Disparities in clinical trial enrollment at a Canadian comprehensive cancer center: A 15-year retrospective study.

INTRODUCTION: Disparities in clinical trials (CTs) enrollment perpetuate inequities in treatment access and outcomes, but there is a paucity of Canadian data. The objective of this study was to examine disparities in cancer CT enrollment at a large Canadian comprehensive cancer center. METHODS: Retrospective study of CT enrollment among new patient consultations from 2006 to 2019, with follow-up to 2021 (N = 154,880), with the primary outcome of enrollment as a binary variable. Factors associated with CT enrollment were evaluated using multivariable Bayesian hierarchical logistic regression with random effects for most responsible physician (MRP) and geography, adjusted for patient characteristics (sex, age, language, geography, and primary care provider [PCP]), area-level marginalization (residential instability, material deprivation, dependency, and ethnic concentration), disease (cancer site and stage), and MRP (department, sex, language, and training). A sensitivity analysis of the cumulative incidence of enrollment was conducted to account for differences in disease type and follow-up length. RESULTS: CT enrollment was 11.2% overall, with a 15-year cumulative incidence of 18%. Lower odds of enrollment were observed in patients who were female (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 0.82; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.78-0.86), ≥65 years (AOR vs. <40, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.56-0.66), non-English speakers (0.72; 95% CI, 0.67-0.77), living ≥250 km away (AOR vs. <15 km, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.62-0.80), and without a PCP. Disease characteristics accounted for the largest proportion of observed variation (20.8%), with significantly greater odds of enrollment in patients with genitourinary cancers and late-stage disease. CONCLUSION: Significant sociodemographic disparities were observed, suggesting the need for targeted strategies to increase diversity in access to cancer CTs in Canada.

Prioritizing Quality Measures in Acute Stroke Care : A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The American Heart Association and American Stroke Association (AHA/ASA) endorsed 15 process measures for acute ischemic stroke (AIS) to improve the quality of care. Identifying the highest-value measures could reduce the administrative burden of quality measure adoption while retaining much of the value of quality improvement. OBJECTIVE: To prioritize AHA/ASA-endorsed quality measures for AIS on the basis of health impact and cost-effectiveness. DESIGN: Individual-based stroke simulation model. DATA SOURCES: Published literature. TARGET POPULATION: U.S. patients with incident AIS. TIME HORIZON: Lifetime. PERSPECTIVE: Health care sector. INTERVENTION: Current versus complete (100%) implementation at the population level of quality measures endorsed by the AHA/ASA with sufficient clinical evidence (10 of 15). OUTCOME MEASURES: Life-years, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), incremental cost-effectiveness ratios, and incremental net health benefits. RESULTS OF BASE-CASE ANALYSIS: Discounted life-years gained from complete implementation would range from 472 (tobacco use counseling) to 34 688 (early carotid imaging) for an annual AIS patient cohort. All AIS quality measures were cost-saving or highly cost-effective by AHA standards (<$50 000 per QALY for high-value care). Early carotid imaging and intravenous tissue plasminogen activator contributed the largest fraction of the total potential value of quality improvement (measured as incremental net health benefit), accounting for 72% of the total value. The top 5 quality measures accounted for 92% of the total potential value. RESULTS OF SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS: A web-based user interface allows for context-specific sensitivity and scenario analyses. LIMITATION: Correlations between quality measures were not incorporated. CONCLUSION: Substantial variation exists in the potential net benefit of quality improvement across AIS quality measures. Benefits were highly concentrated among 5 of 10 measures assessed. Our results can help providers and payers set priorities for quality improvement efforts and value-based payments in AIS care. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke.

Physician Work Hours and the Gender Pay Gap - Evidence from Primary Care.

