Quantifying EHR and Policy Factors Associated with the Gender Productivity Gap in Ambulatory, General Internal Medicine.

BACKGROUND: The gender gap in physician compensation has persisted for decades. Little is known about how differences in use of the electronic health record (EHR) may contribute. OBJECTIVE: To characterize how time on clinical activities, time on the EHR, and clinical productivity vary by physician gender and to identify factors associated with physician productivity. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This longitudinal study included general internal medicine physicians employed by a large ambulatory practice network in the Northeastern United States from August 2018 to June 2021. MAIN MEASURES: Monthly data on physician work relative value units (wRVUs), physician and practice characteristics, metrics of EHR use and note content, and temporal trend variables. KEY RESULTS: The analysis included 3227 physician-months of data for 108 physicians (44% women). Compared with men physicians, women physicians generated 23.8% fewer wRVUs per month, completed 22.1% fewer visits per month, spent 4.0 more minutes/visit and 8.72 more minutes on the EHR per hour worked (all p < 0.001), and typed or dictated 36.4% more note characters per note (p = 0.006). With multivariable adjustment for physician age, practice characteristics, EHR use, and temporal trends, physician gender was no longer associated with productivity (men 4.20 vs. women 3.88 wRVUs/hour, p = 0.31). Typing/dictating fewer characters per note, relying on greater teamwork to manage orders, and spending less time on documentation were associated with higher wRVUs/hour. The 2021 E/M code change was associated with higher wRVUs/hour for all physicians: 10% higher for men physicians and 18% higher for women physicians (p < 0.001 and p = 0.009, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Increased team support, briefer documentation, and the 2021 E/M code change were associated with higher physician productivity. The E/M code change may have preferentially benefited women physicians by incentivizing time-intensive activities such as medical decision-making, preventive care discussion, and patient counseling that women physicians have historically spent more time performing.

Refining quality measures for electrodiagnostic testing in suspected carpal tunnel syndrome to account for acceptable variations in practice: Expert review process.

INTRODUCTION/AIMS: Using a set of process-of-care quality measures for electrodiagnostic testing in suspected carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS), the research team previously documented large variations in electrodiagnostic testing practices and adherence to quality measures. This study sought to enhance the applicability and validity of the quality measures by integrating acceptable variations in testing practices. METHODS: We recruited 13 expert electrodiagnostic medicine specialists from five specialty societies. The experts iteratively refined five quality measures, and then rated the validity of the refined quality measures (1-9 scale). During this process, the experts reviewed data on adherence to existing quality measures and variations in electrodiagnostic testing practices, and considered recently published quality measures from the American Association of Neuromuscular and Electrodiagnostic Medicine. RESULTS: Three quality measures (electrodiagnostic testing before surgery for CTS, temperature assessment during electrodiagnostic testing, and electrodiagnostic criteria for severe median neuropathy) underwent few refinements and were rated valid (medians 8-9). Two measures (essential components of electrodiagnosis, criteria for interpreting electrodiagnostic tests as median neuropathy) were judged valid (medians 8) after revisions. For these measures, experts' ratings on the recommended components of sensory or mixed nerve conduction studies varied: agreement among the experts about the use of sensory peak latency was greater than for onset latency or sensory velocity. DISCUSSION: This study produced quality measures that provide minimum standards for electrodiagnostic testing for suspected CTS that are more comprehensive and nuanced than prior versions. Future work can assess the feasibility, reliability, and validity of these refined measures in diverse physician practices.

Geographic access to pediatric neurosurgeons in the USA: an analysis of sociodemographic factors.

PURPOSE: Geographic access to physicians has been shown to be unevenly distributed in the USA, with those in closer proximity having superior outcomes. The purpose of this study was to describe how geographic access to pediatric neurosurgeons varies across socioeconomic and demographic factors. METHODS: Actively practicing neurosurgeons were identified by matching several registries and membership logs. This data was used to find their primary practice locations and the distance the average person in a county must travel to visit a surgeon. Counties were categorized into "surgeon deserts" and "surgeon clusters," which were counties where providers were significantly further or closer to its residents, respectively, compared to the national average. These groups were also compared for differences in population characteristics using data obtained from the 2020 American Community Survey. RESULTS: A total of 439 pediatric neurosurgeons were identified. The average person in a surgeon desert and cluster was found to be 189.2 ± 78.1 miles and 39.7 ± 19.6 miles away from the nearest pediatric neurosurgeon, respectively. Multivariate analyses showed that higher Rural-Urban Continuum (RUC) codes (p < 0.001), and higher percentages of American Indian (p < 0.001) and Hispanic (p < 0.001) residents were independently associated with counties where the average person traveled significantly further to surgeons. CONCLUSION: Patients residing in counties with greater RUC codes and higher percentages of American Indian and Hispanic residents on average need to travel significantly greater distances to access pediatric neurosurgeons.

