Financial Interventions to Improve Screening in Primary Care: A Systematic Review.

INTRODUCTION: Although health screenings offer timely detection of health conditions and enable early intervention, adoption is often poor. How might financial interventions create the necessary incentives and resources to improve screening in primary care settings? This systematic review aimed to answer this question. METHODS: Peer-reviewed studies published between 2000 and 2023 were identified and categorized by the level of intervention (practice or individual) and type of intervention, specifically alternative payment models (APMs), fee-for-service (FFS), capitation, and capital investments. Outcomes included frequency of screening, performance/quality of care (e.g., patient satisfaction, health outcomes), and workflow changes (e.g., visit length, staffing). RESULTS: Of 51 included studies, a majority focused on practice-level interventions (n=32), used APMs (n=41) that involved payments for achieving key performance indicators (KPIs; n=31) and were of low or very low strength of evidence based on GRADE criteria (n=42). Studies often included screenings for cancer (n=32), diabetes care (n=18), and behavioral health (n=15). KPI payments to both practices and individual providers corresponded with increased screening rates, whereas capitation and provider-level FFS models yielded mixed results. A large majority of studies assessed changes in screening rates (n=48) with less focus on quality of care (n=11) or workflow changes (n=4). DISCUSSION: Financial mechanisms can enhance screening rates with evidence strongest for KPI payments to both practices and individual providers. Future research should explore the relationship between financial interventions and quality of care, in terms of both clinical processes and patient outcomes, as well as the role of these interventions in shaping care delivery.

Is Primary Care Patient Experience Associated with Provider-Patient Language Concordance and Use of Interpreters for Spanish-preferring Patients: A Systematic Literature Review.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare provided by a bilingual provider or with the assistance of an interpreter improves care quality; however, their associations with patient experience are unknown. We reviewed associations of patient experience with provider-patient language concordance (LC) and use of interpreters for Spanish-preferring patients. METHOD: We reviewed articles from academic databases 2005-2023 following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and Joanna Briggs Institute Checklists to rate study quality. We reviewed 217 (of 2193) articles, yielding 17 for inclusion. RESULTS: Of the 17 included articles, most articles focused on primary (n = 6 studies) or pediatric care (n = 5). All were cross-sectional, collecting data by self-administered surveys (n = 7) or interviews (n = 4). Most assessed the relationship between LC or interpreter use and patient experience by cross-sectional associations (n = 13). Two compared subgroups, and two provided descriptive insights into the conversational content (provider-interpreter-patient). None evaluated interventions, so evidence on effective strategies is lacking. LC for Spanish-preferring patients was a mix of null findings (n = 4) and associations with better patient experience (n = 3) (e.g., receiving diet/exercise counseling and better provider communication). Evidence on interpreter use indicated better (n = 2), worse (n = 2), and no association (n = 2) with patient experience. Associations between Spanish-language preference and patient experience were not significant (n = 5) or indicated worse experience (n = 4) (e.g., long waits, problems getting appointments, and not understanding nurses). CONCLUSION: LC is associated with better patient experience. Using interpreters is associated with better patient experience but only with high-quality interpreters. Strategies are needed to eliminate disparities and enhance communication for all Spanish-preferring primary care patients, whether with a bilingual provider or an interpreter.

Patient Comments on the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems Clinician and Group (CG-CAHPS) Survey Reflect Improvements in Provider Behaviors From Coaching.

