Forging a Social Movement to Dismantle Entrenched Power and Liberate Primary Care as a Common Good.

The state of family medicine and primary care in the United States is precarious, afflicted by chronic underinvestment. Family physicians and their allies should not expect different policy outcomes without adopting a different theory of change and tactical approach to reform. I argue: (1) high-quality primary care is a common good, as asserted by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine; (2) a market-based health system captured by extractive capitalism is inimical to primary care as a common good; (3) professionalism has both aided and constrained family physicians as agents of change for primary care as a common good; and, (4) to actualize primary care as a common good, family physicians must embrace "counterculture professionalism" to join with patients, primary care workers, and other allies in a social movement demanding fundamental restructuring of the health system and democratization of health that takes power back from interests profiting from the status quo and reorients the system to one grounded in healing relationships in primary care. This restructuring should take the form of a publicly financed system of universal coverage for direct primary care, with a minimum of 10% of total US health spending allocated to Primary Care for All.

Lower Likelihood of Burnout Among Family Physicians From Underrepresented Racial-Ethnic Groups.

PURPOSE: We investigated whether physician race and ethnicity were associated with burnout among a nationally representative sample of family physicians. METHODS: We undertook a cross-sectional observational study using survey data from 1,510 American Board of Family Medicine recertification applicants in 2017 and 1,586 respondents to the 2017 National Graduate Survey. Of the 3,096 total family physicians, 450 (15%) were from racial and ethnic groups underrepresented in medicine. We used structural equation models to test the effects of underrepresented status on single-item measures of emotional exhaustion and depersonalization. RESULTS: Family physicians underrepresented in medicine were significantly less likely than their non-underrepresented counterparts to report emotional exhaustion (adjusted odds ratio = 0.82; 95% CI, 0.69-0.99; total effect) and depersonalization (adjusted odds ratio = 0.54; 95% CI, 0.41-0.71; total effect). The underrepresented physicians were more likely than non-underrepresented peers to practice in more racially and ethnically diverse counties and less likely to practice obstetrics, both of which partly mediated the protective effect of underrepresented status on depersonalization. CONCLUSIONS: Although factors such as racism might be expected to adversely affect the well-being of underrepresented clinicians, underrepresented family physicians reported a lower frequency of emotional exhaustion and depersonalization. The mediating protective effect of working in more racially and ethnically diverse counties is consistent with evidence of the beneficial effect of cultural diversity on health outcomes for minorities. Because physician burnout is a known predictor of job turnover and may also be associated with poorer quality of care, the lower burnout observed among underrepresented family physicians may be an asset for the health care system as a whole.

Burnout and Health Care Workforce Turnover.

PURPOSE: Levels of burnout among primary care clinicians and staff are alarmingly high, and there is widespread belief that burnout and lack of employee engagement contribute to high turnover of the workforce. Scant research evidence exists to support this assertion, however. METHODS: We conducted a longitudinal cohort study using survey data on burnout and employee engagement collected in 2013 and 2014 from 740 primary care clinicians and staff in 2 San Francisco health systems, matched to employment roster data from 2016. RESULTS: Prevalence of burnout, low engagement, and turnover were high, with 53% of both clinicians and staff reporting burnout, only 32% of clinicians and 35% of staff reporting high engagement, and 30% of clinicians and 41% of staff no longer working in primary care in the same system 2 to 3 years later. Burnout predicted clinician turnover (adjusted odds ratio = 1.57; 95% CI, 1.02-2.40); there was also a strong trend whereby low engagement predicted clinician turnover (adjusted odds ratio with high engagement = 0.58; 95% CI, 0.33-1.04). Neither measure significantly predicted turnover for staff. CONCLUSIONS: High rates of burnout and turnover in primary care are compelling problems. Our findings provide evidence that burnout contributes to turnover among primary care clinicians, but not among staff. Although reducing clinician burnout may help to decrease rates of turnover, health care organizations and policymakers concerned about employee turnover in primary care need to understand the multifactorial causes of turnover to develop effective retention strategies for clinicians and staff.

