Effect of a Coordinated Community and Chronic Care Model Team Intervention vs Usual Care on Systolic Blood Pressure in Patients With Stroke or Transient Ischemic Attack: The SUCCEED Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Few stroke survivors meet recommended cardiovascular goals, particularly among racial/ethnic minority populations, such as Black or Hispanic individuals, or socioeconomically disadvantaged populations. Objective: To determine if a chronic care model-based, community health worker (CHW), advanced practice clinician (APC; including nurse practitioners or physician assistants), and physician team intervention improves risk factor control after stroke in a safety-net setting (ie, health care setting where all individuals receive care, regardless of health insurance status or ability to pay). Design, Setting, and Participants: This randomized clinical trial included participants recruited from 5 hospitals serving low-income populations in Los Angeles County, California, as part of the Secondary Stroke Prevention by Uniting Community and Chronic Care Model Teams Early to End Disparities (SUCCEED) clinical trial. Inclusion criteria were age 40 years or older; experience of ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA) no more than 90 days prior; systolic blood pressure (BP) of 130 mm Hg or greater or 120 to 130 mm Hg with history of hypertension or using hypertensive medications; and English or Spanish language proficiency. The exclusion criterion was inability to consent. Among 887 individuals screened for eligibility, 542 individuals were eligible, and 487 individuals were enrolled and randomized, stratified by stroke type (ischemic or TIA vs hemorrhagic), language (English vs Spanish), and site to usual care vs intervention in a 1:1 fashion. The study was conducted from February 2014 to September 2018, and data were analyzed from October 2018 to November 2020. Interventions: Participants randomized to intervention were offered a multimodal coordinated care intervention, including hypothesized core components (ie, ≥3 APC clinic visits, ≥3 CHW home visits, and Chronic Disease Self-Management Program workshops), and additional telephone visits, protocol-driven risk factor management, culturally and linguistically tailored education materials, and self-management tools. Participants randomized to the control group received usual care, which varied by site but frequently included a free BP monitor, self-management tools, and linguistically tailored information materials. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was change in systolic BP at 12 months. Secondary outcomes were non-high density lipoprotein cholesterol, hemoglobin A1c, and C-reactive protein (CRP) levels, body mass index, antithrombotic adherence, physical activity level, diet, and smoking status at 12 months. Potential mediators assessed included access to care, health and stroke literacy, self-efficacy, perceptions of care, and BP monitor use. Results: Among 487 participants included, the mean (SD) age was 57.1 (8.9) years; 317 (65.1%) were men, and 347 participants (71.3%) were Hispanic, 87 participants (18.3%) were Black, and 30 participants (6.3%) were Asian. A total of 246 participants were randomized to usual care, and 241 participants were randomized to the intervention. Mean (SD) systolic BP improved from 143 (17) mm Hg at baseline to 133 (20) mm Hg at 12 months in the intervention group and from 146 (19) mm Hg at baseline to 137 (22) mm Hg at 12 months in the usual care group, with no significant differences in the change between groups. Compared with the control group, participants in the intervention group had greater improvements in self-reported salt intake (difference, 15.4 [95% CI, 4.4 to 26.0]; P = .004) and serum CRP level (difference in log CRP, -0.4 [95% CI, -0.7 to -0.1] mg/dL; P = .003); there were no differences in other secondary outcomes. Although 216 participants (89.6%) in the intervention group received some of the 3 core components, only 35 participants (14.5%) received the intended full dose. Conclusions and Relevance: This randomized clinical trial of a complex multilevel, multimodal intervention did not find vascular risk factor improvements beyond that of usual care; however, further studies may consider testing the SUCCEED intervention with modifications to enhance implementation and participant engagement. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01763203.

Association of Therapy Time Per Day With Functional Outcomes and Rate of Recovery in Older Adults After Elective Joint Replacement Surgery.