Variations in surgical practice and short-term outcomes for degenerative lumbar scoliosis and spondylolisthesis: do surgeon training and experience matter?

For diverse procedures, sizable geographic variation exists in rates and outcomes of surgery, including for degenerative lumbar spine conditions. Little is known about how surgeon training and experience are associated with surgeon-level variations in spine surgery practice and short-term outcomes. This retrospective observational analysis characterized variations in surgical operations for degenerative lumbar scoliosis or spondylolisthesis, two common age-related conditions. The study setting was two large spine surgery centers in one region during 2017-19. Using data (International Classification of Diseases-10th edition and current procedural terminology codes) extracted from electronic health record systems, we characterized surgeon-level variations in practice (use of instrumented fusion - a more extensive procedure that involves device-related risks) and short-term postoperative outcomes (major in-hospital complications and readmissions). Next, we tested for associations between surgeon training (specialty and spine fellowship) and experience (career stage and operative volume) and use of instrumented fusion as well as outcomes. Eighty-nine surgeons performed 2481 eligible operations. For the study diagnoses, spine surgeons exhibited substantial variation in operative volume, use of instrumented fusion, and postoperative outcomes. Among surgeons above the median operative volume, use of instrumented fusion ranged from 0% to >90% for scoliosis and 9% to 100% for spondylolisthesis, while rates of major in-hospital complications ranged from 0% to 25% for scoliosis and from 0% to 14% for spondylolisthesis. For scoliosis, orthopedic surgeons were more likely than neurosurgeons to perform instrumented fusion for scoliosis [49% vs. 33%, odds ratio (OR) = 2.3, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.3-4.2, P-value = .006] as were fellowship-trained surgeons (49% vs. 25%, OR = 3.0, 95% CI 1.6-5.8; P = .001). Fellowship-trained surgeons had lower readmission rates. Surgeons with higher operative volumes used instrumented fusion more often (OR = 1.1, 95% CI 1.0-1.2, P < .05 for both diagnoses) and had lower rates of major in-hospital complications (OR = 0.91, 95% CI 0.85-0.97; P = .006). Surgical practice can vary greatly for degenerative spine conditions, even within the same region and among colleagues at the same institution. Surgical specialty and subspecialty, in addition to recent operative volume, can be linked to variations in spine surgeons' practice patterns and outcomes. These findings reinforce the notion that residency and fellowship training may contribute to variation and present important opportunities to optimize surgical practice over the course of surgeons' careers. Future efforts to reduce unexplained variation in surgical practice could test interventions focused on graduate medical education. Graphical Abstract.

Medication Safety Event Reporting: Factors That Contribute to Safety Events During Times of Organizational Stress.

BACKGROUND: Incident reports submitted during times of organizational stress may reveal unique insights. PURPOSE: To understand the insights conveyed in hospital incident reports about how work system factors affected medication safety during a coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) surge. METHODS: We randomly selected 100 medication safety incident reports from an academic medical center (December 2020 to January 2021), identified near misses and errors, and classified contributing work system factors using the Human Factors Analysis and Classification System-Healthcare. RESULTS: Among 35 near misses/errors, incident reports described contributing factors (mean 1.3/report) involving skill-based errors (n = 20), communication (n = 8), and tools/technology (n = 4). Reporters linked 7 events to COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: Skill-based errors were the most common contributing factors for medication safety events during a COVID-19 surge. Reporters rarely deemed events to be related to COVID-19, despite the tremendous strain of the surge on nurses. Future efforts to improve the utility of incident reports should emphasize the importance of describing work system factors.

The quality of occupational healthcare for carpal tunnel syndrome, healthcare expenditures, and disability outcomes: A prospective observational study.

