Delivery of Cervical and Colorectal Cancer Screenings During the Pandemic in Community Health Centers: Practice Changes and Recovery Strategies.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic led to clinical practice changes, which affected cancer preventive care delivery. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic on the delivery of colorectal cancer (CRC) and cervical cancer (CVC) screenings. RESEARCH DESIGN: Parallel mixed methods design using electronic health record data (extracted between January 2019 and July 2021). Study results focused on 3 pandemic-related periods: March-May 2020, June-October 2020, and November 2020-September 2021. SUBJECTS: Two hundred seventeen community health centers located in 13 states and 29 semistructured interviews from 13 community health centers. MEASURES: Monthly up-to-date CRC and CVC screening rates and monthly rates of completed colonoscopies, fecal immunochemical test (FIT)/fecal occult blood test (FOBT) procedures, Papanicolaou tests among age and sex-eligible patients. Analysis used generalized estimating equations Poisson modeling. Qualitative analysts developed case summaries and created a cross-case data display for comparison. RESULTS: The results showed a reduction of 75% for colonoscopy [rate ratio (RR) = 0.250, 95% CI: 0.224-0.279], 78% for FIT/FOBT (RR = 0.218, 95% CI: 0.208-0.230), and 87% for Papanicolaou (RR = 0.130, 95% CI: 0.125-0.136) rates after the start of the pandemic. During this early pandemic period, CRC screening was impacted by hospitals halting services. Clinic staff moved toward FIT/FOBT screenings. CVC screening was impacted by guidelines encouraging pausing CVC screening, patient reluctance, and concerns about exposure. During the recovery period, leadership-driven preventive care prioritization and quality improvement capacity influenced CRC and CVC screening maintenance and recovery. CONCLUSIONS: Efforts supporting quality improvement capacity could be key actionable elements for these health centers to endure major disruptions to their care delivery system and to drive rapid recovery.

Primary Care Research: Looking Back and Moving Forward With Reflections on NAPCRG's First 50 Years.

NAPCRG celebrated 50 years of leadership and service at its 2022 meeting. A varied team of primary care investigators, clinicians, learners, patients, and community members reflected on the organization's past, present, and future. Started in 1972 by a small group of general practice researchers in the United States, Canada, and the United Kingdom, NAPCRG has evolved into an international, interprofessional, interdisciplinary, and intergenerational group devoted to improving health and health care through primary care research. NAPCRG provides a nurturing home to researchers and teams working in partnership with individuals, families, and communities. The organization builds upon enduring values to create partnerships, advance research methods, and nurture a community of contributors. NAPCRG has made foundational contributions, including identifying the need for primary care research to inform primary care practice, practice-based research networks, qualitative and mixed-methods research, community-based participatory research, patient safety, practice transformation, and partnerships with patients and communities. Landmark documents have helped define classification systems for primary care, responsible research with communities, the central role of primary care in health care systems, opportunities to revitalize generalist practice, and shared strategies to build the future of family medicine. The future of health and health care depends upon strengthening primary care and primary care research with stronger support, infrastructure, training, and workforce. New technologies offer opportunities to advance research, enhance care, and improve outcomes. Stronger partnerships can empower primary care research with patients and communities and increase commitments to diversity and quality care for all. NAPCRG offers a home for all partners in this work.

Creating research-ready partnerships: the initial development of seven implementation laboratories to advance cancer control.

