Estimating Costs of Implementing Stroke Systems of Care and Data-Driven Improvements in the Paul Coverdell National Acute Stroke Program.

PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES: We evaluated the costs of implementing coordinated systems of stroke care by state health departments from 2012 through 2015 to help policy makers and planners gain a sense of the potential return on investments in establishing a stroke care quality improvement (QI) program. INTERVENTION APPROACH: State health departments funded by the Paul Coverdell National Acute Stroke Program (PCNASP) implemented activities to support the start and proficient use of hospital stroke registries statewide and coordinate data-driven QI efforts. These efforts were aimed at improving the treatment and transition of stroke patients from prehospital emergency medical services (EMS) to in-hospital care and postacute care facilities. Health departments provided technical assistance and data to support hospitals, EMS agencies, and posthospital care agencies to carry out small, rapid, incremental QI efforts to produce more effective and efficient stroke care practices. EVALUATION METHODS: Six of the 11 PCNASP-funded state health departments in the United States volunteered to collect and report programmatic costs associated with implementing the components of stroke systems of care. Six health departments reported costs paid directly by Centers for Disease Control and Prevention-provided funds, 5 also reported their own in-kind contributions, and 4 compiled data from a sample of their partners' estimated costs of resources, such as staff time, involved in program implementation. Costs were analyzed separately for PCNASP-funded expenditures and in-kind contributions by the health department by resource category and program activity. In-kind contributions by partners were also analyzed separately. RESULTS: PCNASP-funded expenditures ranged from $790,123 to $1,298,160 across the 6 health departments for the 3-year funding period. In-kind contributions ranged from $5,805 to $1,394,097. Partner contributions (n = 22) ranged from $3,912 to $362,868. IMPLICATIONS FOR PUBLIC HEALTH: Our evaluation reports costs for multiple state health departments and their partners for implementing components of stroke systems of care in the United States. Although there are limitations, our findings represent key estimates that can guide future program planning and efforts to achieve sustainability.

Evaluation of a Pharmacists' Patient Care Process Approach for Hypertension.

INTRODUCTION: An estimated 116 million American adults (47.3%) have hypertension. Most adults with hypertension do not have it controlled-3 in 4 (92.1 million) U.S. adults with hypertension have a blood pressure ≥130/80 mmHg. The Pharmacists' Patient Care Process is a standardized patient-centered approach to the provision of pharmacist care that is done in collaboration with other healthcare providers. Through the Michigan Medicine Hypertension Pharmacists' Program, pharmacists use the Pharmacists' Patient Care Process to provide hypertension management services in collaboration with physicians in primary care and community pharmacy settings. In 2019, the impact of Michigan Medicine Hypertension Pharmacists' Program patient participation on blood pressure control was evaluated. METHODS: Propensity scoring was used to match patients in the intervention group with patients in the comparison group and regression analyses were then conducted to compare the 2 groups on key patient outcomes. Negative binomial regression was used to examine the number of days with blood pressure under control. The findings presented in this brief are part of a larger multimethod evaluation. RESULTS: More patients in the intervention group than in the comparison group achieved blood pressure control at 3 months (66.3% vs 42.4%) and 6 months (69.1% vs 56.5%). The intervention group experienced more days with blood pressure under control within a 3-month (18.6 vs 9.5 days) and 6-month period (57.0 vs 37.4 days) than the comparison group did. CONCLUSIONS: Findings support the effectiveness of the Michigan Medicine Hypertension Pharmacists' Program approach to implementing the Pharmacists' Patient Care Process to improve blood pressure control.

Initiatives to Enhance Primary Care Delivery: Two Examples from the Field.

OBJECTIVES: Increasing demands on primary care providers have created a need for systems-level initiatives to improve primary care delivery. The purpose of this paper is to describe and present outcomes for two such initiatives: the Pennsylvania Academy of Family Physicians' Residency Program Collaborative (RPC) and the St. Johnsbury Vermont Community Health Team (CHT). METHODS: Researchers conducted case studies of the initiatives using mixed methods, including: secondary analysis of program and electronic health record data, systematic document review and interviews. RESULTS: RPC is a learning collaborative that teaches quality improvement and patient-centeredness to primary care providers, residents, clinical support staff, and administrative staff in residency programs. Results show that participation in a higher number of live learning sessions resulted in a significant increase in patient centered medical home recognition attainment and significant improvements in performance in diabetic process measures including eye exams (14.3%, p=0.004), eye referrals (13.82%, p=0.013), foot exams (15.73%, p=0.003), smoking cessation (15.83%, p=0.012), and self-management goals (25.45%, p=0.001). As a community-clinical linkages model, CHT involves primary care practices, community health workers (CHWs), and community partners. Results suggest that CHT members successfully work together to coordinate comprehensive care for the individuals they serve. Further, individuals exposed to CHWs experienced increased stability in access to health insurance (p=0.001) and prescription drugs (p=0.000), and the need for health education counseling (p=0.000). CONCLUSION: Findings from this study indicate that these two system-level strategies have the promise to improve primary care delivery. Additional research can determine the extent to which these strategies can improve other health outcomes.