"It's Tricky": Care Managers' Perspectives on Interacting with Primary Care Clinicians.

Care management programs that facilitate collaboration between care managers and primary care clinicians are more likely to be successful in improving chronic disease metrics than programs that do not facilitate such collaboration. The authors sought to understand care managers' perspectives on interacting with primary care clinicians. Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with care managers (n = 29) from 3 health systems in and around a large, urban academic center. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim, and iteratively analyzed using a grounded theory approach. Care managers worked for health plans (14%), outpatient specialty clinics (31%), hospitals and emergency departments (24%), and primary care offices (14%). Care managers identified the primary care clinician as leading patients' care and as essential to avoiding unnecessary utilization. Care managers described variability in and barriers to interacting with primary care clinicians. When possible, care managers use the electronic medical record to facilitate interaction rather than communicating directly (eg, phone call) with primary care clinicians. The role of the care manager varied across programs, contributing to primary care clinicians' poor understanding of what the care manager could provide. Consequently, primary care clinicians asked the care manager for help with tasks beyond his/her role. Care managers felt inferior to primary care clinicians, a potential result of the traditional medical hierarchy, which also hindered interactions. Although care managers view interactions with the primary care clinician as essential to the health of the patient, communication challenges, variability of the care manager's role, and medical hierarchy limit collaboration.

A Targeted "Top 100" High-Risk Care Management Program Improves Adherence to Best Practices.

Care management programs for high-risk patients have yielded inconsistent results in reducing health care expenditures. We reviewed the most successful programs and identified 5 best practice areas: (1) in-person patient meetings; (2) direct care manager/physician interaction; (3) provide transitional care services; (4) educate patients; and (5) provide medication review. We measured adherence to the best practices at baseline and at 6 and 9 months into the program for the highest-risk patients. The program increased adherence from baseline to each best practice area. Program enrollment increased at the 6-month follow-up but fell at the 9-month follow-up.

Association of care management intensity with healthcare utilization in an all-condition care management program.

OBJECTIVES: To identify care needs among Medicaid and Medicare patients in an all-condition care management program involving case managers (CMs) and community health workers (CHWs), and to examine the relationship between intervention intensity and healthcare utilization. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective longitudinal evaluation of managed care-hired CMs and CHWs based at 8 primary care sites participating in the Johns Hopkins Community Health Partnership (J-CHiP). METHODS: Patients at high risk for hospitalization were enrolled in J-CHiP. CMs provided care coordination and CHWs addressed barriers to care. Four program intensity categories were created: low CM-low CHW, low CM-high CHW, high CM-low CHW, and high CM-high CHW. We evaluated the adjusted relative risk (RR) of emergency department (ED) visits, hospitalizations, and 30-day hospital readmissions pre- and post enrollment in the program using CM documentation, electronic health record data, and insurance claims. RESULTS: Among 1408 Medicaid and 2196 Medicare patients, the predominant barriers to care were lack of transportation, unstable housing, medication payment, and healthy food access. Among Medicaid and Medicare patients, high CM-high CHW and high CM-low CHW intensities were associated with a higher adjusted risk of hospitalization and 30-day hospital readmission after program implementation compared with low CM-low CHW intensity. Among patients with low CM-high CHW intensity, Medicaid patients had a higher risk of readmission (RR, 1.47; P = .016) and Medicare patients had a higher risk of ED visit (RR, 1.33; P = .001) post program implementation. CONCLUSIONS: In this longitudinal evaluation of an all-condition, unstructured, managed care organization-led program, preprogram trajectories of healthcare utilization rates among patients increased rather than decreased after program implementation, especially among patients receiving the highest care management program intensity.

Does an all-condition case management program for high-risk patients reduce health care utilization in medicaid and medicare beneficiaries with diabetes?

OBJECTIVE: To assess whether an all-condition case management program can improve health care utilization and clinical outcomes in patients with diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: 1342 patients with diabetes were enrolled in the Johns Hopkins Community Health Partnership (J-CHiP) Case Management program for high-risk patients with any chronic disease. We categorized participants into two intervention exposure categories based on the number of contacts with case manager (CM) and community health worker (CHW) per month: low contact (≤1 contact/month), and high contact (>1 contacts/month). The primary outcomes were rates of emergency department (ED) visits, hospitalizations, and 30-day hospital readmissions. RESULTS: In analyses adjusted for age, sex, race, risk score, and baseline health utilization rate, Medicaid participants in the high contact group had 42% (rate ratio (RR): 1.42; 95% CI: 1.08-1.86) and 64% (RR: 1.64; 95% CI: 1.08-2.48) higher risks for hospital admission and readmission, respectively, than the low contact group. Similar increases were seen in the Medicare participants with 20% (RR: 1.20; 95% 1.02-1.42) and 42% (RR:1.42; 95% 1.09-1.84) higher risks for admission and readmission, respectively. The associations were not statistically significant for ED visits. Subsidiary analysis of a subset with HbA1c available (n = 545) revealed a statistically significant decrease in HbA1c among Medicare participants (mean (SD): -0.17% (1.50%)), with a larger decrease in the high contact group (mean (SD): -0.23% (1.59%)). CONCLUSION: In an all-condition case management program for high-risk patients, the higher intensity of contacts with CHW and CM was not associated with a reduced health care utilization in adults with diabetes.