INTRODUCTION/AIMS: In prior work, higher quality care for work-associated carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) was associated with improved symptoms, functional status, and overall health. We sought to examine whether quality of care is associated with healthcare expenditures or disability. METHODS: Among 343 adults with workers' compensation claims for CTS, we created patient-level aggregate quality scores for underuse (not receiving highly beneficial care) and overuse (receiving care for which risks exceed benefits). We assessed whether each aggregate quality score (0%-100%, 100% = better care) was associated with healthcare expenditures (18-mo expenditures, any anticipated need for future expenditures) or disability (days on temporary disability, permanent impairment rating at 18 mo). RESULTS: Mean aggregate quality scores were 77.8% (standard deviation [SD] 16.5%) for underuse and 89.2% (SD 11.0%) for overuse. An underuse score of 100% was associated with higher risk-adjusted 18-mo expenditures ($3672; 95% confidence interval [CI] $324 to $7021) but not with future expenditures (-0.07 percentage points; 95% CI -0.48 to 0.34), relative to a score of 0%. An overuse score of 100% was associated with lower 18-mo expenditures (-$4549, 95% CI -$8792 to -$306) and a modestly lower likelihood of future expenditures (-0.62 percentage points, 95% CI -1.23 to -0.02). Quality of care was not associated with disability. DISCUSSION: Improving quality of care could increase or lower short-term healthcare expenditures, depending on how often care is currently underused or overused. Future research is needed on quality of care in varied workers' compensation contexts, as well as effective and economical strategies for improving quality.

Comparison of Advance Care Planning and End-of-Life Care Intensity Between Dementia Versus Cancer Patients.

BACKGROUND: While advanced care planning (ACP) is recommended in dementia and cancer care, there are unique challenges in ACP for individuals with dementia, such as the insidious onset and progression of cognitive impairment, potentially leading to high-intensity care at the end of life (EOL) for this population. OBJECTIVE: To compare ACP completion and receipt of high-intensity care at the EOL between decedents with dementia versus cancer. DESIGN: Retrospective longitudinal cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: Participants of the U.S. Health and Retirement Study who died between 2000 and 2014 with dementia (n = 2099) and cancer (n = 1137). MAIN MEASURES: Completion of three types of ACP (living will, durable power of attorney for healthcare [DPOAH], discussions of preferences for EOL care) and three measures of EOL care intensity (in-hospital death, intensive care unit [ICU] care in the last 2 years of life, life support use in the last 2 years of life). KEY RESULTS: Use of living will was lower in dementia than in cancer (adjusted proportion, 49.9% vs. 56.9%; difference, - 7.0 percentage points [pp, 95% CI, - 13.3 to - 0.7]; p = 0.03). Use of DPOAH was similar between the two groups, but a lower proportion of decedents with dementia had discussed preferences compared to decedents with cancer (53.0% vs. 68.1%; - 15.1 pp [95% CI, - 19.3 to - 10.9]; p < 0.001). In-hospital death was higher in dementia than in cancer (29.5% vs. 19.8%; + 9.7 pp [95% CI, + 5.9 to + 13.5]; p < 0.001), although use of ICU care was lower (20.9% vs. 26.1%; - 5.2 pp [95% CI, - 9.8 to - 0.7]; p = 0.03). Use of life support was similar between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Individuals with dementia complete ACP less frequently and might be receiving higher-intensity EOL care than those with cancer. Interventions targeting individuals with dementia may be necessary to further improve EOL care for this population.

Do Proposed Quality Measures for Carpal Tunnel Release Reveal Important Quality Gaps and Are They Reliable?