BACKGROUND: The gender gap in physician pay is often attributed in part to women working fewer hours than men, but evidence to date is limited by self-report and a lack of detail regarding clinical revenue and gender differences in practice style. METHODS: Using national all-payer claims and data from electronic health records, we conducted a cross-sectional analysis of 24.4 million primary care office visits in 2017 and performed comparisons between female and male physicians in the same practices. Our primary independent variable was physician gender; outcomes included visit revenue, visit counts, days worked, and observed visit time (interval between the initiation and the termination of a visit). We created multivariable regression models at the year, day, and visit level after adjustment for characteristics of the primary care physicians (PCPs), patients, and types of visit and for practice fixed effects. RESULTS: In 2017, female PCPs generated 10.9% less revenue from office visits than their male counterparts (-$39,143.2; 95% confidence interval [CI], -53,523.0 to -24,763.4) and conducted 10.8% fewer visits (-330.5 visits; 95% CI, -406.6 to -254.3) over 2.6% fewer clinical days (-5.3 days; 95% CI, -7.7 to -3.0), after adjustment for age, academic degree, specialty, and number of sessions worked per week, yet spent 2.6% more observed time in visits that year than their male counterparts (1201.3 minutes; 95% CI, 184.7 to 2218.0). Per visit, after adjustment for PCP, patient, and visit characteristics, female PCPs generated equal revenue but spent 15.7% more time with a patient (2.4 minutes; 95% CI, 2.1 to 2.6). These results were consistent in subgroup analyses according to the gender and health status of the patients and the type and complexity of the visits. CONCLUSIONS: Female PCPs generated less visit revenue than male colleagues in the same practices owing to a lower volume of visits, yet spent more time in direct patient care per visit, per day, and per year. (Funded in part by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.).

Physician and facility drivers of spending variation in locoregional prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Prostate cancer is the most common male cancer, with a wide range of treatment options. Payment reform to reduce unnecessary spending variation is an important strategy for reducing waste, but its magnitude and drivers within prostate cancer are unknown. METHODS: In total, 38,971 men aged ≥66 years with localized prostate cancer who were enrolled in Medicare fee-for-service and were included in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare database from 2009 to 2014 were included. Multilevel linear regression with physician and facility random effects was used to examine the contributions of urologists, radiation oncologists, and their affiliated facilities to variation in total patient spending in the year after diagnosis within geographic region. The authors assessed whether spending variation was driven by patient characteristics, disease risk, or treatments. Physicians and facilities were sorted into quintiles of adjusted patient-level spending, and differences between those that were high-spending and low-spending were examined. RESULTS: Substantial variation in spending was driven by physician and facility factors. Differences in cancer treatment modalities drove more variation across physicians than differences in patient and disease characteristics (72% vs 2% for urologists, 20% vs 18% for radiation oncologists). The highest spending physicians spent 46% more than the lowest and had more imaging tests, inpatient care, and radiotherapy spending. There were no differences across spending quintiles in the use of robotic surgery by urologists or the use of brachytherapy by radiation oncologists. CONCLUSIONS: Significant differences were observed for patients with similar demographics and disease characteristics. This variation across both physicians and facilities suggests that efforts to reduce unnecessary spending must address decision making at both levels.

Comparing Diagnostic Evaluations for Rectal Bleeding and Breast Lumps in Primary Care: a Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Inadequate diagnostic evaluations of breast lumps and rectal bleeding in primary care are an important source of medical errors. Delays appear particularly common in evaluation of rectal bleeding. Comparing pursuit and completion of diagnostic testing for these two conditions within the same practice settings could help highlight barriers and inform interventions. OBJECTIVES: To examine processes undertaken for diagnostic evaluations of breast lumps and rectal bleeding within the same practices and to compare them with regard to (a) the likelihood that diagnostic tests are ordered according to guidelines and (b) the timeliness of order placement and completion. DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study using explicit chart abstraction methods. PARTICIPANTS: Three hundred women aged 30-80 presenting with breast lumps and 300 men and women aged 40-80 years presenting with rectal bleeding to 15 academically affiliated primary care practices, 2012-2016. MAIN MEASURES: Rates and timing of test ordering and completion and patterns of visits and communications. KEY RESULTS: At initial presentation, physicians ordered recommended imaging or procedures at higher rates for patients with breast lumps compared to those with rectal bleeding (97% vs. 86% of patients recommended to receive imaging or endoscopy; p < 0.01). Most (90%) patients with breast lumps completed recommended diagnostic testing within 1 month, versus 31% of patients with rectal bleeding (p < 0.01). By 1 year, 7% of patients with breast lumps had not completed indicated imaging, versus 27% of those with rectal bleeding. Patients with breast lumps had fewer subsequent primary care visits related or unrelated to their symptom and had fewer related communications with specialists. LIMITATIONS: The study relied on documented care, and findings may be most generalizable to academically affiliated institutions. CONCLUSIONS: Diagnostic processes for rectal bleeding were less frequently guideline-concordant and timely than those for breast lumps. The largest discrepancies occurred in initial ordering of indicated tests and the timeliness of test completion.