A Longitudinal Study of Trends in Burnout During Primary Care Transformation.

PURPOSE: The quadruple aim of primary care transformation includes promoting well-being among the primary care workforce. We longitudinally assessed burnout among clinicians and staff in 2 health delivery organizations engaged in primary care redesign guided by a shared transformation model. METHODS: We conducted a descriptive longitudinal study, using repeated cross-sectional measures from 6 waves of surveys of employed primary care clinicians (physicians, nurse practitioners, physician assistants) and staff conducted between 2012 to 2018 in the San Francisco Health Network and in UCSF Health. The 2018 wave had 613 respondents (response rate 88%). Outcome measures were scores on the Maslach Burnout Inventory emotional exhaustion and cynicism subscales. We used regression models to test for time trends in mean scores. RESULTS: Trends in burnout differed by system and occupation. In one system, mean clinician scores steadily improved for emotional exhaustion (P = .04) and cynicism (P = .07). In the other system, clinician burnout scores initially worsened and then returned to baseline levels. In both systems, burnout trends among staff tended to move in the opposite direction from trends among clinicians. CONCLUSIONS: The divergent trends of steady reduction in clinician burnout in one system and clinician burnout getting worse before getting better in the other system suggest that the effects of primary care transformation are influenced by the organizational context. Moreover, practice changes that reduce clinician burnout may not decrease-and may potentially even worsen-burnout among staff. Primary care transformation requires continuing efforts to promote meaningful work and sustainable workloads among all members of the primary care team.

Maslach Burnout Inventory and a Self-Defined, Single-Item Burnout Measure Produce Different Clinician and Staff Burnout Estimates.

BACKGROUND: Clinicians and healthcare staff report high levels of burnout. Two common burnout assessments are the Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI) and a single-item, self-defined burnout measure. Relatively little is known about how the measures compare. OBJECTIVE: To identify the sensitivity, specificity, and concurrent validity of the self-defined burnout measure compared to the more established MBI measure. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey (November 2016-January 2017). PARTICIPANTS: Four hundred forty-four primary care clinicians and 606 staff from three San Francisco Aarea healthcare systems. MAIN MEASURES: The MBI measure, calculated from a high score on either the emotional exhaustion or cynicism subscale, and a single-item measure of self-defined burnout. Concurrent validity was assessed using a validated, 7-item team culture scale as reported by Willard-Grace et al. (J Am Board Fam Med 27(2):229-38, 2014) and a standard question about workplace atmosphere as reported by Rassolian et al. (JAMA Intern Med 177(7):1036-8, 2017) and Linzer et al. (Ann Intern Med 151(1):28-36, 2009). KEY RESULTS: Similar to other nationally representative burnout estimates, 52% of clinicians (95% CI: 47-57%) and 46% of staff (95% CI: 42-50%) reported high MBI emotional exhaustion or high MBI cynicism. In contrast, 29% of clinicians (95% CI: 25-33%) and 31% of staff (95% CI: 28-35%) reported "definitely burning out" or more severe symptoms on the self-defined burnout measure. The self-defined measure's sensitivity to correctly identify MBI-assessed burnout was 50.4% for clinicians and 58.6% for staff; specificity was 94.7% for clinicians and 92.3% for staff. Area under the receiver operator curve was 0.82 for clinicians and 0.81 for staff. Team culture and atmosphere were significantly associated with both self-defined burnout and the MBI, confirming concurrent validity. CONCLUSIONS: Point estimates of burnout notably differ between the self-defined and MBI measures. Compared to the MBI, the self-defined burnout measure misses half of high-burnout clinicians and more than 40% of high-burnout staff. The self-defined burnout measure has a low response burden, is free to administer, and yields similar associations across two burnout predictors from prior studies. However, the self-defined burnout and MBI measures are not interchangeable.

Provider, Patient, and Practice Factors Shape Hepatitis B Prevention and Management by Primary Care Providers.

