Impact of Work Conditions and Minority Patient Populations on Quality and Errors.

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether workplace conditions affect care quality and errors, especially in primary care clinics serving minority patients. METHODS: We conducted a 3-year assessment of work conditions and patient outcomes in 73 primary care clinics in the upper Midwest and New York City. Study participants included 287 physicians and 1204 patients with hypertension and/or diabetes. Chart audit data were contrasted between clinics with ≥30% minority patients (minority-serving clinics, or MSCs) and those with <30% (nonminority-serving clinics, or NMSCs). Physicians reported on time pressure, work control, clinical resources, and specialty referral access; managers described room availability; and chart audits determined care errors and quality. Two-level hierarchical models tested work conditions as mediators between MSC status and clinical outcomes. RESULTS: Error rates were higher in MSCs than NMSCs (29.6% vs 24.8%, P < .05). Lack of clinical resources explained 41% of the effect of MSC status on errors (P < .05). Diabetes control was poorer in MSCs than in NMSCs (53.8% controlled vs 76.1%, P < .05); lack of clinical resources explained 24% of this difference (P < .05). Room availability increased quality in both MSCs and NMSCs by 5.95% for each additional room per clinician per session. Lack of access to rooms and specialists decreased the likelihood of blood pressure control in MSCs. CONCLUSION: Work conditions such as clinical resources, examination room availability, and access to referrals are significantly associated with errors and quality, especially in MSCs.

Separate and unequal: clinics where minority and nonminority patients receive primary care.

BACKGROUND: Few studies have examined the influence of physician workplace conditions on health care disparities. We compared 96 primary care clinics in New York, New York, and in the upper Midwest serving various proportions of minority patients to determine differences in workplace organizational characteristics. METHODS: Cross-sectional data are from surveys of 96 clinic managers, 388 primary care physicians, and 1701 of their adult patients with hypertension, diabetes mellitus, or congestive heart failure participating in the Minimizing Error, Maximizing Outcome (MEMO) study. Data from 27 clinics with at least 30% minority patients were contrasted with data from 69 clinics with less than 30% minority patients. RESULTS: Compared with clinics serving less than 30% minority patients, clinics serving at least 30% minority patients have less access to medical supplies (2.7 vs 3.4, P < .001), referral specialists (3.0 vs 3.5, P < .005) on a scale of 1 (none) to 4 (great), and examination rooms per physician (2.2 vs 2.7, P =.002) . Their patients are more frequently depressed (22.8% vs 12.1%), are more often covered by Medicaid (30.2% vs 11.4%), and report lower health literacy (3.7 vs 4.4) on a scale of 1 (low) to 5 (high) (P < .001 for all). Physicians from clinics serving higher proportions of minority populations perceive their patients as frequently speaking little or no English (27.1% vs 3.4%, P =.004), having more chronic pain (24.1% vs 12.9%, P < .001) and substance abuse problems (15.1% vs 10.1%, P =.005), and being more medically complex (53.1% vs 39.9%) and psychosocially complex (44.9% vs 28.2%) (P < .001 for both). In regression analyses, clinics with at least 30% minority patients are more likely to have chaotic work environments (odds ratio, 4.0; P =.003) and to have fewer physicians reporting high work control (0.2; P =.003) or high job satisfaction (0.4; P =.01). CONCLUSION: Clinics serving higher proportions of minority patients have more challenging workplace and organizational characteristics.

Brief physician advice for problem drinking among older adults: an economic analysis of costs and benefits.

OBJECTIVE: Problem alcohol use among elderly persons can have a variety of health-related consequences, complicating management of chronic illnesses and increasing health care utilization and costs. This study evaluates the economic cost and benefits of brief intervention for at-risk drinking older adults. METHOD: A controlled clinical trial with 24-month follow-up tested effectiveness of brief physician advice in reducing alcohol use, health care utilization and other consequences among older (age 65 or older) adult problem drinkers. Of 6,073 patients screened for problem drinking in 24 community-based primary care practices in Wisconsin, 158 patients met inclusion criteria and were randomized into control (n = 71) or intervention (n = 87) groups. Intervention group patients received two 10- to 15-minute physician-delivered counseling sessions including professional advice, education and contracting using scripted workbooks. RESULTS: The intervention group demonstrated significant reductions in alcohol use (p = 0.001) and frequency of excessive drinking (p = 0.03) compared with the control group over 24 months, but no significant differences emerged in economic outcomes, including hospital days, emergency department visits, office visits, medications, lab and x-ray procedures, injuries, legal events or mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Although the clinical benefits of brief alcohol interventions with older adults are clear, the economic results in this age group are less certain. Older adult problem drinkers may require more intensive and costly interventions to achieve economic benefits similar to those seen in younger adult problem drinkers. Methodological issues, such as statistical power, outcome measures, outlier cases and follow-up periods, are identified for future evaluations.

Brief physician advice for problem drinkers: long-term efficacy and benefit-cost analysis.

BACKGROUND: This report describes the 48-month efficacy and benefit-cost analysis of Project TrEAT (Trial for Early Alcohol Treatment), a randomized controlled trial of brief physician advice for the treatment of problem drinking. METHODS: Four hundred eighty-two men and 292 women, ages 18-65, were randomly assigned to a control (n = 382) or intervention (n = 392) group. The intervention consisted of two physician visits and two nurse follow-up phone calls. Intervention components included a review of normative drinking, patient-specific alcohol effects, a worksheet on drinking cues, drinking diary cards, and a drinking agreement in the form of a prescription. RESULTS: Subjects in the treatment group exhibited significant reductions (p < 0.01) in 7-day alcohol use, number of binge drinking episodes, and frequency of excessive drinking as compared with the control group. The effect occurred within 6 months of the intervention and was maintained over the 48-month follow-up period. The treatment sample also experienced fewer days of hospitalization (p = 0.05) and fewer emergency department visits (p = 0.08). Seven deaths occurred in the control group and three in the treatment group. The benefit-cost analysis suggests a 43,000 dollars reduction in future health care costs for every 10,000 dollars invested in early intervention. The benefit-cost ratio increases when including the societal benefits of fewer motor vehicle events and crimes. CONCLUSIONS: The long-term follow-up of Project TrEAT provides the first direct evidence that brief physician advice is associated with sustained reductions in alcohol use, health care utilization, motor vehicle events, and associated costs. The report suggests that a patient's personal physician can successfully treat alcohol problems and endorses the implementation of alcohol screening and brief intervention in the US health care system.