BACKGROUND: In 2019-2020, with National Cancer Institute funding, seven implementation laboratory (I-Lab) partnerships between scientists and stakeholders in 'real-world' settings working to implement evidence-based interventions were developed within the Implementation Science Centers in Cancer Control (ISC3) consortium. This paper describes and compares approaches to the initial development of seven I-Labs in order to gain an understanding of the development of research partnerships representing various implementation science designs. METHODS: In April-June 2021, members of the ISC3 Implementation Laboratories workgroup interviewed research teams involved in I-Lab development in each center. This cross-sectional study used semi-structured interviews and case-study-based methods to collect and analyze data about I-Lab designs and activities. Interview notes were analyzed to identify a set of comparable domains across sites. These domains served as the framework for seven case descriptions summarizing design decisions and partnership elements across sites. RESULTS: Domains identified from interviews as comparable across sites included engagement of community and clinical I-Lab members in research activities, data sources, engagement methods, dissemination strategies, and health equity. The I-Labs use a variety of research partnership designs to support engagement including participatory research, community-engaged research, and learning health systems of embedded research. Regarding data, I-Labs in which members use common electronic health records (EHRs) leverage these both as a data source and a digital implementation strategy. I-Labs without a shared EHR among partners also leverage other sources for research or surveillance, most commonly qualitative data, surveys, and public health data systems. All seven I-Labs use advisory boards or partnership meetings to engage with members; six use stakeholder interviews and regular communications. Most (70%) tools or methods used to engage I-Lab members such as advisory groups, coalitions, or regular communications, were pre-existing. Think tanks, which two I-Labs developed, represented novel engagement approaches. To disseminate research results, all centers developed web-based products, and most (n = 6) use publications, learning collaboratives, and community forums. Important variations emerged in approaches to health equity, ranging from partnering with members serving historically marginalized populations to the development of novel methods. CONCLUSIONS: The development of the ISC3 implementation laboratories, which represented a variety of research partnership designs, offers the opportunity to advance understanding of how researchers developed and built partnerships to effectively engage stakeholders throughout the cancer control research lifecycle. In future years, we will be able to share lessons learned for the development and sustainment of implementation laboratories.

Latino Adolescent-Mother Language Concordance, Neighborhood Deprivation, and Vaccinations in Community Health Centers.

INTRODUCTION: Latino adolescents may face numerous barriers) to recommended vaccinations. There is little research on the association between Latino adolescent-mother preferred language concordance and vaccination completion and if it varies by neighborhood. To better understand the social/family factors associated with Latino adolescent vaccination, we studied the association of adolescent-mother language concordance and neighborhood social deprivation with adolescent vaccination completion. METHODS: We employed a multistate, electronic health record (EHR) based dataset of community health center patients to compare three Latino groups: (1) English-preferring adolescents with English-preferring mothers, (2) Spanish-preferring adolescents with Spanish-preferring mothers, and (3) English-preferring adolescents with Spanish-preferring mothers with non-Hispanic white adolescent-mother pairs for human papilloma virus (HPV), meningococcal, and influenza vaccinations. We adjusted for mother and adolescent demographics and care utilization and stratified by the social deprivation of the family's neighborhood. RESULTS: Our sample included 56,542 adolescent-mother dyads. Compared with non-Hispanic white dyads, all three groups of Latino dyads had higher odds of adolescent HPV and meningococcal vaccines and higher rates of flu vaccines. Latino dyads with Spanish-preferring mothers had higher vaccination odds/rates than Latino dyads with English-preferring mothers. The effects of variation by neighborhood social deprivation in influenza vaccination rates were minor in comparison to differences by ethnicity/language concordance. CONCLUSION: In a multistate analysis of vaccinations among Latino and non-Latino adolescents, English-preferring adolescents with Spanish-preferring mothers had the highest completion rates and English-preferring non-Hispanic white dyads the lowest. Further research can seek to understand why this language dyad may have an advantage in adolescent vaccination completion.

Latino adolescents may face numerous barriers to preventive care­especially routine immunizations, but analyses often focus on single or few factors that may affect the utilization of these services. Our analysis of not only the language preference of Latino adolescents, but the preferred language of their mothers and their neighborhood social adversity demonstrates that English-preferring Latino adolescents with Spanish preferring mothers were most likely to utilize all immunizations we studied, and there were differences in utilization among Latino families by language concordance. This adds to our knowledge of Latino adolescent health care utilization by demonstrating the differences in Latino families, and suggesting that many of these families may have assets for service utilization from which we can learn.

Patient-level factors associated with receipt of preventive care in the safety net.

Prevention is critical to optimizing health, yet most people do not receive all recommended preventive services. As the complexity of preventive recommendations increases, there is a need for new measurements to capture the degree to which a person is up to date, and identify individual-level barriers and facilitators to receiving needed preventive care. We used electronic health record data from a national network of community health centers (CHCs) in the United States (US) during 2014-2017 to measure patient-level up-to-date status with preventive ratios (measuring up-to-date person-time denoted as a percent) for 12 preventive services and an aggregate preventive index. We use negative binomial regression to identify factors associated with up-to-date preventive care. We assessed 267,767 patients across 165 primary care clinics. Mean preventive ratios ranged from 8.7% for Hepatitis C screening to 83.3% for blood pressure screening. The mean aggregate preventive index was 43%. Lack of health insurance, smoking, and homelessness were associated with lower preventive ratios for most cancer and cardiovascular screenings (p < 0.05). Having more ambulatory visits, better continuity of care, and enrollment in the patient portal were positively associated with the aggregate preventive index (p < 0.05) and higher preventive ratios for all services (p < 0.05) except chlamydia and HIV screening. Overall, receipt of preventive services was low. CHC patients experience many barriers to receiving needed preventive care, but certain healthcare behaviors - regular visits, usual provider continuity, and patient portal enrollment - were consistently associated with more up-to-date preventive care. These associations should inform future efforts to improve preventive care delivery.