GOALS: To evaluate provider knowledge, attitudes and barriers to hepatitis B virus (HBV) care and management practices across diverse primary care settings. BACKGROUND: Factors influencing adherence to recommended HBV screening and management guidelines are poorly defined. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Providers across various health care settings in San Francisco were surveyed. Multivariate analyses were used to identify factors associated with recommended HBV screening, vaccination, and disease monitoring. RESULTS: Of 277 (41.3%) responding providers, 42% reported performing HBV screening in >50% of at-risk patients, and 49%, HBV vaccination in >50% of eligible patients. Most reported appropriate monitoring of a majority of HBV-infected patients with alanine aminotransferase (79%) and HBV viral load (67%) every 6 to 12 months, but performed any hepatocellular carcinoma screening in 49%. Provider factors significantly associated with HBV screening were speaking an Asian language [odds ratio (OR), 3.27], offering HBV treatment (OR, 3.00), having >25% of Asian patients in practice (OR, 2.10), practicing in safety net settings (OR, 7.51) and having higher barrier score (OR, 0.74). Appropriate HBV monitoring was associated with provider speaking an Asian language (OR, 3.43) and provider age (OR, 0.68/decade). Hepatocellular carcinoma screening was associated with having >25% of patients speaking English as a second language (OR, 4.26) and practicing in safety net settings (OR, 0.14). CONCLUSIONS: Rates of adherence to HBV guidelines were suboptimal irrespective of practice setting and were influenced by certain provider, patient and practice factors. This study reinforces the importance of engaging primary care providers in development, dissemination, and implementation of evidence-based HBV practice guidelines.

Engaging patients in primary care practice transformation: theory, evidence and practice.

Patient engagement is a fundamental strategy for achieving patient centred care and is receiving increasing attention in primary care reform efforts such as the patient-centred medical home and related care models. Much of the prior published theory and evidence supporting patient engagement has focused on improving engagement in individual care. Much less is understood about engaging patients as partners in practice improvement at the primary care clinic or practice level. We review the historical and policy context for the growing interest in the USA and UK in patient engagement at the primary care practice level, highlight findings from systematic reviews of the research evidence on practice-level patient engagement and discuss practical considerations for implementing patient engagement. We conclude that while there are persuasive ethical and social justice reasons for empowering patient involvement in practice improvement at the clinic level, research conducted to date in primary care provides suggestive but not yet resounding evidence in support of the instrumental triple aim benefit of practice-level patient engagement. We propose a research agenda to better understand the process and outcomes of practice-level patient engagement and its potential advantages to both the practice and the patients and communities served. Better evidence as well as resources to support and incentivize effective and feasible engagement methods are needed to catalyse greater diffusion of practice-level patient engagement in primary care practices.

Achieving Health Equity Through Community Engagement in Translating Evidence to Policy: The San Francisco Health Improvement Partnership, 2010-2016.

BACKGROUND: The San Francisco Health Improvement Partnership (SFHIP) promotes health equity by using a novel collective impact model that blends community engagement with evidence-to-policy translational science. The model involves diverse stakeholders, including ethnic-based community health equity coalitions, the local public health department, hospitals and health systems, a health sciences university, a school district, the faith community, and others sectors. COMMUNITY CONTEXT: We report on 3 SFHIP prevention initiatives: reducing consumption of sugar sweetened beverages (SSBs), regulating retail alcohol sales, and eliminating disparities in children's oral health. METHODS: SFHIP is governed by a steering committee. Partnership working groups for each initiative collaborate to 1) develop and implement action plans emphasizing feasible, scalable, translational-science-informed interventions and 2) consider sustainability early in the planning process by including policy and structural interventions. OUTCOME: Through SFHIP's efforts, San Francisco enacted ordinances regulating sale and advertising of SSBs and a ballot measure establishing a soda tax. Most San Francisco hospitals implemented or committed to implementing healthy-beverage policies that prohibited serving or selling SSBs. SFHIP helped prevent Starbucks and Taco Bell from receiving alcohol licenses in San Francisco and helped prevent state authorization of sale of powdered alcohol. SFHIP increased the number of primary care clinics providing fluoride varnish at routine well-child visits from 3 to 14 and acquired a state waiver to allow dental clinics to be paid for dental services delivered in schools. INTERPRETATION: The SFHIP model of collective impact emphasizing community engagement and policy change accomplished many of its intermediate goals to create an environment promoting health and health equity.