BACKGROUND: The American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons recently proposed quality measures for the initial surgical treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS). One measure addressed avoidance of adjunctive surgical procedures during carpal tunnel release; and a second measure addressed avoidance of routine use of clinic-based occupational and/or physical therapy (OT/PT) after carpal tunnel release. However, for quality measures to serve their intended purposes, they must be tested in real-world data to establish that gaps in quality exist and that the measures yield reliable performance information. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) Is there an important quality gap in clinical practice for avoidance of adjunctive surgical procedures during carpal tunnel release? (2) Is there an important quality gap in avoiding routine use of clinic-based occupational and/or physical therapy after carpal tunnel release? (3) Do these two quality measures have adequate beta-binomial signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and split-sample reliability (SSR)? METHODS: This retrospective comparative study used a large national private insurance claims database, the 2018 Optum Clinformatics® Data Mart. Ideally, healthcare quality measures are tested within data reflective of the providers and payors to which the measures will be applied. We previously tested these measures in a large public healthcare system and a single academic medical center. In this study, we sought to test the measures in the broader context of patients and providers using private insurance. For both measures, we included the first carpal tunnel release from 28,083 patients performed by one of 7236 surgeons, irrespective of surgical specialty (including, orthopaedic, plastic, neuro-, and general surgery). To calculate surgeon-level descriptive and reliability statistics, analyses were focused on the 66% (18,622 of 28,083) of patients who received their procedure from one of the 24% (1740 of 7236) of surgeons with at least five carpal tunnel releases in the database. No other inclusion/exclusion criteria were applied. To determine whether the measures reveal important gaps in treatment quality (avoidance of adjunctive procedures and routine therapy), we calculated descriptive statistics (median and interquartile range) of the performance distribution stratified by surgeon-level annual volume of carpal tunnel releases in the database (5+, 10+, 15+, 20+, 25+, and 30+). Like the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), we considered a measure "topped out" if median performance was greater than 95%, meaning the opportunity for further quality improvement is low. We calculated the surgeon-level beta-binomial SNR and SSR for each measure, each stratified by the number of carpal tunnel releases performed by each surgeon in the database. These are standard measures of reliability in health care quality measurement science. The SNR quantifies the proportion of variance that is between rather than within surgeons, and the SSR is the correlation of performance scores when each surgeons' patients are split into two random samples and then corrected for sample size. RESULTS: We found that 2% (308 of 18,622) of carpal tunnel releases involved an adjunctive procedure. The results showed that avoidance of adjunctive surgical procedures during carpal tunnel release had a median (IQR) performance of 100% (100% to 100%) at all case volumes. Only 8% (144 of 1740) of surgeons with at least five cases in the database had less than 100% performance, and only 5% (84 of 1740) had less than 90% performance. This means adjunctive procedures were rarely performed and an important quality gap does not exist based on the CMS criterion. Regarding the avoidance of routine therapy, there was a larger quality gap: For surgeons with at least five cases in the database, median performance was 89% (75% to 100%), and 25% (435 of 1740) of these surgeons had less than 75% performance. This signifies that the measure is not topped out and may reveal an important quality gap. Most patients receiving clinic-based OT/PT had only one visit in the 6 weeks after surgery. Median (IQR) SNRs of the first measure, which addressed avoidance of adjunctive surgical procedures, and the second measure, which addresses avoidance of routine use clinic-based OT/PT, were 1.00 (1.00 to 1.00) and 0.86 (0.67 to 1.00), respectively. The SSR for these measures were 0.87 (95% CI 0.85 to 0.88) and 0.75 (95% CI 0.73 to 0.77), respectively. All of these reliability statistics exceed National Quality Forum's emerging minimum standard of 0.60. CONCLUSION: The first measure, the avoidance of adjunctive surgical procedures during carpal tunnel release, lacked an important quality gap suggesting it is unlikely to be useful in driving improvements. The second measure, avoidance of routine use of clinic-based OT/PT, revealed a larger quality gap and had very good reliability, suggesting it may be useful for quality monitoring and improvement purposes. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: As healthcare systems and payors use the second measure, avoidance of routine use of clinic-based OT/PT, to encourage adherence to clinical practice guidelines (such as provider profiling, public reporting, and payment policies), it will be critically important to consider what proportion of patients receiving OT/PT should be considered routine practice and therefore inconsistent with guidelines. The value or potential harm of this measure depends on this judgement.

Digital Tools Designed to Obtain the History of Present Illness From Patients: Scoping Review.

BACKGROUND: Many medical conditions, perhaps 80% of them, can be diagnosed by taking a thorough history of present illness (HPI). However, in the clinical setting, situational factors such as interruptions and time pressure may cause interactions with patients to be brief and fragmented. One solution for improving clinicians' ability to collect a thorough HPI and maximize efficiency and quality of care could be to use a digital tool to obtain the HPI before face-to-face evaluation by a clinician. OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to identify and characterize digital tools that have been designed to obtain the HPI directly from patients or caregivers and present this information to clinicians before a face-to-face encounter. We also sought to describe outcomes reported in testing of these tools, especially those related to usability, efficiency, and quality of care. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review using predefined search terms in the following databases: MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science, Embase, IEEE Xplore Digital Library, ACM Digital Library, and ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. Two reviewers screened titles and abstracts for relevance, performed full-text reviews of articles meeting the inclusion criteria, and used a pile-sorting procedure to identify distinguishing characteristics of the tools. Information describing the tools was primarily obtained from identified peer-reviewed sources; in addition, supplementary information was obtained from tool websites and through direct communications with tool creators. RESULTS: We identified 18 tools meeting the inclusion criteria. Of these 18 tools, 14 (78%) used primarily closed-ended and multiple-choice questions, 1 (6%) used free-text input, and 3 (17%) used conversational (chatbot) style. More than half (10/18, 56%) of the tools were tailored to specific patient subpopulations; the remaining (8/18, 44%) tools did not specify a target subpopulation. Of the 18 tools, 7 (39%) included multilingual support, and 12 (67%) had the capability to transfer data directly into the electronic health record. Studies of the tools reported on various outcome measures related to usability, efficiency, and quality of care. CONCLUSIONS: The HPI tools we identified (N=18) varied greatly in their purpose and functionality. There was no consensus on how patient-generated information should be collected or presented to clinicians. Existing tools have undergone inconsistent levels of testing, with a wide variety of different outcome measures used in evaluation, including some related to usability, efficiency, and quality of care. There is substantial interest in using digital tools to obtain the HPI from patients, but the outcomes measured have been inconsistent. Future research should focus on whether using HPI tools can lead to improved patient experience and health outcomes, although surrogate end points could instead be used so long as patient safety is monitored.