Levers for addressing medical underuse and overuse: achieving high-value health care.

The preceding papers in this Series have outlined how underuse and overuse of health-care services occur within a complex system of health-care production, with a multiplicity of causes. Because poor care is ubiquitous and has considerable consequences for the health and wellbeing of billions of people around the world, remedying this problem is a morally and politically urgent task. Universal health coverage is a key step towards achieving the right care. Therefore, full consideration of potential levers of change must include an upstream perspective-ie, an understanding of the system-level factors that drive overuse and underuse, as well as the various incentives at work during a clinical encounter. One example of a system-level factor is the allocation of resources (eg, hospital beds and clinicians) to meet the needs of a local population to minimise underuse or overuse. Another example is priority setting using tools such as health technology assessment to guide the optimum diffusion of safe, effective, and cost-effective health-care services. In this Series paper we investigate a range of levers for eliminating medical underuse and overuse. Some levers could operate effectively (and be politically viable) across many different health and political systems (eg, increase patient activation with decision support) whereas other levers must be tailored to local contexts (eg, basing coverage decisions on a particular cost-effectiveness ratio). Ideally, policies must move beyond the purely incremental; that is, policies that merely tinker at the policy edges after underuse or overuse arises. In this regard, efforts to increase public awareness, mobilisation, and empowerment hold promise as universal methods to reset all other contexts and thereby enhance all other efforts to promote the right care.

Physician Payment after the SGR--The New Meritocracy.

With the Merit-Based Incentive Payment System, Medicare shifts from payment based on macroeconomic indicators to relying on physician- or group-level indicators of cost and quality--and could create a large fee differential between high- and low-performing physicians.

Diagnostic Evaluation of Patients Presenting to Primary Care with Rectal Bleeding.

BACKGROUND: Rectal bleeding is a common, frequently benign problem that can also be an early sign of colorectal cancer. Diagnostic evaluation for rectal bleeding is complex, and clinical practice may deviate from available guidelines. OBJECTIVE: To assess the degree to which primary care physicians document risk factors for colorectal cancer among patients with rectal bleeding and order colonoscopies when indicated, and the likelihood of physicians ordering and patients receiving recommended colonoscopies based on demographic characteristics, visit patterns, and clinical presentations. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study using explicit chart abstraction methods. PARTICIPANTS: Three hundred adults, 40-80 years of age, presenting with rectal bleeding to 15 academically affiliated primary care practices between 2012 and 2016. MAIN MEASURES: 1) The frequency at which colorectal cancer risk factors were documented in patients' charts, 2) the frequency at which physicians ordered colonoscopies and patients received them, and 3) the odds of ordering and patients receiving recommended colonoscopies based on patient demographic characteristics, visit patterns, and clinical presentations. KEY RESULTS: Risk factors for colorectal cancer were documented between 9% and 66% of the time. Most patients (89%) with rectal bleeding needed a colonoscopy according to a clinical guideline. Physicians placed colonoscopy orders for 74% of these patients, and 56% completed the colonoscopy within a year (36% within 60 days). The odds of physicians ordering recommended colonoscopies were significantly higher in patients aged 50-64 years of age than in those aged 40-50 years (OR = 2.23, 95% CI: 1.04, 4.80), and for patients whose most recent colonoscopy was 5 or more years ago (OR = 4.04, 95% CI: 1.50, 10.83). The odds of physicians ordering and patients receiving recommended colonoscopies were significantly lower for each primary care visit unrelated to rectal bleeding (OR = 0.85, 95% CI: 0.75, 0.96). CONCLUSIONS: Diagnostic evaluation of patients presenting to primary care with rectal bleeding may be suboptimal because of inadequate risk factor assessment and prioritization of patients' other concurrent medical problems.

