad- or narrow-spectrum antibiotics. KEY RESULTS: Across vignettes, there was an 11.5 percentage point reduction in choosing aggressive treatment options (e.g., broad-spectrum antibiotics) when aggressive options were grouped compared to when those same options were listed individually (95% CI: 2.9 to 20.1%; p = .008). CONCLUSIONS: Provider treatment choice appears to be influenced by the grouping of menu options, suggesting that the layout of EHR order sets is not an arbitrary exercise. The careful crafting of EHR order sets can serve as an important opportunity to improve patient care without constraining physicians' ability to prescribe what they believe is best for their patients.

Practice context affects efforts to improve diabetes care for primary care patients: a pragmatic cluster randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Efforts to improve primary care diabetes management have assessed strategies across heterogeneous groups of patients and practices. However, there is substantial variability in how well practices implement interventions and achieve desired outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To examine practice contextual features that moderate intervention effectiveness. DESIGN: Secondary analysis of data from a cluster randomized trial of three approaches for implementing the Chronic Care Model to improve diabetes care. PARTICIPANTS: Forty small to mid-sized primary care practices participated, with 522 clinician and staff member surveys. Outcomes were assessed for 822 established patients with a diagnosis of type 2 diabetes who had at least one visit to the practice in the 18 months following enrollment. MAIN MEASURES: The primary outcome was a composite measure of diabetes process of care, ascertained by chart audit, regarding nine quality measures from the American Diabetes Association Physician Recognition Program: HgA1c, foot exam, blood pressure, dilated eye exam, cholesterol, nephropathy screen, flu shot, nutrition counseling, and self-management support. Data from practices included structural and demographic characteristics and Practice Culture Assessment survey subscales (Change Culture, Work Culture, Chaos). KEY RESULTS: Across the three implementation approaches, demographic/structural characteristics (rural vs. urban + .70(p = .006), +2.44(p < .001), -.75(p = .004)); Medicaid: < 20 % vs. ≥ 20 % (-.20(p = .48), +.75 (p = .08), +.60(p = .02)); practice size: < 4 clinicians vs. ≥ 4 clinicians (+.56(p = .02), +1.96(p < .001), +.02(p = .91)); practice Change Culture (high vs. low: -.86(p = .048), +1.71(p = .005), +.34(p = .22)), Work Culture (high vs. low: -.67(p = .18), +2.41(p < .001), +.67(p = .005)) and variability in practice Change Culture (high vs. low: -.24(p = .006), -.20(p = .0771), -.44(p = .0019) and Work Culture (high vs. low: +.56(p = .3160), -1.0(p = .008), -.25 (p = .0216) were associated with trajectories of change in diabetes process of care, either directly or differentially by study arm. CONCLUSIONS: This study supports the need for broader use of methodological approaches to better examine contextual effects on implementation and effectiveness of quality improvement interventions in primary care settings.

Specialist and primary care physicians' views on barriers to adequate preparation of patients for renal replacement therapy: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Early preparation for renal replacement therapy (RRT) is recommended for patients with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD), yet many patients initiate RRT urgently and/or are inadequately prepared. METHODS: We conducted audio-recorded, qualitative, directed telephone interviews of nephrology health care providers (n = 10, nephrologists, physician assistants, and nurses) and primary care physicians (PCPs, n = 4) to identify modifiable challenges to optimal RRT preparation to inform future interventions. We recruited providers from public safety-net hospital-based and community-based nephrology and primary care practices. We asked providers open-ended questions to assess their perceived challenges and their views on the role of PCPs and nephrologist-PCP collaboration in patients' RRT preparation. Two independent and trained abstractors coded transcribed audio-recorded interviews and identified major themes. RESULTS: Nephrology providers identified several factors contributing to patients' suboptimal RRT preparation, including health system resources (e.g., limited time for preparation, referral process delays, and poorly integrated nephrology and primary care), provider skills (e.g., their difficulty explaining CKD to patients), and patient attitudes and cultural differences (e.g., their poor understanding and acceptance of their CKD and its treatment options, their low perceived urgency for RRT preparation; their negative perceptions about RRT, lack of trust, or language differences). PCPs desired more involvement in preparation to ensure RRT transitions could be as "smooth as possible", including providing patients with emotional support, helping patients weigh RRT options, and affirming nephrologist recommendations. Both nephrology providers and PCPs desired improved collaboration, including better information exchange and delineation of roles during the RRT preparation process. CONCLUSIONS: Nephrology and primary care providers identified health system resources, provider skills, and patient attitudes and cultural differences as challenges to patients' optimal RRT preparation. Interventions to improve these factors may improve patients' preparation and initiation of optimal RRTs.

Heterogeneity in venous disease practice patterns amongst primary healthcare practitioners.

INTRODUCTION: This study aimed to describe the practice patterns of primary healthcare practitioners who diagnose and manage venous disease to determine differences in clinical evaluation of disease, recognition of venous ulcers, and referral patterns. METHODS: A survey was distributed at the August 2011 Primary Care Medical Conference (Pri-Med) in Baltimore, Maryland. Pri-med is a medical education company that caters to the continued professional development needs of a variety of physicians. RESULTS: A total of 305 surveys were completed. Of the respondents, 91% were physicians and 9% were advanced level practitioners. In all, 93% prescribed compression stockings as first-line treatment. Heterogeneous referral patterns were reported with 81% referring to vascular surgery, 25% to a vein clinic, 10% to interventional radiology, and 3% to interventional cardiology. Up to 35% responded that they met resistance (did not have their referral accepted) when attempting referral to a vascular surgery colleague. There was substantial variation when asked about the treatment of deep vein thrombosis with 88% starting anticoagulation therapy, 54% prescribing compression stockings, 40% doing a thrombophilia workup, and 25% referring for lytic therapy. CONCLUSION: Diagnosis and management aptitude of venous disease is highly variable. Further grassroots education is required to improve diagnosis and treatment in patients with chronic venous disease.