The Pennsylvania Rural Health Model: Hospitals' Early Experiences With Global Payment for Rural Communities.

GOAL: In January 2019, the first cohort of rural hospitals began to operate under the Pennsylvania Rural Health Model for all-payer prospective global budget reimbursement as part of a demonstration funded by the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation. Using information from primary source documents and interviews with key stakeholders, we sought to identify challenges and lessons learned throughout the design, development, and early implementation stages of the model. METHODS: We relied on two qualitative research approaches: (1) review of primary source documents such as peer-reviewed publications and news accounts related to the model and (2) semistructured interviews with key staff and stakeholders, including current and former members of the Pennsylvania Department of Health, first-year applicant hospitals, technical assistance providers, and members of state and federal organizations and agencies familiar with the Pennsylvania and Maryland payment reform efforts for rural health and rural hospitals (N = 20). PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We identified four primary attributes that innovative projects such as the model need: (1) a champion at the state and hospital level, significant cooperation across state agencies and between federal and state agencies, and support from nongovernment stakeholders; (2) ongoing engagement and education of all stakeholders, particularly related to rural health disparities, the challenges faced by rural hospitals (especially resource limitations), and the differences between rural and urban health and health service delivery; (3) realistic time lines, noting that stakeholder relationships with hospital leadership develop over many months; and (4) multistakeholder collaboration, because participating hospitals must have ongoing engagement with community members (i.e., consumers of healthcare), nonacute community partners, and other rural hospitals to foster a "rural health movement." APPLICATIONS TO PRACTICE: A successful Pennsylvania model holds promise for other states seeking to address the needs of rural populations and the hospitals that are vital to those communities. The lessons in this article can assist others in making the transition from volume to value in rural healthcare.

Cancer Screening for Dermatomyositis: A Survey of Indirect Costs, Burden, and Patient Willingness to Pay.

Dermatomyositis (DM) is a rare idiopathic inflammatory myopathy (IIM) associated with an increased risk for malignancy. Although cancer screening is recommended, no consensus guidelines currently exist. Whole-body positron emission tomography/ computed tomography (PET/CT) has similar cost and efficacy to a more traditional conventional cancer screening panel (CSP). Our study sought to characterize patients' perspective of cancer screening and the indirect costs to patients. We conducted a survey of patients recently diagnosed with DM who were undergoing or had recently undergone a CSP. Patient values and indirect costs need to be considered in choosing a screening modality. This study contributes to a greater understanding of patients' experience of cancer screening in DM, which should be taken into consideration when developing consensus guidelines for cancer screening.

Impact of medical scribes on physician and patient satisfaction in dermatology.

Physician burnout and its association with the use of electronic health records (EHRs) is well known. The impact of scribes for academic dermatologists and their patients needs to be explored. As physician burnout increases, system-based solutions are needed. To assess the impact of a scribe on physician and patient satisfaction at an academic dermatology clinic. Prospective, pre-post-pilot intervention study. During the pilot intervention, clinicians had clinic sessions with and without a scribe. We assessed changes in (1) clinician satisfaction and burnout, (2) time spent on EHR, and (3) patient satisfaction. An electronic 7-item baseline survey, 23-item mid-study survey, and a 22-item end-of-study survey to assess clinician burnout and feedback on satisfaction with medical scribes. A 19-item post visit satisfaction survey was given to patients. EHR was queried to compare amount of time spent on EHR, closure of charts, and number of patients seen during scribe coverage and at baseline. Of the six clinicians, 100% felt that there was value to scribe support. Physician burnout was low at baseline and did not change post-pilot. Active documentation time, on average, decreased by 67% per patient with a 28% increase in patients seen per clinic. Over 88% of patients disagreed with the statement, "I was uncomfortable disclosing personal information when a scribe was present" (p < 0.001). In an academic dermatology and Mohs surgery setting, medical scribes increased clinician satisfaction without compromising patient satisfaction.