Affordable Care Act Medicaid expansion and access to primary-care based smoking cessation assistance among cancer survivors: an observational cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Smoking among cancer survivors can increase the risk of cancer reoccurrence, reduce treatment effectiveness and decrease quality of life. Cancer survivors without health insurance have higher rates of smoking and decreased probability of quitting smoking than cancer survivors with health insurance. This study examines the associations of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) Medicaid insurance expansion with smoking cessation assistance and quitting smoking among cancer survivors seen in community health centers (CHCs). METHODS: Using electronic health record data from 337 primary care community health centers in 12 states that expanded Medicaid eligibility and 273 CHCs in 8 states that did not expand, we identified adult cancer survivors with a smoking status indicating current smoking within 6 months prior to ACA expansion in 2014 and ≥ 1 visit with smoking status assessed within 24-months post-expansion. Using an observational cohort propensity score weighted approach and logistic generalized estimating equation regression, we compared odds of quitting smoking, having a cessation medication ordered, and having ≥6 visits within the post-expansion period among cancer survivors in Medicaid expansion versus non-expansion states. RESULTS: Cancer survivors in expansion states had higher odds of having a smoking cessation medication order (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 2.54, 95%CI = 1.61-4.03) and higher odds of having ≥6 office visits than those in non-expansion states (aOR = 1.82, 95%CI = 1.22-2.73). Odds of quitting smoking did not differ significantly between patients in Medicaid expansion versus non-expansion states. CONCLUSIONS: The increased odds of having a smoking cessation medication order among cancer survivors seen in Medicaid expansion states compared with those seen in non-expansion states provides evidence of the importance of health insurance coverage in accessing evidence-based tobacco treatment within CHCs. Continued research is needed to understand why, despite increased odds of having a cessation medication prescribed, odds of quitting smoking were not significantly higher among cancer survivors in Medicaid expansion states compared to non-expansion states.

Shared Language for Shared Work in Population Health.

People working on behalf of population health, community health, or public health often experience confusion or ambiguity in the meaning of these and other common terms-the similarities and differences and how they bear on the tasks and division of labor for care delivery and public health. Shared language must be clear enough to help, not hinder people working together as they ultimately come to mutual understanding of roles, responsibilities, and actions in their joint work. Based on an iterative lexicon development process, the authors developed and propose a definitional framework as an aid to navigating among related population and community health terms. These terms are defined, similarities and differences clarified, and then organized into 3 categories that reflect goals, realities, and ways to get the job done. Goals include (a) health as well-being for persons, (b) population health as that goal expressed in measurable terms for groups, and (c) community health as population health for particular communities of interest, geography, or other defining characteristic-groups with shared identity and particular systemic influences on health. Realities are social determinants as influences, health disparities as effects, and health equity as both a goal and a design principle. Ways to get the job done include health care delivery systems for enrollees and public health in population-based civic activities-with a broad zone of collaboration where streams of effort converge in partnership with served communities. This map of terms can enable people to move forward together in a broad zone of collaboration for health with less confusion, ambiguity, and conflict.

Effectiveness of an insurance enrollment support tool on insurance rates and cancer prevention in community health centers: a quasi-experimental study.

