Clinical and economic results from a randomized trial of clinical decision support in a rural health network.

BACKGROUND: Replication studies evaluate technologies in usual use settings. METHODS: We conducted a clinical trial to determine whether reductions in clinical and economic results observed in a previous study could be replicated in a larger setting. Subjects were randomized to receive intervention (email notifications for sentinel health events sent to their care managers) or control. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was the rate of emergency department visits for low severity conditions. Secondary outcomes included: medical costs and other clinical event rates. RESULTS: We randomized 13,454 individuals (intervention, 6740; control, 6714). Subjects in both groups had similar rates of clinical events and medical costs. CONCLUSION: The use of email notifications to care managers was associated with no reductions in clinical events or medical costs.

Co-location of behavioral health and primary care services: Community Care of North Carolina and the Center of Excellence for Integrated Care.

The North Carolina Division of Mental Health, Developmental Disabilities, and Substance Abuse Services works with partners to reduce the impact of behavioral health conditions in communities throughout the state. We review state-funded behavioral health initiatives that provide support to military personnel and their families, with special attention to public services and co-location efforts.

Stroke-related knowledge among uninsured Latino immigrants in Durham County, North Carolina.

BACKGROUND: Knowledge of stroke risk factors and symptoms is a necessary prerequisite for improving prevention and reducing treatment delays. Little is known about stroke-related knowledge among the US immigrant Latino population. METHODS: A previously published stroke knowledge survey was translated into Spanish and administered orally to a convenience sample of 76 Latino Spanish-speaking clients of a community-based health care management program for uninsured residents of Durham County, North Carolina, between January and March 2007. RESULTS: Of respondents, 81% could not correctly name a single stroke risk factor, 57% could not correctly identify a stroke symptom, and only 45% said they would telephone emergency services (dial 9-1-1), call an ambulance, or go to a hospital if they or a family member were having a stroke. However, 80% of respondents knew that a stroke could be prevented, and 86% knew that a stroke could be treated. CONCLUSION: Stroke-related knowledge may be particularly poor in the uninsured Latino immigrant population. Novel approaches will be needed to improve awareness and prevention in this high-risk group.

Improving the health of the community: Duke's experience with community engagement.

Evidence is accumulating that the United States is falling behind in its potential to translate biomedical advances into practical applications for the population. Societal forces, increased awareness of health disparities, and the direction of clinical and translational research are producing a compelling case for AHCs to bridge the gaps between scientific knowledge and medical advancement and between medical advancement and health. The Duke University Health System, the city and county of Durham, North Carolina, and multiple local nonprofit and civic organizations are actively engaged in addressing this need. More than a decade ago, Duke and its community partners began collaborating on projects to meet specific, locally defined community health needs. In 2005, Duke and Durham jointly developed a set of Principles of Community Engagement reflecting the key elements of the partnership and crafted an educational infrastructure to train health professionals in the principles and practice of community engagement. And, most recently, Duke has worked to establish the Duke Translational Medicine Institute, funded in part by a National Institutes of Health Clinical Translational Science Award, to improve health through innovative behavioral, social, and medical knowledge, matched with community engagement and the information sciences.

Health needs and barriers to healthcare of women who have experienced intimate partner violence.

BACKGROUND: This study assessed the health needs and barriers to healthcare among women with a history of intimate partner violence (IPV) as told by women themselves. METHODS: Qualitative interviews were conducted with 25 women clients and 10 staff members at a crisis center in metropolitan North Carolina. Clients also completed a structured survey. RESULTS: Eleven shelter clients and 14 walk-ins completed the survey and interview. Client participants were demographically mixed, and 20% were Spanish-speaking immigrants. Most clients were unemployed and uninsured. Women reported worse health in the interviews than on the surveys; clients' major health needs were chronic pain, chronic diseases, and mental illness. Reported barriers to healthcare were cost, psychological control by the abuser, and low self-esteem and self-efficacy. Staff's perceptions of clients health needs differed from clients,' focusing on reproductive health, HIV/sexually transmitted infection (STI), mental illness, and inadequate preventive healthcare. Staff and clients' perceptions of barriers to healthcare were more congruent. Suggestions for improving the center's response were to offer more health education groups and more health-related staff trainings. Agency barriers to implementing these changes were limited funding, focus on crisis management, and perceived disconnect with the healthcare system. CONCLUSIONS: Health needs of women who have experienced IPV are significant and include physical and mental concerns. IPV creates unique barriers to accessing healthcare, which can be addressed only partially by a crisis center. Greater coordination with the healthcare system is needed to respond more appropriately to the health needs of women who have experienced IPV.