OBJECTIVES: To explore the association between therapy minutes per length of stay (LOS) day (TMLD), functional outcomes, and rate of functional recovery among older adults after elective hip or knee replacement surgery across postacute (PAC) settings. DESIGN: Secondary analysis of data collected for an observational cohort study from 2005 to 2010. SETTING: Four inpatient rehabilitation facilities (IRF) and 7 skilled nursing facilities (SNF). PARTICIPANTS: Adults aged 65 years or older (N=162) with Medicare fee-for-service insurance and a primary diagnosis of elective hip or knee replacement. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: FIM mobility and self-care measures at discharge. RESULTS: The TMLD was divided into high, medium, and low categories. Participants were grouped into low, medium, and high gain rate groups based on their average change in mobility and self-care FIM measures per LOS day. Gain rate and TMLD groups were crossmapped to create 9 gain-TMLD groups separately for mobility and self-care. There were no significant differences in admission mobility or self-care measures by gain rate and TMLD trajectory or by facility type (IRF or SNF). TMLD was not significantly associated with discharge mobility measures. Participants in high gain trajectories attained independence with mobility and self-care tasks at discharge regardless of TMLD. Those in low gain trajectories needed supervision or assistance on all mobility tasks. Older age and greater pain at discharge were significantly associated with lower odds of being in the medium or high gain rate groups. CONCLUSIONS: For clinicians and facility managers who must care for patients with constrained resources, the shift to value-based reimbursement for rehabilitation services in PAC settings has reinvigorated the question of whether the duration of therapy provided influences patient outcomes. Three hours of daily therapy after joint replacement surgery may exceed what is necessary for recovery. Postsurgical pain management remains a significant challenge in older adults.

Reducing Rejected Fecal Immunochemical Tests Received in the Laboratory for Colorectal Cancer Screening.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening decreases CRC incidence; however, many patients are not successfully screened. PURPOSE: To improve screening rates at our institution by decreasing the rate of rejected fecal immunochemical tests (FITs), a means of CRC screening, from 28.6% to <10% by December 2017. METHODS: Specimens were rejected for the following reasons: expired specimen, lack of recorded collection date/time, lack of physician orders, incomplete patient information, and illegible handwriting. Multidisciplinary teams devised the following interventions: FIT envelope reminder stickers, automated FIT patient reminder phone calls, a laboratory standard operating procedure, an accessioning process at satellite laboratories, revisions to a clinical reminder when offering FIT, and provision of FIT-compatible printers to clinics. RESULTS: Total specimens received each month ranged from 647 to 970. Fecal immunochemical test rejection rates fell from 28.6% in June 2017 to 6.9% in December 2017 with a statistically significant decrease (p-value = .015) between the intervention period (May 2017-October 2017) and the postintervention period (November 2017-May 2018). CONCLUSIONS: Targeted interventions with stakeholder involvement are essential in reducing the rejection rate. IMPLICATIONS: The decreased rejection rate saves resources by decreasing the need to rescreen patients whose specimens were rejected, and may improve CRC screening rates.

Association Between Estimated Mortality Risk and Measured Quality of Care in Older Adults.

Quality measures based on processes of care (e.g., breast cancer screening) are frequently used to compare performance of providers and healthcare organizations in a value-based reimbursement system, but using these measures to make performance comparisons could penalize clinicians caring for older adults with multiple comorbidities. These clinicians may more frequently withhold recommended care based on limited prognosis, patient preference, or potential adverse effects and, as a result, may incur financial penalties because of poor measured performance. Alternatively, they may need to perform additional administrative work to exclude patients from quality measurement. To examine the potential performance handicap associated with caring for complex populations, we cross-sectionally examined the association between broad outpatient processes of care and 5-year mortality risk in a nationally representative older adult sample (≥ 65) from the 2002 to 2015 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (n=26,006). In adjusted analyses, performance score based on process-of-care measures was significantly worse in the high-risk group (5-year mortality risk ≥50; adjusted performance score 67.4%; adjusted absolute difference 6.7%, 95% confidence interval (CI)=5.3-8.1%, p<.001) and in the intermediate-risk group (5-year mortality risk 25-49%; adjusted performance score 71.7%; adjusted absolute difference 2.4%, 95% CI=1.7-3.1%, p<.001) than in the low-risk group (5-year mortality risk <25%); adjusted performance score 74.1% following <25%. The trend was overall constant across types of care processes and was more prominent in the younger age brackets of our sample. These results suggest that use of process-of-care measures can lead to disproportionate burden for clinicians and organizations primarily taking care of complex populations.

Randomized controlled trial of a coordinated care intervention to improve risk factor control after stroke or transient ischemic attack in the safety net: Secondary stroke prevention by Uniting Community and Chronic care model teams Early to End Disparities (SUCCEED).