Feeling inadequate: Residents' stress and learning at primary care clinics in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Educators hope that residents' experiences in primary care continuity clinics will influence more trainees to enter primary care careers. Unfortunately, evidence shows that outpatient primary care training in the United States is stressful and fails to promote primary care careers. We conducted qualitative interviews with residents to understand the source of stress and to explain this failure. METHODS: In-person individual interviews were conducted with 37 primary care residents training at outpatient clinics in the US. Analysis used the constant comparative method and included open and focused coding, allowing themes to emerge inductively from the data. RESULTS: 73% of residents interviewed reported negative emotions about clinic. Beyond stress, residents reported feeling inadequate as primary care physicians at clinic. Four factors contributed: mental distractions, unfamiliarity with primary care medicine, management of outpatients, and relationships with patients. Residents' comparisons of hospital-based and outpatient experiences favored the former in relation to the four factors. CONCLUSIONS: Residents feel unprepared for primary care and inadequate as primary care physicians, and these feelings discourage them from practicing primary care. This phenomenon must be studied within the entire context of residency, as residents' attitudes about their outpatient experiences were shaped in relation to their inpatient experiences.

The Increasing Adoption of Out-of-Pocket Cost Caps: Benefits, Unintended Consequences, and Policy Opportunities.

This Viewpoint discusses potential benefits and unintended consequences of out-of-pocket cost caps in Medicare and the employer-sponsored health insurance market and provides suggested policy opportunities to address shortcomings.

Team-based primary care: The medical assistant perspective.

BACKGROUND: Team-based care has the potential to improve primary care quality and efficiency. In this model, medical assistants (MAs) take a more central role in patient care and population health management. MAs' traditionally low status may give them a unique view on changing organizational dynamics and teamwork. However, little empirical work exists on how team-based organizational designs affect the experiences of low-status health care workers like MAs. PURPOSES: The aim of this study was to describe how team-based primary care affects the experiences of MAs. A secondary aim was to explore variation in these experiences. METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: In late 2014, the authors interviewed 30 MAs from nine primary care practices transitioning to team-based care. Interviews addressed job responsibilities, teamwork, implementation, job satisfaction, and learning. Data were analyzed using a thematic networks approach. Interviews also included closed-ended questions about workload and job satisfaction. RESULTS: Most MAs reported both a higher workload (73%) and a greater job satisfaction (86%) under team-based primary care. Interview data surfaced four mechanisms for these results, which suggested more fulfilling work and greater respect for the MA role: (a) relationships with colleagues, (b) involvement with patients, (c) sense of control, and (d) sense of efficacy. Facilitators and barriers to these positive changes also emerged. CONCLUSION: Team-based care can provide low-status health care workers with more fulfilling work and strengthen relationships across status lines. The extent of this positive impact may depend on supporting factors at the organization, team, and individual worker levels. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: To maximize the benefits of team-based care, primary care leaders should recognize the larger role that MAs play under this model and support them as increasingly valuable team members. Contingent on organizational conditions, practices may find MAs who are willing to manage the increased workload that often accompanies team-based care.

Choosing wisely--the politics and economics of labeling low-value services.

More than 40 medical specialties have identified "Choosing Wisely" lists of five overused or low-value services. But these services vary widely in potential impact on care and spending, and specialty societies often name other specialties' services as low value.

Impact of Medicare's Nonpayment Program on Hospital-acquired Conditions.