BACKGROUND: Following the ACA, millions of people gained Medicaid insurance. Most electronic health record (EHR) tools to date provide clinical-decision support and tracking of clinical biomarkers, we developed an EHR tool to support community health center (CHC) staff in assisting patients with health insurance enrollment documents and tracking insurance application steps. The objective of this study was to test the effectiveness of the health insurance support tool in (1) assisting uninsured patients gaining insurance coverage, (2) ensuring insurance continuity for patients with Medicaid insurance (preventing coverage gaps between visits); and (3) improving receipt of cancer preventive care. METHODS: In this quasi-experimental study, twenty-three clinics received the intervention (EHR-based insurance support tool) and were matched to 23 comparison clinics. CHCs were recruited from the OCHIN network. EHR data were linked to Medicaid enrollment data. The primary outcomes were rates of uninsured and Medicaid visits. The secondary outcomes were receipt of recommended breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screenings. A comparative interrupted time-series using Poisson generalized estimated equation (GEE) modeling was performed to evaluate the effectiveness of the EHR-based tool on the primary and secondary outcomes. RESULTS: Immediately following implementation of the enrollment tool, the uninsured visit rate decreased by 21.0% (Adjusted Rate Ratio [RR] = 0.790, 95% CI = 0.621-1.005, p = .055) while Medicaid-insured visits increased by 4.5% (ARR = 1.045, 95% CI = 1.013-1.079) in the intervention group relative to comparison group. Cervical cancer preventive ratio increased 5.0% (ARR = 1.050, 95% CI = 1.009-1.093) immediately following implementation of the enrollment tool in the intervention group relative to comparison group. Among patients with a tool use, 81% were enrolled in Medicaid 12 months after tool use. For the 19% who were never enrolled in Medicaid following tool use, most were uninsured (44%) at the time of tool use. CONCLUSIONS: A health insurance support tool embedded within the EHR can effectively support clinic staff in assisting patients in maintaining their Medicaid coverage. Such tools may also have an indirect impact on evidence-based practice interventions, such as cancer screening. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was retrospectively registered on February 4th, 2015 with Clinicaltrials.gov (#NCT02355262). The registry record can be found at https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02355262 .

The Affordable Care Act improved health insurance coverage and cardiovascular-related screening rates for cancer survivors seen in community health centers.

BACKGROUND: This study assessed the impact of Affordable Care Act (ACA) Medicaid expansion on health insurance rates and receipt of cardiovascular-related preventive screenings (body mass index, glycated hemoglobin [HbA1c], low-density lipoproteins, and blood pressure) for cancer survivors seen in community health centers (CHCs). METHODS: This study identified cancer survivors aged 19 to 64 years with at least 3 CHC visits in 13 states from the Accelerating Data Value Across a National Community Health Center Network (ADVANCE). Via inverse probability of treatment weighting multilevel multinomial modeling, insurance rates before and after the ACA were estimated by whether a patient lived in a state that expanded Medicaid, and changes between a pre-ACA time period and 2 post-ACA time periods were assessed. RESULTS: The weighted estimated sample size included 409 cancer survivors in nonexpansion states and 2650 in expansion states. In expansion states, the proportion of uninsured cancer survivors decreased significantly from 20.3% in 2012-2013 to 4.5%in 2016-2017, and the proportion of those with Medicaid coverage increased significantly from 38.8% to 55.6%. In nonexpansion states, there was a small decrease in uninsurance rates (from 33.6% in 2012-2013 to 22.5% in 2016-2017). Cardiovascular-related preventive screening rates increased over time in both expansion and nonexpansion states: HbA1c rates nearly doubled from the pre-ACA period (2012-2013) to the post-ACA period (2016-2017) in expansion states (from 7.2% to 12.8%) and nonexpansion states (from 9.3% to 16.8%). CONCLUSIONS: This study found a substantial decline in uninsured visits among cancer survivors in Medicaid expansion states. Yet, 1 in 5 cancer survivors living in a state that did not expand Medicaid remained uninsured. Several ACA provisions likely worked together to increase cardiovascular-related preventive screening rates for cancer survivors seen in CHCs.

Using Electronic Health Records in Longitudinal Studies: Estimating Patient Attrition.