BACKGROUND: Recurrent strokes are preventable through awareness and control of risk factors such as hypertension, and through lifestyle changes such as healthier diets, greater physical activity, and smoking cessation. However, vascular risk factor control is frequently poor among stroke survivors, particularly among socio-economically disadvantaged blacks, Latinos and other people of color. The Chronic Care Model (CCM) is an effective framework for multi-component interventions aimed at improving care processes and outcomes for individuals with chronic disease. In addition, community health workers (CHWs) have played an integral role in reducing health disparities; however, their effectiveness in reducing vascular risk among stroke survivors remains unknown. Our objectives are to develop, test, and assess the economic value of a CCM-based intervention using an Advanced Practice Clinician (APC)-CHW team to improve risk factor control after stroke in an under-resourced, racially/ethnically diverse population. METHODS/DESIGN: In this single-blind randomized controlled trial, 516 adults (≥40 years) with an ischemic stroke, transient ischemic attack or intracerebral hemorrhage within the prior 90 days are being enrolled at five sites within the Los Angeles County safety-net setting and randomized 1:1 to intervention vs usual care. Participants are excluded if they do not speak English, Spanish, Cantonese, Mandarin, or Korean or if they are unable to consent. The intervention includes a minimum of three clinic visits in the healthcare setting, three home visits, and Chronic Disease Self-Management Program group workshops in community venues. The primary outcome is blood pressure (BP) control (systolic BP <130 mmHg) at 1 year. Secondary outcomes include: (1) mean change in systolic BP; (2) control of other vascular risk factors including lipids and hemoglobin A1c, (3) inflammation (C reactive protein [CRP]), (4) medication adherence, (5) lifestyle factors (smoking, diet, and physical activity), (6) estimated relative reduction in risk for recurrent stroke or myocardial infarction (MI), and (7) cost-effectiveness of the intervention versus usual care. DISCUSSION: If this multi-component interdisciplinary intervention is shown to be effective in improving risk factor control after stroke, it may serve as a model that can be used internationally to reduce race/ethnic and socioeconomic disparities in stroke in resource-constrained settings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT01763203 .

When comorbidity, aging, and complexity of primary care meet: development and validation of the Geriatric CompleXity of Care Index.

OBJECTIVES: To develop and validate the Geriatric CompleXity of Care Index (GXI), a comorbidity index of medical, geriatric, and psychosocial conditions that addresses disease severity and intensity of ambulatory care for older adults with chronic conditions. DESIGN: DEVELOPMENT phase: variable selection and rating by clinician panel. VALIDATION phase: medical record review and secondary data analysis. SETTING: Assessing the Care of Vulnerable Elders-2 study. PARTICIPANTS: Six hundred forty-four older (≥75) individuals receiving ambulatory care. DEVELOPMENT: 32 conditions categorized according to severity, resulting in 117 GXI variables. A panel of clinicians rated each GXI variable with respect to the added difficulty of providing primary care for an individual with that condition. VALIDATION: Modified versions of previously validated comorbidity measures (simple count, Charlson, Medicare Hierarchical Condition Category), longitudinal clinical outcomes (functional decline, survival), intensity of ambulatory care (primary, specialty care visits, polypharmacy, number of eligible quality indicators (NQI)) over 1 year of care. RESULTS: The most-morbid individuals (according to quintiles of GXI) had more visits (7.0 vs 3.7 primary care, 6.2 vs 2.4 specialist), polypharmacy (14.3% vs 0% had ≥14 medications), and greater NQI (33 vs 25) than the least-morbid individuals. Of the four comorbidity measures, the GXI was the strongest predictor of primary care visits, polypharmacy, and NQI (P < .001, controlling for age, sex, function-based vulnerability). CONCLUSION: Older adults with complex care needs, as measured by the GXI, have healthcare needs above what previously employed comorbidity measures captured. Healthcare systems could use the GXI to identify the most complex elderly adults and appropriately reimburse primary providers caring for older adults with the most complex care needs for providing additional visits and coordination of care.

Quality of care provided in a special needs plan using a nurse care manager model.