Association of the quality of interpersonal care during family planning counseling with contraceptive use.

BACKGROUND: Health communication and interpersonal skills are increasingly emphasized in the measurement of health care quality, yet there is limited research on the association of interpersonal care with health outcomes. As approximately 50% of pregnancies in the United States are unintended, whether interpersonal communication influences contraceptive use is of public health importance. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine whether the quality of interpersonal care during contraceptive counseling is associated with contraceptive use over time. STUDY DESIGN: The Patient-Provider Communication about Contraception study is a prospective cohort study of 348 English-speaking women seen for contraceptive care, conducted between 2009 and 2012 in the San Francisco Bay Area. Quality of communication was assessed using a patient-reported interpersonal quality in family planning care measure based on the dimensions of patient-centered care. In addition, the clinical visit was audio recorded and its content coded according to the validated Four Habits Coding Scheme to assess interpersonal communication behaviors of clinicians. The outcome measures were 6-month continuation of the selected contraceptive method and use of a highly or moderately effective method at 6 months. Results were analyzed using mixed effect logistic regression models controlling for patient demographics, the clinic and the provider at which the visit occurred, and the method selected. RESULTS: Patient participants had a mean age of 26.8 years (SD 6.9 years); 46% were white, 26% Latina, and 28% black. Almost two-thirds of participants had an income of <200% of the Federal Poverty Level. Most of the women (73%) were making visits to a provider whom they had not seen before. Of the patient participants, 41% were still using their chosen contraceptive method at 6-month follow-up. Patients who reported high interpersonal quality of family planning care were more likely to maintain use of their chosen contraceptive method (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.8; 95% CI, 1.1-3.0) and to be using a highly or moderately effective method at 6 months (aOR, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.2-3.5). In addition, 2 of the Four Habits were associated with contraceptive continuation; "invests in the beginning" (aOR, 2.3; 95% CI, 1.2-4.3) and "elicits the patient's perspective" (aOR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.0-3.2). CONCLUSION: Our study provides evidence that the quality of interpersonal care, measured using both patient report and observation of provider behaviors, influences contraceptive use. These results provide support for ongoing attention to interpersonal communication as an important aspect of health care quality. The associations of establishing rapport and eliciting the patient perspective with contraceptive continuation are suggestive of areas of focus for provider communication skills training for contraceptive care.

Development of a survey instrument to measure patient experience of integrated care.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare systems are working to move towards more integrated, patient-centered care. This study describes the development and testing of a multidimensional self-report measure of patients' experiences of integrated care. METHODS: Random-digit-dial telephone survey in 2012 of 317 adults aged 40 years or older in the San Francisco region who had used healthcare at least twice in the past 12 months. One-time cross-sectional survey; psychometric evaluation to confirm dimensions and create multi-item scales. Survey data were analyzed using VARCLUS and confirmatory factor analysis and internal consistency reliability testing. RESULTS: Scales measuring five domains were confirmed: coordination within and between care teams, navigation (arranging appointments and visits), communication between specialist and primary care doctor, and communication between primary care doctor and specialist. Four of these demonstrated excellent internal consistency reliability. Mean scale scores indicated low levels of integration. CONCLUSION: These scales measuring integrated care capture meaningful domains of patients' experiences of health care. The low levels of care integration reported by patients in the study sample suggest that these types of measures should be considered in ongoing evaluations of health system performance and improvement. Further research should examine whether differences in patient experience of integrated care are associated with differences in the processes and outcomes of care received.

The 10 building blocks of high-performing primary care.