BACKGROUND: Electronic health records (EHRs) provide rich data on many domains not routinely available in other data, as such, they are a promising source to study changes in health outcomes using longitudinal study designs (eg, cohort studies, natural experiments, etc.). Yet, patient attrition rates in these data are unknown. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to estimate overall and among adults with diabetes or hypertension: (1) patient attrition over a 3-year period at community health centers; and (2) the likelihood that patients with Medicaid permanently switched their source of primary care. RESEARCH DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study of 2012-2017 data from the Accelerating Data Value Across a National Community Health Center Network (ADVANCE) Clinical Data Research Network of community health centers were used to assess EHR data attrition. Oregon Medicaid enrollment and claims data were used to estimate the likelihood of changing the source of primary care. SUBJECTS: A total of 827,657 patients aged 19-64 with ≥1 ambulatory visit from 76 community health center systems across 20 states. In all, 232,891 Oregon Medicaid enrollees (aged 19-64) with a gap of ≥6 months following a claim for a visit billed to a primary care source. MEASURES: Percentage of patients not returning within 3 years of their qualifying visit (attrition). The probability that a patient with Medicaid permanently changed their primary care source. RESULTS: Attrition over the 3 years averaged 33.5%; attrition rates were lower (<25%) among patients with diabetes and/or hypertension. Among Medicaid enrollees, the percentage of provider change after a 6-month gap between visits was 12% for community health center patients compared with 39% for single-provider practice patients. Over 3 years, the likelihood of a patient changing to a new provider increased with length of time since their last visit but remained lowest among community health center patients. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates the use of the EHR dataset is a reliable source of data to support longitudinal studies while highlighting variability in attrition by primary care source and chronic conditions.

Payment for Contraceptive Services in Safety Net Clinics: Roles of Affordable Care Act, Title X, and State Programs.

OBJECTIVES: We describe payor for contraceptive visits 2013-2014, before and after Medicaid expansion under the Affordable Care Act (ACA), in a large network of safety-net clinics. We estimate changes in the proportion of uninsured contraceptive visits and the independent associations of the ACA, Title X, and state family planning programs. METHODS: Our sample included 237 safety net clinics in 11 states with a common electronic health record. We identified contraception-related visits among women aged 10-49 years using diagnosis and procedure codes. Our primary outcome was an indicator of an uninsured visit. We also assessed payor type (public/private). We included encounter, clinic, county, and state-level covariates. We used interrupted time series and logistic regression, and calculated multivariable absolute predicted probabilities. RESULTS: We identified 162,666 contraceptive visits in 219 clinics. There was a significant decline in uninsured contraception-related visits in both Medicaid expansion and nonexpansion states, with a slightly greater decline in expansion states (difference-in-difference: -1.29 percentage points; confidence interval: -1.39 to -1.19). The gap in uninsured visits between expansion and nonexpansion states widened after ACA implementation (from 2.17 to 4.1 percentage points). The Title X program continues to fill gaps in insurance in Medicaid expansion states. CONCLUSIONS: Uninsured contraceptive visits at safety net clinics decreased following Medicaid expansion under the ACA in both expansion and nonexpansion states. Overall, levels of uninsured visits are lower in expansion states. Title X continues to play an important role in access to care and coverage. In addition to protecting insurance gains under the ACA, Title X and state programs should continue to be a focus of research and advocacy.

Disparities in Biomarkers for Patients With Diabetes After the Affordable Care Act.

BACKGROUND: Racial and ethnic minorities are disproportionately affected by diabetes and at greater risk of experiencing poor diabetes-related outcomes compared with non-Hispanic whites. The Affordable Care Act (ACA) was implemented to increase health insurance coverage and reduce health disparities. OBJECTIVE: Assess changes in diabetes-associated biomarkers [hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) and low-density lipoprotein] 24 months pre-ACA to 24 months post-ACA Medicaid expansion by race/ethnicity and insurance group. RESEARCH DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study of community health center (CHC) patients. SUBJECTS: Patients aged 19-64 with diabetes living in 1 of 10 Medicaid expansion states with ≥1 CHC visit and ≥1 HbA1c measurement in both the pre-ACA and the post-ACA time periods (N=13,342). METHODS: Linear mixed effects and Cox regression modeled outcome measures. RESULTS: Overall, 33.5% of patients were non-Hispanic white, 51.2% Hispanic, and 15.3% non-Hispanic black. Newly insured Hispanics and non-Hispanic whites post-ACA exhibited modest reductions in HbA1c levels, similar benefit was not observed among non-Hispanic black patients. The largest reduction was among newly insured Hispanics versus newly insured non-Hispanic whites (P<0.05). For the subset of patients who had uncontrolled HbA1c (HbA1c≥9%) within 3 months of the ACA Medicaid expansion, non-Hispanic black patients who were newly insured gained the highest rate of controlled HbA1c (hazard ratio=2.27; 95% confidence interval, 1.10-4.66) relative to the continuously insured group. CONCLUSIONS: The impact of the ACA Medicaid expansion on health disparities is multifaceted and may differ across racial/ethnic groups. This study highlights the importance of CHCs for the health of minority populations.