OBJECTIVES: To comprehensively evaluate the quality of care provided in special needs plans (SNPs; Medicare Advantage plans that aim to provide specialized care for complex older adults) and specifically the nurse care management model in the community setting. DESIGN: We adapted 107 process-of-care quality measures across 12 conditions from the Assessing Care of Vulnerable Elders set to obtain a clinically detailed evaluation of the quality of care received by complex older enrollees in a dual eligible Evercare SNP. We abstracted 13 months of primary care medical records to delineate quality of care provided by physicians and whether there was value added from the nurse care manager model. SETTING: Dual eligible Evercare SNP located in central Florida. PARTICIPANTS: Two-hundred thirty-one vulnerable older enrollees in the SNP who had complex disease. RESULTS: Based on physician medical records alone, the 231 high-risk participants (mean age 77, 67% women) received recommended care for 53% of 5,569 evaluated clinical circumstances, ranging from 12% for end-of-life care to 78% for diabetes mellitus. In fewer than 40% of these clinical circumstances was recommended care provided for dementia, falls, and urinary incontinence. In a second analysis accounting for care provided by both the Evercare nurse and the physician, recommended care was provided to patients in 69% of the 5,684 evaluated clinical circumstances. CONCLUSION: Comprehensive quality measurement applied to vulnerable older adults enrolled in one mature SNP showed that the Evercare nurse model addresses important deficits in physician care for geriatric conditions. Such measurement should be applied to other SNP models and to compare SNP care with that for complex, older, fee-for-service Medicare cohorts.

Does better quality of care for falls and urinary incontinence result in better participant-reported outcomes?

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether delivery of better quality of care for urinary incontinence (UI) and falls is associated with better participant-reported outcomes. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Assessing Care of Vulnerable Elders Study 2 (ACOVE-2). PARTICIPANTS: Older (≥ 75) ambulatory care participants in ACOVE-2 who screened positive for UI (n = 133) or falls or fear of falling (n=328). MEASUREMENTS: Composite quality scores (percentage of quality indicators (QIs) passed per participant) and change in Incontinence Quality of Life (IQOL, range 0-100) or Falls Efficacy Scale (FES, range 10-40) scores were measured before and after care was delivered (mean 10 months). Because the treatment-related falls QIs were measured only on patients who received a physical examination, an alternative Common Pathway QI (CPQI) score was developed that assigned a failing score for falls treatment to unexamined participants. RESULTS: Each 10% increment in receipt of recommended care for UI was associated with a 1.4-point improvement in IQOL score (P = .01). The original falls composite quality-of-care score was unrelated to FES, but the new CPQI scoring method for falls quality of care was related to FES outcomes (+0.4 points per 10% increment in falls quality, P = .01). CONCLUSION: Better quality of care for falls and UI was associated with measurable improvement in participant-reported outcomes in less than 1 year. The connection between process and outcome required consideration of the interdependence between diagnosis and treatment in the falls QIs. The link between process and outcome demonstrated for UI and falls underscores the importance of improving care in these areas.

Caring for the Uninsured with Prostate Cancer: A Comparison of Four Policy Alternatives in California.

The IMPACT Program seeks to improve access to prostate cancer care for low-income, uninsured men. The objective of the current study was to compare the cost-effectiveness of four policy alternatives in treating this population. We analyzed the cost-effectiveness of four policy alternatives for providing care to low-income, uninsured men with prostate cancer: (1) IMPACT as originally envisioned, (2) a version of IMPACT with reduced physician fees, (3) a hypothetical Medicaid prostate cancer treatment program, and (4) the existing county safety net. We calculated cost-effectiveness based on incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) with the formula ICER = (Cost(alternative strategy) - Cost(baseline strategy)) / (QALY(alternative strategy) - QALY(baseline strategy)). We measured outcomes as quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). "Best-case" scenarios assumed timely access to care in 50% of cases in the county system and 70% of cases in any system that reimbursed providers at Medicaid fee-for-service rates. "Worst-case" scenarios assumed timely access in 35 and 50% of corresponding cases. In fiscal year 2004-2005, IMPACT allocated 11% of total expenditures to administrative functions and 23% to fixed clinical costs, with an overall budget of $5.9 million. The ICERs ($/QALY) assuming "best-case" scenarios for original IMPACT, modified IMPACT, and a hypothetical Medicaid program were $32,091; $64,663; and $10,376; respectively. ICERs assuming "worst-case" scenarios were $27,189; $84,236; and $10,714; respectively. County safety net was used as a baseline. In conclusion, IMPACT provides underserved Californians with prostate cancer care and value-added services with only 11% of funds allocated to administrative fixed costs. Both the original IMPACT program and the hypothetical Medicaid prostate cancer program were cost-effective compared to the county safety net, while the reduced-fees version of IMPACT was not.