GOAL: Patient experience survey data are used to examine the patient-centeredness of care, identify areas for improvement, and monitor interventions aimed to enhance the patient experience. Most healthcare organizations measure patient experience using Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) surveys. Studies have documented the use of CAHPS closed-ended survey responses for completing public reports, monitoring internal feedback and performance, identifying areas of improvement, and evaluating interventions to improve care. However, limited evidence exists on the utility of patients' comments on CAHPS surveys for evaluating provider-level interventions. To explore this potential, we examined comments on the CAHPS Clinician and Group (CG-CAHPS) 2.0 visit survey before and after a provider intervention. The "shadow coaching" intervention had been shown to improve provider performance and patient experience scores on the CG-CAHPS overall provider rating and provider communication composite. METHODS: We examined how patient comments on the CG-CAHPS survey differed before and after shadow coaching of 74 providers. We described the valence (tone), content, and actionability of 1,935 comments-1,051 collected before coaching and 884 collected after coaching-to see how these aspects changed before and after providers were coached. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Patient comments reflected improved CG-CAHPS scores after shadow coaching. The proportion of positive comments increased, and comments about doctors were more positive. Comments about time spent in the examination room decreased, apparently reflecting the decreased proportion of negative comments after coaching. Comments regarding three of the four aspects of provider communication asked on the CG-CAHPS survey were more positive after coaching (provider listens carefully, shows respect, spends enough time); the valence of comments about the fourth aspect (provider explains things in a way that is easy to understand) did not change. Also, comments describing an overall positive evaluation of the practice increased. Comments were generally less actionable after coaching, perhaps reflecting the increased positivity of the comments. PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS: Patient comments collected before the provider intervention reflected overall improvements in provider behavior, as indicated by medium-to-large statistically significant improvements in CG-CAHPS composite scores. These results suggest that patient comments from the CG-CAHPS survey can be used as input for quality improvement or an evaluation of provider-level interventions. Tracking the valence and content of comments about providers before and after an intervention to improve care is a practical method to learn how provider behavior changes.

Equity as a Guiding Principle for the Public Health Data System.

The growing centering of equity in health has elevated a conversation about how those interests should translate within the systems and sectors that influence health. In particular, the public health data system has been relatively limited in capturing the drivers and consequences of health inequity as well as the varying dimensions of equity. This article examines what it means to use equity as a guiding principle throughout the components and functions of a modern public health data system. As with other articles in this supplement, this article builds from a literature review, environmental scan, and deliberations from the National Commission to Transform Public Health Data Systems to summarize current gaps to integrate equity throughout the system. It outlines opportunities for the technology and data science sectors specifically to engage given the access that these sectors have to information that would illuminate and frame the nuances and impacts of health inequity.

What Data Should Be Included in a Modern Public Health Data System.

The public is inundated with data, both in where data are ubiquitously collected and in how organizations are using data to drive public sector and commercial decisions. The public health data system is no exception to this flood of data, both in growing data volume and variety. However, what are collected and analyzed about the health status of the nation, how particular data and measures are prioritized for parsimony, and how those data provide a signal for where to invest to address health inequities are in dire need of a reboot. As with other articles in this supplement, this article builds from a literature review, an environmental scan, and deliberations from the National Commission to Transform Public Health Data Systems. The article summarizes what data should be included and identifies where the technology and data sectors can contribute to fill current gaps to measure equity, positive health, and well-being.

Technology and Data Implications for the Public Health Workforce.

Achieving a modern equity-oriented public health system requires the development of a public health workforce with the skills and competencies needed to generate findings and integrate knowledge using diverse data. Yet current workforce capabilities and infrastructure are misaligned with what is needed to harness both new and older forms of data and to translate them into information that is equity contextualized. As with other articles in this supplement, this article builds from a literature review, environmental scan, and deliberations from the National Commission to Transform Public Health Data Systems. The article summarizes some of the challenges around current workforce capabilities and pipeline. The article identifies where the technology and data sectors can contribute skills, expertise, and assets in support of innovative workforce models and augment the development of public health workforce competencies.

Summary of the 2020 AHRQ research meeting on 'advancing methods of implementing and evaluating patient experience improvement using consumer assessment of healthcare providers and systems (CAHPS®) surveys'.

BACKGROUND: The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality held a research meeting on using Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS®) data for quality improvement (QI) and evaluating such efforts. TOPICS COVERED.: Meeting addressed: 1)What has been learned about organizational factors/environment needed to improve patient experience? 2)How have organizations used data to improve patient experience? 3)What can evaluations using CAHPS data teach us about implementing successful programs to improve patient experience? KEY THEMES: Providers and stakeholders need to be engaged early and often, standardize QI processes, complement CAHPS data with other data, and compile dashboards of CAHPS scores to identify and track improvement. Rigorous study designs are valuable, but much can be learned and accomplished through practical organization-level studies.

Trends In Hospital Prices Paid By Private Health Plans Varied Substantially Across The US.

Commercial health plans pay higher prices than public payers for hospital care, which accounts for more than 5 percent of US gross domestic product. Crafting effective policy responses requires monitoring trends and identifying sources of variation. Relying on data from the Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System, we describe how commercial hospital payment rates changed relative to Medicare rates during 2012-19 and how trends differed by hospital referral region (HRR). We found that average commercial-to-Medicare price ratios were relatively stable, but trends varied substantially across HRRs. Among HRRs with high price ratios in 2012, ratios increased by 38 percentage points in regions in the top quartile of growth and decreased by 38 percentage points in regions in the bottom quartile. Our findings suggest that restraining the growth rate of HRR commercial hospital price ratios to the national average during our sample period would have reduced aggregate spending by $39 billion in 2019.