The Affordable Care Act Medicaid Expansion Positively Impacted Community Health Centers and Their Patients.

Community health centers (CHCs) provide primary care for underserved children and adults. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) aimed to strengthen the CHC network by increasing federal funds and expanding Medicaid eligibility. The ACA also aimed to boost preventive and mental health services and to reduce health and healthcare disparities. Here, we summarize our results to-date as experts in investigating the impact of ACA Medicaid expansion on CHCs and the patients they serve. We found the ACA Medicaid expansion increased access to care and preventive services, primarily in Medicaid expansion states. Rates of physical and mental health conditions rose substantially from pre- to post-ACA in expansion states, suggesting underdiagnosis pre-ACA. Disparities in health insurance coverage by race/ethnicity decreased at CHCs, yet some remain. These findings indicate that the ACA Medicaid expansion significantly helped CHCs and patients. Insurance expansion buoyed CHCs' financial viability by increasing reimbursement. Therefore, the ACA Medicaid expansion enhanced the health of underserved patients and repeal would jeopardize these advances for CHCs and their patients.

Redesigning Primary Care to Address the COVID-19 Pandemic in the Midst of the Pandemic.

During a pandemic, primary care is the first line of defense. It is able to reinforce public health messages, help patients manage at home, and identify those in need of hospital care. In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, primary care scrambled to rapidly transform itself and protect clinicians, staff, and patients while remaining connected to patients. Using the established public health framework for addressing a pandemic, we describe the actions primary care needs to take in a pandemic. Recommended actions are based on observed experiences of the authors' primary care practices and networks. Early in the COVID-19 pandemic, tasks focused on promoting physical distancing and encouraging patients with suspected illness or exposure to self-quarantine. Testing was not available and contract tracing was not possible. As the pandemic spread, in-person care was converted to virtual care using telehealth. Practices remained connected to patients using registries to reach out to those at risk for infection, with uncontrolled chronic conditions, or were socially vulnerable. Practices managed most patients with suspected COVID-19 at home. As the pandemic decelerates, practices are now preparing to address the direct and indirect consequences-complications from COVID-19 infections, missed treatment for acute problems, inadequate prevention, uncontrolled chronic disease, mental illness, and greater social needs. Throughout, practices bore tremendous financial burden, laying off staff or even closing at a time when most needed. Primary care must learn from this experience and be ready for the next pandemic. Policymakers and payers cannot fail primary care during their next time of need.

Tobacco Cessation in Affordable Care Act Medicaid Expansion States Versus Non-expansion States.

INTRODUCTION: Community health centers (CHCs) care for vulnerable patients who use tobacco at higher than national rates. States that expanded Medicaid eligibility under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) provided insurance coverage to tobacco users not previously Medicaid-eligible, thereby potentially increasing their odds of receiving cessation assistance. We examined if tobacco users in Medicaid expansion states had increased quit rates, cessation medications ordered, and greater health care utilization compared to patients in non-expansion states. METHODS: Using electronic health record (EHR) data from 219 CHCs in 10 states that expanded Medicaid as of January 1, 2014, we identified patients aged 19-64 with tobacco use status documented in the EHR within 6 months prior to ACA Medicaid expansion and ≥1 visit with tobacco use status assessed within 24 months post-expansion (January 1, 2014 to December 31, 2015). We propensity score matched these patients to tobacco users from 108 CHCs in six non-expansion states (n = 27 670 matched pairs; 55 340 patients). Using a retrospective observational cohort study design, we compared odds of having a quit status, cessation medication ordered, and ≥6 visits within the post-expansion period among patients in expansion versus non-expansion states. RESULTS: Patients in expansion states had increased adjusted odds of quitting (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 1.35, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.28-1.43), having a medication ordered (aOR = 1.53, 95% CI: 1.44-1.62), and having ≥6 follow-up visits (aOR = 1.34, 95% CI: 1.28-1.41) compared to patients from non-expansion states. CONCLUSIONS: Increased access to insurance via the ACA Medicaid expansion likely led to increased quit rates within this vulnerable population. IMPLICATIONS: CHCs care for vulnerable patients at higher risk of tobacco use than the general population. Medicaid expansion via the ACA provided insurance coverage to a large number of tobacco users not previously Medicaid-eligible. We found that expanded insurance coverage was associated with increased cessation assistance and higher odds of tobacco cessation. Continued provision of insurance coverage could lead to increased quit rates among high-risk populations, resulting in improvements in population health outcomes and reduced total health care costs.