Neighborhood clinics: an academic medical center-community health center partnership.

This report describes a clinic run by a federally-qualified health center and an academic medical center. The clinic expands the community's primary care capacity, combining advantages of big and small settings, and of its dual affiliation. Survey data suggest the clinic prevents health care delays and lowers emergency department use.

Just for Us: an academic medical center-community partnership to maintain the health of a frail low-income senior population.

PURPOSE: To promote health and maintain independence, Just for Us provides financially sustainable, in-home, integrated care to medically fragile, low-income seniors and disabled adults living in subsidized housing. DESIGN AND METHODS: The program provides primary care, care management, and mental health services delivered in patient's homes by a multidisciplinary, multiagency team. RESULTS: After 2 years of operation, Just for Us is serving nearly 300 individuals in 10 buildings. The program is demonstrating improvement in individual indices of health. Medicaid expenditures for enrollees are shifting from ambulances and hospital services to pharmacy, personal care, and outpatient visits. The program is not breaking even, but it is moving toward that goal. The program's success is based on a partnership involving an academic medical center, a community health center, county social and mental health agencies, and a city housing authority to coordinate and leverage services. IMPLICATIONS: Just for Us is becoming a financially sustainable way of creating a "system within a nonsystem" for low-income elderly persons in clustered housing.

Alternative models for academic family practices.

BACKGROUND: The Future of Family Medicine Report calls for a fundamental redesign of the American family physician workplace. At the same time, academic family practices are under economic pressure. Most family medicine departments do not have self-supporting practices, but seek support from specialty colleagues or hospital practice plans. Alternative models for academic family practices that are economically viable and consistent with the principles of family medicine are needed. This article presents several "experiments" to address these challenges. METHODS: The basis of comparison is a traditional academic family medicine center. Apart of the faculty practice plan, our center consistently operated at a deficit despite high productivity. A number of different practice types and alternative models of service delivery were therefore developed and tested. They ranged from a multi-specialty office arrangement, to a community clinic operated as part of a federally-qualified health center, to a team of providers based in and providing care for residents of an elderly public housing project. Financial comparisons using consistent accounting across models are provided. RESULTS: Academic family practices can, at least in some settings, operate without subsidy while providing continuity of care to a broad segment of the community. The prerequisites are that the clinicians must see patients efficiently, and be able to bill appropriately for their payer mix. CONCLUSION: Experimenting within academic practice structure and organization is worthwhile, and can result in economically viable alternatives to traditional models.

Making a home in the community for the academic medical center.

Academic medical centers (AMCs) have traditionally provided primary care for low-income and other underserved populations. However, they have had difficulty developing lasting partnerships with other organizations serving the same populations. This article describes an exception to the rule, in which an academic division was created at Duke University Medical Center to develop effective collaborations with health care and social service providers in Durham, North Carolina, including both public agencies and private organizations. Together, the division and its partners have created and operate programs that improve health outcomes and access to care for those at risk. These programs share a number of characteristics: they are designed to meet the needs of the patient, not the provider; they are based in the community, not in the AMC; they bring services to people's homes, schools, and neighborhoods; they are multidisciplinary, combining health, social, and even mental health services; and, once established, they are revenue-generating and can be made self-supporting when grant funding ends. These programs are also innovative. They are designed to model and test new ways of organizing and delivering care. Preliminary indications suggest that they also strengthen the AMC's relationships with the surrounding community.

Development of an interinstitutional collaboration to support community-partnered research addressing the health of emerging Latino populations.

Collaborative and participatory research approaches have received considerable attention as means to understanding and addressing disparities in health and health care. In this article, the authors describe the process of building a three-way partnership among two academic health centers-Duke University and the University of North Carolina-and members of the Latino community in North Carolina to develop and pilot test a lay health advisor program to improve Latina immigrants' mental health and coping skills. The authors applied the principles of participatory research to engage community and academic partners, to select the health topic and population, and to develop program goals and objectives. Key challenges were negotiating administrative structures and learning institutional cultures, as well as dealing with contextual issues such as mental health reform and antiimmigrant sentiment in the state.Some important lessons learned are to seek opportunities for taking advantage of existing relationships and expertise at each academic institution, to be respectful of the burden of research on vulnerable communities, and to involve community partners at all stages of the process.