Worker and employer experiences with COVID-19 and the California Workers' Compensation System: A review of the literature.

BACKGROUND: Given workplace risks from COVID-19, California policymakers passed Senate Bill (SB) 1159 to facilitate access to workers' compensation (WC) benefits for frontline workers. However there has been no review of the available evidence needed to inform policy decisions about COVID-19 and WC. METHODS: We conducted a literature review on worker and employer experiences surrounding COVID-19 and WC, adhering to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. RESULTS: Forty articles were included (16 about worker experiences and 24 about employer practices). Most were not about experiences and practices related to COVID-19 and WC. Worker studies indicated that paid sick leave reduced new COVID-19 cases and COVID-19 activity. Studies also found that rural agricultural and food processing workers lacked sick leave protection and faced severe housing and food insecurity. Studies on workplace health and safety indicated that healthcare workers with access to personal protective equipment had lower stress levels. Studies about employer practices found that unrestricted work in high-contact industries was associated with increased risks to at-risk workers, and with health disparities. No studies examined worker COVID-19 experiences and WC claims or benefits, job loss, retaliation, workers' medical care experiences, and return-to-work or leave practices. CONCLUSIONS: Our review identified experiences and practice related to COVID-19 and the WC system, but not specifically about WC and COVID-19 WC claims or benefits. Further research is needed to document and understand evidence underpinning the need for WC coverage for COVID-19 and to evaluate the impact of the current SB 1159 bill on WC in California.

Synergies between centralized and federated approaches to data quality: a report from the national COVID cohort collaborative.

OBJECTIVE: In response to COVID-19, the informatics community united to aggregate as much clinical data as possible to characterize this new disease and reduce its impact through collaborative analytics. The National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C) is now the largest publicly available HIPAA limited dataset in US history with over 6.4 million patients and is a testament to a partnership of over 100 organizations. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We developed a pipeline for ingesting, harmonizing, and centralizing data from 56 contributing data partners using 4 federated Common Data Models. N3C data quality (DQ) review involves both automated and manual procedures. In the process, several DQ heuristics were discovered in our centralized context, both within the pipeline and during downstream project-based analysis. Feedback to the sites led to many local and centralized DQ improvements. RESULTS: Beyond well-recognized DQ findings, we discovered 15 heuristics relating to source Common Data Model conformance, demographics, COVID tests, conditions, encounters, measurements, observations, coding completeness, and fitness for use. Of 56 sites, 37 sites (66%) demonstrated issues through these heuristics. These 37 sites demonstrated improvement after receiving feedback. DISCUSSION: We encountered site-to-site differences in DQ which would have been challenging to discover using federated checks alone. We have demonstrated that centralized DQ benchmarking reveals unique opportunities for DQ improvement that will support improved research analytics locally and in aggregate. CONCLUSION: By combining rapid, continual assessment of DQ with a large volume of multisite data, it is possible to support more nuanced scientific questions with the scale and rigor that they require.

Obesity in Inflammatory Bowel Disease Is Associated with Early Readmissions Characterised by an Increased Systems and Patient-level Burden.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Rates of obesity are rising in patients with inflammatory bowel disease [IBD]. We conducted a US population-based study to determine the effects of obesity on outcomes in hospitalised patients with IBD. METHODS: We searched the Nationwide Readmissions Database 2016-2017 to identify all adult patients hospitalised for IBD, using ICD-10 codes. We compared obese (body mass index [BMI] ≥ 30) vs non-obese [BMI < 30] patients with IBD to evaluate the independent effects of obesity on readmission, mortality, and other hospital outcomes. Multivariate regression and propensity matching were performed. RESULTS: We identified 143 190 patients with IBD, of whom 9.1% were obese. Obesity was independently associated with higher all-cause readmission at 30 days {18% vs 13% (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.16, p = 0.005)} and 90 days (29% vs 21% [aOR 1.27, p < 0.0001]), as compared with non-obese patients, with similar findings upon a propensity-matched sensitivity analysis. Obese and non-obese patients had similar risks of mortality on index admission [0.24% vs 0.31%, p = 0.18] and readmission [1.5% vs 1.8% p = 0.3]. Obese patients had longer [5.3 vs 4.9 days] and more expensive [USD12,195 vs USD11,154] hospitalisations on index admission. Obesity did not affect the risk of intestinal surgery or bowel obstruction. Compared with index admissions, readmissions were characterised by increased mortality [6-fold], health care use, and bowel obstruction [3-fold] [all p < 0.0001]. CONCLUSIONS: Obesity in IBD appears to be associated with increased early readmission, characterised by a higher burden, despite the introduction of weight-based therapeutics. Prevention of obesity should be a focus in the treatment of IBD to decrease readmission and health care burden.