Unmet Medical Needs Among Adults Who Move due to Unaffordable Housing: California Health Interview Survey, 2011-2017.

BACKGROUND: Stable, affordable housing is an established determinant of health. As affordable housing shortages across the USA threaten to displace people from their homes, it is important to understand the implications of cost-related residential moves for healthcare access. OBJECTIVE: To examine the relationship between cost-related moves and unmet medical needs. DESIGN: We performed a cross-sectional analysis of 7 waves (2011-2017) of the California Health Interview Survey. PARTICIPANTS: We included all respondents ages 18 and older. MAIN MEASURES: The primary predictor variable was residential move history in the past 5 years (cost-related move, non-cost-related move, or no move). The primary outcome was unmet medical needs in the past year (necessary medications and/or medical care that were delayed or not received). KEY RESULTS: Our sample included 146,417 adults (42-47% response rate), representing a weighted population of 28,518,590. Overall, 20.3% of the sample reported unmet medical needs in the past year, and 4.9% reported a cost-related move in the past 5 years. In multivariable logistic regression models, adjusted risk of unmet medical needs increased for adults with both cost-related moves (aOR 1.38; 95% CI 1.19-1.59) and non-cost-related moves (aOR 1.17; 95% CI 1.09-1.26) compared to those with no moves. Among people who had moved, those with cost-related moves were more likely to report unmet medical needs compared to people with non-cost-related moves (p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: People who have moved due to unaffordable housing represent a population at increased risk for unmet medical needs. Policy makers seeking to improve population health should consider strategies to limit cost-related moves and to mitigate their adverse effects on healthcare access.

How do contraindications to non-opioid analgesics and opioids affect the likelihood that patients with back pain diagnoses in the primary care setting receive an opioid prescription? An observational cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Given the risks of opioids, clinicians are under growing pressure to treat pain with non-opioid medications. Yet non-opioid analgesics such as non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) have their own risks: patients with kidney disease or gastrointestinal diseases can experience serious adverse events. We examined the likelihood that patients with back pain diagnoses and contraindications to NSAIDs and opioids received an opioid prescription in primary care. METHODS: We identified office visits for back pain from 2012 to 2017 and sampled the first office visit per patient per year (N = 24,543 visits). We created indicators reflecting contraindications for NSAIDs (kidney, liver, cardiovascular/cerebrovascular, and gastrointestinal diseases; concurrent or chronic use of anticoagulants/antiplatelets, chronic corticosteroid use) and opioids (depression, anxiety, substance use (SUD) and bipolar disorders, and concurrent benzodiazepines) and estimated four logistic regression models, with the one model including all patient visits and models 2-4 stratifying for previous opioid use. We estimated the population attributable risk for each contraindication. RESULTS: In our model with all patients-visits, patients received an opioid prescription at 4% of visits. The predicted probability (PP) of receiving an opioid was 4% without kidney disease vs. 7% with kidney disease; marginal effect (ME): 3%; 95%CI: 1-4%). For chronic or concurrent anticoagulant/antiplatelet prescriptions, the PPs were 4% vs. 6% (ME: 2%; 95%CI: 1-3%). For concurrent benzodiazepines, the PPs were 4% vs. 11% (ME: 7%, 95%CI: 5-9%) and for SUD, the PPs were 4% vs. 5% (ME: 1%, 95%CI: 0-3%). For the model including patients with previous long-term opioid use, the PPs for concurrent benzodiazepines were 25% vs. 24% (ME: -1%; 95%CI: - 18-16%). The population attributable risk (PAR) for NSAID and opioid contraindications was small. For kidney disease, the PAR was 0.16% (95%CI: 0.08-0.23%), 0.44% (95%CI: 0.30-0.58%) for anticoagulants and antiplatelets, 0.13% for substance use (95%CI: 0.03-0.22%) and 0.20% for concurrent benzodiazepine use (95%CI: 0.13-0.26%). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with diagnoses of kidney disease and concurrent use of anticoagulants/antiplatelet medications had a higher probability of receiving an opioid prescription at a primary care visit for low back pain, but these conditions do not explain a large proportion of the opioid prescriptions.