BACKGROUND: Medicare's Nonpayment Program of 2008 (hereafter called Program) withholds hospital reimbursement for costs related to hospital-acquired conditions (HACs). Little is known whether a hospital's Medicare patient load [quantified by the hospital's Medicare utilization ratio (MUR), which is the proportion of inpatient days financed by Medicare] influences its response to the Program. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the Program was associated with changes in HAC incidence, and whether this association varies across hospitals with differential Medicare patient load. RESEARCH DESIGN: Quasi-experimental study using difference-in-differences estimation. Incidence of HACs before and after Program implementation was compared across hospital MUR quartiles. SUBJECTS: A total of 867,584 elderly Medicare stays for acute myocardial infarction, congestive heart failure, pneumonia, and stroke that were discharged from 159 New York State hospitals from 2005 to 2012. MEASURES: For descriptive analysis, hospital-level mean HAC rates by month, MUR quartile, and Program phase are reported. For multivariate analysis, primary outcome is incidence of the any-or-none indicator for occurrence of at least 1 of 6 HACs. Secondary outcomes are the incidence of each HAC. RESULTS: The Program was associated with decline in incidence of (i) any-or-none indicator among MUR quartile 2 hospitals (conditional odds ratio=0.57; 95% confidence interval, 0.38-0.87), and (ii) catheter-associated urinary tract infections among MUR quartile 3 hospitals (conditional odds ratio=0.30; 95% confidence interval, 0.12-0.75) as compared with MUR quartile 1 hospitals. Significant declines in certain HACs were noted in the stratified analysis. CONCLUSIONS: The Program was associated with decline in incidence of selected HACs, and this decline was variably greater among hospitals with higher MUR.

How Primary Care Physicians Integrate Price Information into Clinical Decision-Making.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about how primary care physicians (PCPs) in routine outpatient practice use paid price information (i.e., the amount that insurers finally pay providers) in daily clinical practice. OBJECTIVE: To describe the experiences of PCPs who have had paid price information on tests and procedures for at least 1 year. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study using semi-structured interviews and the constant comparative method of qualitative analysis. PARTICIPANTS: Forty-six PCPs within an accountable care organization. INTERVENTION: Via the ordering screen of their electronic health record, PCPs were presented with the median paid price for commonly ordered tests and procedures (e.g., blood tests, x-rays, CTs, MRIs). APPROACH: We asked PCPs for (a) their "gut reaction" to having paid price information, (b) the situations in which they used price information in clinical decision-making separate from or jointly with patients, (c) their thoughts on who bore the chief responsibility for discussing price information with patients, and (d) suggestions for improving physician-targeted price information interventions. KEY RESULTS: Among "gut reactions" that ranged from positive to negative, all PCPs were more interested in having patient-specific price information than paid prices from the practice perspective. PCPs described that when patients' out-of-pocket spending concerns were revealed, price information helped them engage patients in conversations about how to alter treatment plans to make them more affordable. PCPs stated that having price information only slightly altered their test-ordering patterns and that they avoided mentioning prices when advising patients against unnecessary testing. Most PCPs asserted that physicians bear the chief responsibility for discussing prices with patients because of their clinical knowledge and relationships with patients. They wished for help from patients, practices, health plans, and society in order to support price transparency in healthcare. CONCLUSIONS: Physician-targeted price transparency efforts may provide PCPs with the information they need to respond to patients' concerns regarding out-of-pocket affordability rather than that needed to change test-ordering habits.

A Randomized Trial of Displaying Paid Price Information on Imaging Study and Procedure Ordering Rates.

BACKGROUND: Prior studies have demonstrated how price transparency lowers the test-ordering rates of trainees in hospitals, and physician-targeted price transparency efforts have been viewed as a promising cost-controlling strategy. OBJECTIVE: To examine the effect of displaying paid-price information on test-ordering rates for common imaging studies and procedures within an accountable care organization (ACO). DESIGN: Block randomized controlled trial for 1 year. SUBJECTS: A total of 1205 fully licensed clinicians (728 primary care, 477 specialists). INTERVENTION: Starting January 2014, clinicians in the Control arm received no price display; those in the intervention arms received Single or Paired Internal/External Median Prices in the test-ordering screen of their electronic health record. Internal prices were the amounts paid by insurers for the ACO's services; external paid prices were the amounts paid by insurers for the same services when delivered by unaffiliated providers. MAIN MEASURES: Ordering rates (orders per 100 face-to-face encounters with adult patients): overall, designated to be completed internally within the ACO, considered "inappropriate" (e.g., MRI for simple headache), and thought to be "appropriate" (e.g., screening colonoscopy). KEY RESULTS: We found no significant difference in overall ordering rates across the Control, Single Median Price, or Paired Internal/External Median Prices study arms. For every 100 encounters, clinicians in the Control arm ordered 15.0 (SD 31.1) tests, those in the Single Median Price arm ordered 15.0 (SD 16.2) tests, and those in the Paired Prices arms ordered 15.7 (SD 20.5) tests (one-way ANOVA p-value 0.88). There was no difference in ordering rates for tests designated to be completed internally or considered to be inappropriate or appropriate. CONCLUSIONS: Displaying paid-price information did not alter how frequently primary care and specialist clinicians ordered imaging studies and procedures within an ACO. Those with a particular interest in removing waste from the health care system may want to consider a variety of contextual factors that can affect physician-targeted price transparency.