Association Between COVID-19 Relief Funds and Hospital Characteristics in the US.

Importance: In response to financial stress created by the reduction in care during the COVID-19 pandemic, hospitals received financial assistance through the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act program. To date, the allocation of CARES Act funding is not well understood. Objective: To examine the disbursement of the High-Impact Distribution CARES Act funds and the association between financial assistance and hospital-level financial resources prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. Design Setting and Participants: This cross-sectional analysis of US-based hospitals and health systems assesses the hospital characteristics associated with CARES Act funding with linear regression models using linked hospital and health system-level information on CARES Act funding with hospital characteristics from Hospital Cost Report data. Exposures: Hospital and health system CARES Act financial assistance. Main Outcomes and Measures: Hospital and health system affiliation, status, and financial health prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. Data analysis took place from December 2020 through June 2021. Results: The analysis included 952 hospital-level entities with an average payment of $33.6 million, most of which was received during the first payment round. Wide ranges existed in CARES Act funding, with 24% of matched hospitals receiving less than $5 million in funding and 8% receiving more than $50 million. Academic-affiliated hospitals, hospitals with higher pre-COVID-19 assets and hospitals with higher COVID-19 cases received higher levels of funding, while critical access hospitals received lower levels of financial assistance. A 10% increase in hospital assets, endowment size, and COVID-19 cases was associated with 1.4% (95% CI, 0.8% to 2.0%; P = .003), 0.2% (95% CI, 0.1% to 0.3%; P < .001), and 3.5% (95% CI, 2.8% to 4.2%; P < .001) increases in CARES Act funding, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study of US hospitals and health systems, findings suggest that High-Impact Distribution CARES Act funds may have disproportionately gone to hospitals that were in a stronger financial situation prior to the pandemic compared with those that were not, but funds also went disproportionately to those that eventually had the most cases.

Practice Expenses Associated with Comprehensive Primary Care Capabilities.

Through the Comprehensive Primary Care (CPC) and Comprehensive Primary Care Plus (CPC+) programs, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) has encouraged primary care practices to invest in "comprehensive primary care" capabilities. Empirical evidence suggests these capabilities are under-reimbursed or not reimbursed under prevailing fee-for-service payment models. To help CMS design alternative payment models (APMs) that reimburse the costs of these capabilities, the authors developed a method for estimating related practice expenses. Fifty practices, sampled for diversity across CPC+ participation status, geographic region, rural status, size, and parent-organization affiliation, completed the study. Researchers developed a mixed-methods strategy, beginning with interviews of practice leaders to identify their capabilities and the types of costs incurred. This was followed by researcher-assisted completion of a workbook tailored to each practice, which gathered related labor and nonlabor costs. In a final interview, practice leaders reviewed cost estimates and made any needed corrections before approval. A main goal was to address a persistent question faced by CMS: When practices reported widely divergent costs for a given capability, was that divergence due to practices having different prices for the same capability or from their having substantially different capabilities? The cost estimation method developed in this project collected detailed data on practice capabilities and their costs. However, the small sample did not allow quantitative estimation of the contributions of service level and pricing to the variation in overall costs. This cost estimation method, deployed on a larger scale, could generate robust data to inform new payment models aimed at incentivizing and sustaining comprehensive primary care.

Michigan Pharmacists Transforming Care and Quality: Developing a Statewide Collaborative of Physician Organizations and Pharmacists to Improve Quality of Care and Reduce Costs.