How Do Clinicians of Different Specialties Perceive and Use Opioid Risk Mitigation Strategies? A Qualitative Study.

BACKGROUND: In response to the opioid crisis, states and health systems are encouraging clinicians to use risk mitigation strategies aimed at assessing a patient's risk for opioid misuse or abuse: opioid agreements, prescription drug monitoring programs (PDMPs), and urine drug tests (UDT). Objective: The objective of this qualitative study was to understand how clinicians perceived and used risk mitigation strategies for opioid abuse/misuse and identify barriers to implementation. Methods: We interviewed clinicians who prescribe opioid medications in the outpatient setting from 2016-2018 and analyzed the data using Constructivist Grounded Theory methodology. Results: We interviewed 21 primary care clinicians and 12 specialists. Nearly all clinicians reported using the PDMP. Some clinicians (adopters) found the opioid agreement and UDTs to be valuable, but most (non-adopters) did not. Adopters found the agreements and UDTs helpful in treating patients equitably, setting limits, and having objective evidence of misuse; protocols and workflows facilitated the use of the strategies. Non-adopters perceived the strategies as awkward, disruptive to the clinician-patient relationship, and introducing a power differential; they also cited lack of time and resources as barriers to use. Conclusions: Our study demonstrates that clinicians in certain settings have found effective ways to implement and use the PDMP, opioid agreements, and UDT but that other clinicians are less comfortable with their use. Administrators and policymakers should ensure that the strategies are designed in a way that strengthens the clinician-patient relationship while maximizing safety for patients and that clinicians are adequately trained and supported when introducing the strategies.

Quality of electrodiagnostic testing for carpal tunnel syndrome: adherence to quality measures.

INTRODUCTION: Research has shown that quality of health-care services is often suboptimal. Little is known about the quality of electrodiagnostic testing. METHODS: We prospectively recruited 477 adults with workers' compensation claims for carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) from 30 occupational health clinics and evaluated whether electrodiagnostic testing adhered to five process-oriented quality measures. RESULTS: Among patients who had surgery for CTS, nearly all underwent recommended preoperative electrodiagnostic testing (measure #1, 170 of 174, 97.7%). Most electrodiagnostic tests included essential components (measure #2, 295 of 379, 77.8%). However, few reports documented skin temperature (measure #3, 93 of 379, 24.5%) and criteria were seldom met for interpreting test findings as consistent with CTS (measure #4, 41 of 284, 14.4%) or "severe" CTS (measure #5, 8 of 46, 17.4%). DISCUSSION: Most patients underwent testing before surgery, but test quality was often suboptimal. This work lays the groundwork for future efforts to monitor and improve the quality of electrodiagnostic testing for CTS.

The quality of electrodiagnostic tests for carpal tunnel syndrome: Implications for surgery, outcomes, and expenditures.

INTRODUCTION: The quality of electrodiagnostic tests may influence treatment decisions, particularly regarding surgery, affecting health outcomes and health-care expenditures. METHODS: We evaluated test quality among 338 adults with workers' compensation claims for carpal tunnel syndrome. Using simulations, we examined how it influences the appropriateness of surgery. Using regression, we evaluated associations with symptoms and functional limitations (Boston Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire), overall health (12-item Short Form Health Survey version 2), actual receipt of surgery, and expenditures. RESULTS: In simulations, suboptimal quality tests rendered surgery inappropriate for 99 of 309 patients (+32 percentage points). In regression analyses, patients with the highest quality tests had larger declines in symptoms (-0.50 point; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.89 to -0.12) and functional impairment (-0.42 point; 95% CI, -0.78 to -0.06) than patients with the lowest quality tests. Test quality was not associated with overall health, actual receipt of surgery, or expenditures. DISCUSSION: Test quality is pivotal to determining surgical appropriateness and associated with meaningful differences in symptoms and function.

Understanding Clinicians' Decisions to Assume Prescriptions for Inherited Patients on Long-term Opioid Therapy: A Qualitative Study.

