Clinical microsystems, part 1. The building blocks of health systems.

BACKGROUND: Wherever, however, and whenever health care is delivered-no matter the setting or population of patients-the body of knowledge on clinical microsystems can guide and support innovation and peak performance. Many health care leaders and staff at all levels of their organizations in many countries have adapted microsystem knowledge to their local settings. CLINICAL MICROSYSTEMS: A PANORAMIC VIEW: HOW DO CLINICAL MICROSYSTEMS FIT TOGETHER? As the patient's journey of care seeking and care delivery takes place over time, he or she will move into and out of an assortment of clinical microsystems, such as a family practitioner's office, an emergency department, and an intensive care unit. This assortment of clinical microsystems-combined with the patient's own actions to improve or maintain health--can be viewed as the patient's unique health system. This patient-centric view of a health system is the foundation of second-generation development for clinical microsystems. LESSONS FROM THE FIELD: These lessons, which are not comprehensive, can be organized under the familiar commands that are used to start a race: On Your Mark, Get Set, Go! ... with a fourth category added-Reflect: Reviewing the Race. These insights are intended as guidance to organizations ready to strategically transform themselves. CONCLUSION: Beginning to master and make use of microsystem principles and methods to attain macrosystem peak performance can help us knit together care in a fragmented health system, eschew archipelago building in favor of nation-building strategies, achieve safe and efficient care with reliable handoffs, and provide the best possible care and attain the best possible health outcomes.

"ProvenCareSM": a provider-driven pay-for-performance program for acute episodic cardiac surgical care.

OBJECTIVE: To test whether an integrated delivery system could successfully implement an evidence-based pay-for-performance program for coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery. METHODS: The program consisted of 3 components: (1) establishing implementable best practices; (2) developing risk-based pricing; (3) establishing a mechanism for patient engagement. Surgeons reviewed all class I and IIa "2004 American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Guidelines for CABG Surgery" and translated them into 40 verifiable behaviors. These were imbedded within a new ProvenCareSM program and "hardwired" within the electronic health record system, including order sets, templates, and "time outs". Concurrently preoperative, inpatient, and postoperative care within 90 days was packaged into a fixed price. A Patient Compact was developed to highlight the importance of patient activation. All elective CABG patients treated between February 2, 2006 and February 2, 2007 were included (ProvenCareSM Group) and compared with 137 patients treated in 2005 (Conventional Care Group). RESULTS: Initially, only 59% of patients received all 40 best practice components. At 3 months, program compliance reached 100%, but fell transiently to 86% over the next 3 months. Reliability subsequently increased to 100% and was sustained for the remainder of the study period. The overall trend in reliability was significant at P=0.001. Thirty-day clinical outcomes showed improved trends () but only the likelihood of discharge to home reached statistical significance. Length of stay decreased by 16% and mean hospital charges fell 5.2%.(Table is included in full-text article.) CONCLUSION: A provider-driven pay-for-performance process for CABG, enabled by an electronic health record system, can reliably deliver evidence-based care, fundamentally alter reimbursement incentives, and may ultimately improve outcomes and reduce resource use.