BACKGROUND: Inappropriate drug use, increasing complexity of drug regimens, continued pressure to control costs, and focus on shared accountability for clinical measures drive the need to leverage the medication expertise of pharmacists in direct patient care. A statewide strategy based on the collaboration of pharmacists and physicians regarding patient care was developed to improve disease state management and medication-related outcomes. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION: Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan (BCBSM) partnered with Michigan Medicine to develop and implement a statewide provider-payer program called Michigan Pharmacists Transforming Care and Quality (MPTCQ), which integrates pharmacists within physician practices throughout the state of Michigan. As the MPTCQ Coordinating Center, Michigan Medicine established an infrastructure integrating clinical pharmacists into direct patient care within patient-centered medical home (PCMH) practices and provides direction and guidance for quality and process improvement across physician organizations (POs) and their affiliated physician practices. The primary goal of MPTCQ is to improve patient care and outcomes related to Medicare star ratings and HEDIS measures through integration of clinical pharmacists into direct patient care. The short-term goal is to adopt and modify Michigan Medicine's integrated pharmacist practice model at participating POs, with the long-term goal of developing a sustainable model of pharmacist integration at each PO to improve patient care and outcomes. Initially, pharmacists are delivering disease management (diabetes, hypertension, and hyperlipidemia) and comprehensive medication review services with future plans to expand clinical services. OBSERVATIONS: In 2015, 10 POs participated in year 1 of the program. In collaboration with the MPTCQ Coordinating Center, each PO identified 1 "pharmacist transformation champion" (PTC). The PTC implemented the integrated pharmacist model at 2 or 3 practice sites with at least 2 practicing physicians per site. IMPLICATIONS: MPTCQ is a unique collaboration between a large academic institution, physician organizations, a payer, and a statewide coordinating center to improve patient care and address medication-related challenges by integrating pharmacists into a PCMH network. Pharmacists can actively provide their medication expertise to physicians and patients and optimize quality measure performance. DISCLOSURES: This project was funded by Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan. Choe and Spahlinger are employees of Michigan Medicine. Tungol Lin, Kobernik, Cohen, Qureshi, Leyden, and Darland are employees of Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan. At the time of manuscript preparation, Share and Wesolowicz were employees of Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan. Study concept and design were primarily contributed by Choe, along with the other authors. Choe, Tungol Lin, and Kobernik collected data, and data interpretation was performed by Choe, Tungol Lin, Cohen, and Wesolowicz. The manuscript was written primarily by Choe, along with Tungol Lin and assisted by Kobernik, Cohen, Leyden, and Qureshi. The manuscript was revised by Leyden, Spahlinger, Share, and Darland. Material from this manuscript was previously presented as an education session at the 2016 AMCP Managed Care & Specialty Pharmacy Annual Meeting; April 19-22, 2016; San Francisco, California.

Sterile compounding: clinical, legal, and regulatory implications for patient safety.

BACKGROUND: Poor compounding practices by the New England Compounding Center resulted in the 2012-2013 fungal infections outbreak. Contaminated injectable methylprednisolone led to the diagnosis of fungal infections in 751 patients and 64 deaths. In the United States, pharmacy compounding has traditionally been regulated by state boards of pharmacy rather than the FDA. To minimize safety risks related to pharmacy compounding, the Drug Quality and Security Act (DQSA) was signed into law November 27, 2013, to improve regulation of compounding pharmacies. OBJECTIVES: To (a) review the literature regarding clinical, legal, and regulatory implications of pharmacy compounding for patient safety during the 2012-2013 fungal infections outbreak and (b) discuss strategies that managed care organizations (MCOs) can use to promote safe compounding practices.  METHODS: A literature search was conducted via PubMed for original articles on fungal infections related to drug compounding published October 2012 to March 2014. Specific search terms included "drug compounding and fungal infection" and "fungal meningitis outbreak." The FDA website was also utilized for material related to the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and the DQSA.  RESULTS: Four articles met inclusion criteria. The 2012-2013 fungal infections outbreak was attributed to 3 lots of preservative-free methylprednisolone acetate, which comprised 17,675 vials distributed to 76 facilities across 23 states. Median incubation period (from time of last injection to initial diagnosis) was 47 days, ranging from 0 to 249 days. According to the FDA, a total of 30 recalls regarding compounded products were issued by pharmacies during March through December 2013. CONCLUSIONS: Pharmacy compounding has the potential for significant safety risks. The purpose of the DQSA is to improve regulation of compounding pharmacies. Since registration as an outsourcing facility is voluntary, uncertainty still remains regarding advancement in safe compounding practices. MCOs can employ multiple strategies to ensure patient safety and promote appropriate drug therapy.