OBJECTIVE: Given the changing political and social climate around opioids, we examined how clinicians in the outpatient setting made decisions about managing opioid prescriptions for new patients already on long-term opioid therapy. METHODS: We conducted in-depth interviews with 32 clinicians in Southern California who prescribed opioid medications in the outpatient setting for chronic pain. The study design, interview guides, and coding for this qualitative study were guided by constructivist grounded theory methodology. RESULTS: We identified three approaches to assuming a new patient's opioid prescriptions. Staunch Opposers, mostly clinicians with specialized training in pain medicine, were averse to continuing opioid prescriptions for new patients and often screened outpatients seeking opioids. Cautious and Conflicted Prescribers were wary about prescribing opioids but were willing to refill prescriptions if they perceived the patient as trustworthy and the medication fell within their comfort zone. Clinicians in the first two groups felt resentful about other clinicians "dumping" patients on opioids on them. Rapport Builders, mostly primary care physicians, were the most willing to assume opioid prescriptions and were strategic in their approach to transitioning patients to safer doses. CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians with the most training in pain management were the least willing to assume responsibility for opioid prescriptions for patients already on long-term opioid therapy. In contrast, primary care clinicians were the most willing to assume this responsibility. However, primary care clinicians face barriers to providing high-quality care for patients with complex pain conditions, such as short visit times and less specialized training.

Testing proposed quality measures for treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome: feasibility, magnitude of quality gaps, and reliability.

BACKGROUND: The American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons and American Society for Surgery of the Hand recently proposed three quality measures for carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS): Measure 1 - Discouraging routine use of Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for diagnosis of CTS; Measure 2 - Discouraging the use of adjunctive surgical procedures during carpal tunnel release (CTR); and Measure 3 - Discouraging the routine use of occupational and/or physical therapy after CTR. The goal of this study were to 1) Assess the feasibility of using the specifications to calculate the measures in real-world healthcare data and identify aspects of the specifications that might be clarified or improved; 2) Determine if the measures identify important variation in treatment quality that justifies expending resources for their further development and implementation; 3) Assess the facility- and surgeon-level reliability of measures. METHODS: The measures were calculated using national data from the Veterans Health Administration (VA) Corporate Data Warehouse for three fiscal years (FY; 2016-18). Facility- and surgeon-level performance and reliability were examined. To expand the testing context, the measures were also tested using data from an academic medical center. RESULTS: The denominator of Measure 1 was 132,049 VA patients newly diagnosed with CTS. The denominators of Measures 2 and 3 were 20,813 CTRs received by VA patients. The median facility-level performances on the three measures were 96.5, 100, and 94.7%, respectively. Of 130 VA facilities, none had < 90% performance on Measure 1. Among 111 facilities that performed CTRs, only 1 facility had < 90% performance on Measure 2. In contrast, 21 facilities (18.9%) and 333 surgeons (17.8%) had lower than 90% performance on Measure 3 (Median facility- and surgeon-level reliability for Measure 3 were very high (0.95 and 0.96 respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Measure 3 displayed adequate facility- and surgeon-level variability and reliability to justify its use for quality monitoring and improvement purposes. Measures 1 and 2 lacked quality gaps, suggesting they should not be implemented in VA and need to be tested in other healthcare settings. Opportunities exist to refine the specifications of Measure 3 to ensure that different organizations calculate the measure in the same way.

Trends in the Use of Skilled Nursing Facility and Home Health Care Under the Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program: An Interrupted Time-series Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Medicare's Hospital Readmission Reduction Program (HRRP) penalizes hospitals with elevated 30-day readmission rates for acute myocardial infarction (AMI), heart failure (HF), or pneumonia. To reduce readmissions, hospitals may have increased referrals to skilled nursing facilities (SNFs) and home health care. RESEARCH DESIGN: Outcomes included 30-day postdischarge utilization of SNF and home health care, including any use as well as days of use. Subjects included Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries aged 65 years and older who were admitted with AMI, HF, or pneumonia to hospitals subject to the HRRP. Using an interrupted time-series analysis, we compared utilization rates observed after the announcement of the HRRP (April 2010 through September 2012) and after the imposition of penalties (October 2012 through September 2014) with projected utilization rates that accounted for pre-HRRP trends (January 2008 through March 2010). Models included patient characteristics and hospital fixed effects. RESULTS: For AMI and HF, utilization of SNF and home health care remained stable overall. For pneumonia, observed utilization of any SNF care increased modestly (1.0%, P<0.001 during anticipation; 2.4%, P<0.001 after penalties) and observed utilization of any home health care services declined modestly (-0.5%, P=0.008 after announcement; -0.7%, P=0.045 after penalties) relative to projections. Beneficiaries with AMI and pneumonia treated at penalized hospitals had higher rates of being in the community 30 days postdischarge. CONCLUSIONS: Hospitals might be shifting to more intensive postacute care to avoid readmissions among seniors with pneumonia. At the same time, penalized hospitals' efforts to prevent readmissions may be keeping higher proportions of their patients in the community.

Primary Care Physicians in the Merit-Based Incentive Payment System (MIPS): a Qualitative Investigation of Participants' Experiences, Self-Reported Practice Changes, and Suggestions for Program Administrators.