Our experiences studying exemplar primary care practices, and our work assisting other practices to become more patient centered, led to a formulation of the essential elements of primary care, which we call the 10 building blocks of high-performing primary care. The building blocks include 4 foundational elements-engaged leadership, data-driven improvement, empanelment, and team-based care-that assist the implementation of the other 6 building blocks-patient-team partnership, population management, continuity of care, prompt access to care, comprehensiveness and care coordination, and a template of the future. The building blocks, which represent a synthesis of the innovative thinking that is transforming primary care in the United States, are both a description of existing high-performing practices and a model for improvement.

The primary care extension program: a catalyst for change.

The Affordable Care Act authorized, but did not fund, the Primary Care Extension Program (PCEP). Much like the Cooperative Extension Program of the US Department of Agriculture sped the modernization of farming a century ago, the PCEP could speed the transformation of primary care. It could also help achieve other goals such as integrating primary care with public health and translating research into practice. The urgency of these goals and their importance to achieving the Triple Aim for health care should increase interest in rapidly building the PCEP, much as the need to feed the country did a century ago.

A Call to Improve Health by Achieving the Learning Health Care System.

The learning health care system is an aspirational operational model for improving health care by learning from the care being delivered. The model, which has been endorsed by the National Academy of Medicine, aligns naturally with academic health systems, which have a mission to improve care for their communities through research and education. In this scholarly perspective, the authors define the learning health care system concept and its historical relationship to academic health systems; explore opportunities for and barriers to realizing the learning health care system; and propose actions to achieve the learning health care system at the local, regional, and national levels. The authors argue that the learning health care system model is essential to academic medicine's evolution and to achieving the foundational societal mission of academic health systems to advance health through research and education.

Association of protective behaviors with SARS-CoV-2 infection: results from a longitudinal cohort study of adults in the San Francisco Bay Area.

PURPOSE: In an effort to decrease transmission during the first years of the COVID-19 pandemic, public health officials encouraged masking, social distancing, and working from home, and restricted travel. However, many studies of the effectiveness of these measures had significant methodologic limitations. In this analysis, we used data from the TrackCOVID study, a longitudinal cohort study of a population-based sample of 3846 adults in the San Francisco Bay Area, to evaluate the association between self-reported protective behaviors and incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection. METHODS: Participants without SARS-CoV2 infection were enrolled from August to December 2020 and followed monthly with testing and surveys (median of four visits). RESULTS: A total of 118 incident infections occurred (3.0% of participants). At baseline, 80.0% reported always wearing a mask; 56.0% avoided contact with nonhousehold members some/most of the time; 9.6% traveled outside the state; and 16.0% worked 20 or more hours per week outside the home. Factors associated with incident infection included being Black or Latinx, having less than a college education, and having more household residents. The only behavioral factor associated with incident infection was working outside the home (adjusted hazard ratio 1.62, 95% confidence interval 1.02-2.59). CONCLUSIONS: Focusing on protecting people who cannot work from home could help prevent infections during future waves of COVID-19, or future pandemics from respiratory viruses. This focus must be balanced with the known importance of directing resources toward those at risk of severe infections.

Estimating a reasonable patient panel size for primary care physicians with team-based task delegation.

PURPOSE Primary care faces the dilemma of excessive patient panel sizes in an environment of a primary care physician shortage. We aimed to estimate primary care panel sizes under different models of task delegation to nonphysician members of the primary care team. METHODS We used published estimates of the time it takes for a primary care physician to provide preventive, chronic, and acute care for a panel of 2,500 patients, and modeled how panel sizes would change if portions of preventive and chronic care services were delegated to nonphysician team members. RESULTS Using 3 assumptions about the degree of task delegation that could be achieved (77%, 60%, and 50% of preventive care, and 47%, 30%, and 25% of chronic care), we estimated that a primary care team could reasonably care for a panel of 1,947, 1,523, or 1,387 patients. CONCLUSIONS If portions of preventive and chronic care services are delegated to nonphysician team members, primary care practices can provide recommended preventive and chronic care with panel sizes that are achievable with the available primary care workforce.