Implementation and adoption of a health insurance support tool in the electronic health record: a mixed methods analysis within a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: In addition to delivering vital health care to millions of patients in the United States, community health centers (CHCs) provide needed health insurance outreach and enrollment support to their communities. We developed a health insurance enrollment tracking tool integrated within the electronic health record (EHR) and conducted a hybrid implementation-effectiveness trial in a CHC-based research network to assess tool adoption using two implementation strategies. METHODS: CHCs were recruited from the OCHIN practice-based research network. Seven health center systems (23 CHC clinic sites) were recruited and randomized to receive basic educational materials alone (Arm 1), or these materials plus facilitation (Arm 2) during the 18-month study period, September 2016-April 2018. Facilitation consisted of monthly contacts with clinic staff and utilized audit and feedback and guided improvement cycles. We measured total and monthly tool utilization from the EHR. We conducted structured interviews of CHC staff to assess factors associated with tool utilization. Qualitative data were analyzed using an immersion-crystallization approach with barriers and facilitators identified using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. RESULTS: The majority of CHCs in both study arms adopted the enrollment tool. The rate of tool utilization was, on average, higher in Arm 2 compared to Arm 1 (20.0% versus 4.7%, p < 0.01). However, by the end of the study period, the rate of tool utilization was similar in both arms; and observed between-arm differences in tool utilization were largely driven by a single, large health center in Arm 2. Perceived relative advantage of the tool was the key factor identified by clinic staff as driving tool utilization. Implementation climate and leadership engagement were also associated with tool utilization. CONCLUSIONS: Using basic education materials and low-intensity facilitation, CHCs quickly adopted an EHR-based tool to support critical outreach and enrollment activities aimed at improving access to health insurance in their communities. Though facilitation carried some benefit, a CHC's perceived relative advantage of the tool was the primary driver of decisions to implement the tool. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02355262, Posted February 4, 2015.

Identifying and characterizing cancer survivors in the US primary care safety net.

BACKGROUND: Primary care providers must understand the use patterns, clinical complexity, and primary care needs of cancer survivors to provide quality health care services. However, to the authors' knowledge, little is known regarding the prevalence and health care needs of this growing population, particularly in safety net settings. METHODS: The authors identified adults with a history of cancer documented in primary care electronic health records within a network of community health centers (CHCs) in 19 states. The authors estimated cancer history prevalence among >1.2 million patients and compared sex-specific site distributions with national estimates. Each survivor was matched to 3 patients without cancer from the same set of clinics. The demographic characteristics, primary care use, and comorbidity burden then were compared between the 2 groups, assessing differences with absolute standardized mean differences (ASMDs). ASMD values >0.1 denote meaningful differences between groups. Generalized estimating equations yielded adjusted odds ratios (aORs) for select indicators. RESULTS: A total of 40,266 cancer survivors were identified (prevalence of 3.0% of adult CHC patients). Compared with matched cancer-free patients, a higher percentage of survivors had ≥6 primary care visits across 3 years (62% vs 48%) and were insured (83% vs 74%) (ASMD, >0.1 for both). Cancer survivors had excess medical complexity, including a higher prevalence of depression, asthma/chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and liver disease (ASMD, >0.1 for all). Survivors had higher odds of any opioid prescription (aOR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.19-1.27) and chronic opioid therapy (aOR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.23-1.32) compared with matched controls (P < .001 for all). CONCLUSIONS: Identifying cancer survivors and understanding their patterns of utilization and physical and mental comorbidities present an opportunity to tailor primary health care services to this population.

Where Do Oregon Medicaid Enrollees Seek Outpatient Care Post-affordable Care Act Medicaid Expansion?