Using Behavioral Economics to Design Physician Incentives That Deliver High-Value Care.

Behavioral economics provides insights about the development of effective incentives for physicians to deliver high-value care. It suggests that the structure and delivery of incentives can shape behavior, as can thoughtful design of the decision-making environment. This article discusses several principles of behavioral economics, including inertia, loss aversion, choice overload, and relative social ranking. Whereas these principles have been applied to motivate personal health decisions, retirement planning, and savings behavior, they have been largely ignored in the design of physician incentive programs. Applying these principles to physician incentives can improve their effectiveness through better alignment with performance goals. Anecdotal examples of successful incentive programs that apply behavioral economics principles are provided, even as the authors recognize that its application to the design of physician incentives is largely untested, and many outstanding questions exist. Application and rigorous evaluation of infrastructure changes and incentives are needed to design payment systems that incentivize high-quality, cost-conscious care.

Team dynamics, clinical work satisfaction, and patient care coordination between primary care providers: A mixed methods study.

BACKGROUND: Team-based care is essential for delivering high-quality, comprehensive, and coordinated care. Despite considerable research about the effects of team-based care on patient outcomes, few studies have examined how team dynamics relate to provider outcomes. PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to examine relationships among team dynamics, primary care provider (PCP) clinical work satisfaction, and patient care coordination between PCPs in 18 Harvard-affiliated primary care practices participating in Harvard's Academic Innovations Collaborative. METHODOLOGY: First, we administered a cross-sectional survey to all 548 PCPs (267 attending clinicians, 281 resident physicians) working at participating practices; 65% responded. We assessed the relationship of team dynamics with PCPs' clinical work satisfaction and perception of patient care coordination between PCPs, respectively, and the potential mediating effect of patient care coordination on the relationship between team dynamics and work satisfaction. In addition, we embedded a qualitative evaluation within the quantitative evaluation to achieve a convergent mixed methods design to help us better understand our findings and illuminate relationships among key variables. FINDINGS: Better team dynamics were positively associated with clinical work satisfaction and quality of patient care coordination between PCPs. Coordination partially mediated the relationship between team dynamics and satisfaction for attending clinicians, suggesting that higher satisfaction depends, in part, on better teamwork, yielding more coordinated patient care. We found no mediating effects for resident physicians. Qualitative results suggest that sources of satisfaction from positive team dynamics for PCPs may be most relevant to attending clinicians. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Improving primary care team dynamics could improve clinical work satisfaction among PCPs and patient care coordination between PCPs. In addition to improving outcomes that directly concern health care providers, efforts to improve aspects of team dynamics may also help resolve critical challenges in workforce planning in primary care.

The (Missed) Potential of the Patient-centered Medical Home for Disparities.

BACKGROUND: Disparities in health care and health outcomes are a significant problem in the United States. Delivery system reforms such as the patient-centered medical home (PCMH) could have important implications for disparities. OBJECTIVES: To investigate what role disparities play in current PCMH initiatives and how their set-up might impact on disparities. RESEARCH DESIGN: We selected 4 state-based PCMH initiatives (Colorado, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, and Rhode Island), 1 regional initiative in New Orleans, and 1 multistate initiative. We interviewed 30 key actors in these initiatives and 3 health policy experts on disparities in the context of PCMH. Interview data were coded using the constant comparative method. RESULTS: We find that disparities are not an explicit priority in PCMH initiatives. Nevertheless, many policymakers, providers, and initiative leaders believe that the model has the potential to reduce disparities. However, because of the funding structure of initiatives and the lack of adjustment of quality metrics, health policy experts do not share this optimism and safety-net providers report concerns and frustration. CONCLUSION: Even though disparities are currently not a priority in the PCMH community, the design of initiatives has important implications for disparities.