BACKGROUND: While both administrators of pay-for-performance programs and practicing physicians strive to improve healthcare quality, they sometimes disagree on the best approach. The Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015 mandated the creation of the Merit-Based Incentive Payment System (MIPS), a program that incentivizes more than 700,000 physician participants to report on four domains of care, including healthcare quality. While MIPS performance scores were recently released, little is known about how primary care physicians (PCPs) and their practices are being affected by the program and what actions they are taking in response to MIPS. OBJECTIVES: To (1) describe PCP perspectives and self-reported practice changes related to quality measurement under MIPS and (2) disseminate PCP suggestions for improving the program. DESIGN: Qualitative study employing semi-structured interviews. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty PCPs trained in internal medicine or family medicine who were expected to report under MIPS for calendar year 2017 were interviewed between October 2017 and June 2018. Eight PCPs self-reported to be knowledgeable about MIPS. Seven PCPs worked in small practices. KEY RESULTS: Most PCPs identified advantages of quality measurement under MIPS, including the creation of practice-level systems for quality improvement. However, they also cited disadvantages, including administrative burdens and fears that practices serving vulnerable patients could be penalized. Many participants reported using technology or altering staffing to help with data collection and performance improvement. A few participants were considering selling small practices or joining larger ones to avoid administrative tasks. Suggestions for improving MIPS included simplifying the program to reduce administrative burdens, protecting practices serving vulnerable populations, and improving communication between program administrators and PCPs. CONCLUSIONS: MIPS is succeeding in nudging PCPs to develop quality measurement and improvement systems, but PCPs are concerned that administrative burdens are leading to the diversion of clinical resources away from patient-centered care and negatively impacting patient and clinician satisfaction. Program administrators should improve communication with participants and consider simplifying the program to make it less burdensome. Future work should be done to investigate how technical assistance programs can target PCPs that serve vulnerable patient populations and are having difficulty adapting to MIPS.

Quality of care and patient-reported outcomes in carpal tunnel syndrome: A prospective observational study.

INTRODUCTION: Higher quality care for carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) may be associated with better outcomes. METHODS: This prospective observational study recruited adults diagnosed with CTS from 30 occupational health centers, evaluated physicians' adherence to recommended care processes, and assessed results of the Boston Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire (BCTQ) and Short Form Health Survey version 2 (SF-12v2) at recruitment and at 18 months. RESULTS: Among 343 individuals, receiving better care (80th vs. 20th percentile for adherence) was associated with greater improvements in BCTQ Symptom Severity scores (-0.18, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.32 to -0.05), BCTQ Functional Status scores (-0.21, 95% CI -0.34 to -0.08), and SF12-v2 Physical Component scores (1.75, 95% CI 0.33-3.16). Symptoms improved more when physicians assessed and managed activity, patients underwent necessary surgery, and employers adjusted job tasks. DISCUSSION: Efforts should be made to ensure that patients with CTS receive essential care processes including necessary surgery and activity assessment and management. Muscle Nerve 57: 896-904, 2018.

Temporal Trends in Fall Rates with the Implementation of a Multifaceted Fall Prevention Program: Persistence Pays Off.

BACKGROUND: Most fall prevention programs are only modestly effective, and their sustainability is unknown. An academic medical center implemented a series of fall prevention interventions from 2001 to 2014. METHODS: The medical center's series of fall prevention interventions were as follows: reorganized the Falls Committee (2001), started flagging high-risk patients (2001), improved fall reporting (2002), increased scrutiny of falls (2005), instituted hourly nursing rounds (2006), reorganized leadership systems (2007), standardized fall prevention equipment (2008), adapted to a move to a new hospital building (2008), routinely investigated root causes (2009), mitigated fall risk during hourly nursing rounds (2009), educated patients about falls (2011), and taught nurses to think critically about risk (2012). To evaluate temporal trends in falls and injury falls, piecewise negative binomial regression with study unit-level random effects was used to analyze structured validated data sets available since 2003. RESULTS: From July 2003 through December 2014, the crude fall rate declined from 3.07 to 2.22 per 1,000 patient days, and injury falls declined from 0.77 to 0.65 per 1,000 patient days. Nonsignificant increases in falls occurred after nurses started rounding hourly and after the move to the new hospital. On the basis of regression models, significant declines occurred after nurses began to mitigate fall risk during hourly rounds (p = 0.009). CONCLUSION: Instituting incremental changes for more than a decade was associated with a meaningful (about 28%) and sustained decline in falls, although the rate of decline varied over time. Hospitals interested in reducing falls but concerned about competing clinical and financial priorities may find an incremental approach to be effective.