BACKGROUND: Previous studies suggest the newly Medicaid insured are more likely to use the emergency department (ED) however they did not differentiate between patients established or not established with primary care. OBJECTIVES: To understand where Oregon Medicaid beneficiaries sought care after the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) Medicaid expansion (ED, primary care, or specialist) and the interaction between primary care establishment and outpatient care utilization. RESEARCH DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study. SUBJECTS: Adults continuously insured from 2014 through 2015 who were either newly, returning, or continuously insured post-PPACA. MEASURES: Site of first and last outpatient visit, established with primary care status, and outpatient care utilization. RESULTS: The odds of being established with primary care at their first visit were lower among newly [odds ratio (OR), 0.18; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.18-0.19] and returning insured (OR, 0.22; 95% CI, 0.22-0.23) than the continuously insured. Continuously insured, new patients with primary care had higher odds of visiting the ED (OR, 2.15; 95% CI, 2.01-2.30) at their first visit than newly or returning insured. Patients established with a single primary care provider in all insurance groups had lower rates of ED visit, whereas those established with multiple primary care providers had the highest ED visit rates. CONCLUSIONS: Most newly and returning insured Medicaid enrollees sought primary care rather than ED services and most became established with primary care. Our findings suggest that both insurance and primary care continuity play a role in where patients seek health care services.

Cervical and colorectal cancer screening prevalence before and after Affordable Care Act Medicaid expansion.

Community health centers (CHCs), which serve socioeconomically disadvantaged patients, experienced an increase in insured visits after the 2014 Affordable Care Act (ACA) coverage options began. Yet, little is known about how cancer screening rates changed post-ACA. Therefore, this study assessed changes in the prevalence of cervical and colorectal cancer screening from pre- to post-ACA in expansion and non-expansion states among patients seen in CHCs. Electronic health record data on 624,601 non-pregnant patients aged 21-64 eligible for cervical or colorectal cancer screening between 1/1/2012 and 12/31/2015 from 203 CHCs were analyzed. We assessed changes in prevalence and screening likelihood among patients, by insurance type and race/ethnicity and compared Medicaid expansion and non-expansion states using difference-in-difference methodology. Female patients had 19% increased odds of receiving cervical cancer screening post- relative to pre-ACA in expansion states [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 1.19, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.09-1.31] and 23% increased odds in non-expansion states (aOR = 1.23, 95% CI = 1.05-1.46): the greatest increase was among uninsured patients in expansion states (aOR = 1.36, 95% CI = 1.16-1.59) and privately-insured patients in non-expansion states (aOR = 1.43, 95% CI = 1.11-1.84). Colorectal cancer screening prevalence increased from 11% to 18% pre- to post-ACA in expansion states and from 13% to 21% in non-expansion states. For most outcomes, the observed changes were not significantly different between expansion and non-expansion states. Despite increased prevalences of cervical and colorectal cancer screening in both expansion and non-expansion states across all race/ethnicity groups, rates remained suboptimal for this population of socioeconomically disadvantaged patients.

Following Uninsured Patients Through Medicaid Expansion: Ambulatory Care Use and Diagnosed Conditions.

PURPOSE: The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) has improved access to health insurance, yet millions remain uninsured. Many patients who remain uninsured access care at community health centers (CHCs); however, little is known about their health conditions and health care use. We assessed ambulatory care use and diagnosed health conditions among a cohort of CHC patients uninsured before enactment of the ACA (pre-ACA: January 1, 2012 to December 31, 2013) and followed them after enactment (post-ACA: January 1, 2014 to December 31, 2015). METHODS: This retrospective cohort analysis used electronic health record data from CHCs in 11 US states that expanded Medicaid eligibility. We assessed ambulatory care visits and documented health conditions among a cohort of 138,246 patients (aged 19 to 64 years) who were uninsured pre-ACA and either remained uninsured, gained Medicaid, gained other health insurance, or did not have a visit post-ACA. We estimated adjusted predicted probabilities of ambulatory care use using an ordinal logistic mixed-effects regression model. RESULTS: Post-ACA, 20.9% of patients remained uninsured, 15.0% gained Medicaid, 12.4% gained other insurance, and 51.7% did not have a visit. The majority of patients had ≥1 diagnosed health condition. The adjusted proportion of patients with high use (≥6 visits over 2 years) increased from pre-ACA to post-ACA among those who gained Medicaid (pre-ACA: 23%, post-ACA: 34%, P <.001) or gained other insurance (pre-ACA: 29%, post-ACA: 48%, P <.001), whereas the percentage fell slightly for those continuously uninsured. CONCLUSIONS: A significant percentage of CHC patients remained uninsured; many who remained uninsured had diagnosed health conditions, and one-half continued to have ≥3 visits to CHCs. CHCs continue to be essential providers for uninsured patients.