Implementation of a comprehensive program to improve coordination of care in an urban academic health care system.

Purpose Academic healthcare systems face great challenges in coordinating services across a continuum of care that spans hospital, community providers, home and chronic care facilities. The Johns Hopkins Community Health Partnership (J-CHiP) was created to improve coordination of acute, sub-acute and ambulatory care for patients, and improve the health of high-risk patients in surrounding neighborhoods. The paper aims to discuss this issue. Design/methodology/approach J-CHiP targeted adults admitted to the Johns Hopkins Hospital and Johns Hopkins Bayview Medical Center, patients discharged to participating skilled nursing facilities (SNFs), and high-risk Medicare and Medicaid patients receiving primary care in eight nearby outpatient sites. The primary drivers of the program were redesigned acute care delivery, seamless transitions of care and deployment of community care teams. Findings Acute care interventions included risk screening, multidisciplinary care planning, pharmacist-driven medication management, patient/family education, communication with next provider and care coordination protocols for common conditions. Transition interventions included post-discharge health plans, hand-offs and follow-up with primary care providers, Transition Guides, a patient access line and collaboration with SNFs. Community interventions involved forming multidisciplinary care coordination teams, integrated behavioral care and new partnerships with community-based organizations. Originality/value This paper offers a detailed description of the design and implementation of a complex program to improve care coordination for high-risk patients in an urban setting. The case studies feature findings from each intervention that promoted patient engagement, strengthened collaboration with community-based organizations and improved coordination of care.

Going Beyond Clinical Care to Reduce Health Care Spending: Findings From the J-CHiP Community-based Population Health Management Program Evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Addressing both clinical and nonclinical determinants of health is essential for improving population health outcomes. In 2012, the Johns Hopkins Community Health Partnership (J-CHiP) implemented innovative population health management programs across acute and community environments. The community-based program involved multidisciplinary teams [ie, physicians, care managers (CM), health behavior specialists (HBS), community health workers, neighborhood navigators] and collaboration with community-based organizations to address social determinants. OBJECTIVES: To report the impact of a community-based program on cost and utilization from 2011 to 2016. DESIGN: Difference-in-difference estimates were calculated for an inclusive cohort of J-CHiP participants and matched nonparticipants. The analysis was replicated for participants with a CM and/or HBS to estimate the differential impact with more intensive program services. SUBJECTS: A total of 3268 high-risk Medicaid and Medicare beneficiaries (1634 total J-CHiP participants, 1365 with CM and 678 with HBS). OUTCOME MEASURES: Paid costs and counts of emergency department visits, admissions, and readmissions per member per year. RESULTS: For Medicaid, costs were almost $1200 per member per year lower for participants as a whole, $2000 lower for those with an HBS, and $3000 lower for those with a CM; hospital admission and readmission rates were 9%-26% lower for those with a CM and/or HBS. For Medicare, costs were lower (-$476), but utilization was similar or higher than nonparticipants. None of the observed Medicaid or Medicare differences were statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Although not statistically significant, the results indicate a promising innovation for Medicaid beneficiaries. For Medicare, the impact was negligible, indicating the need for further program modification.

Key Design Considerations When Calculating Cost Savings for Population Health Management Programs in an Observational Setting.

OBJECTIVE: To illustrate the impact of key quasi-experimental design elements on cost savings measurement for population health management (PHM) programs. DATA SOURCES: Population health management program records and Medicaid claims and enrollment data from December 2011 through March 2016. STUDY DESIGN: The study uses a difference-in-difference design to compare changes in cost and utilization outcomes between program participants and propensity score-matched nonparticipants. Comparisons of measured savings are made based on (1) stable versus dynamic population enrollment and (2) all eligible versus enrolled-only participant definitions. Options for the operationalization of time are also discussed. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: Individual-level Medicaid administrative and claims data and PHM program records are used to match study groups on baseline risk factors and assess changes in costs and utilization. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Savings estimates are statistically similar but smaller in magnitude when eliminating variability based on duration of population enrollment and when evaluating program impact on the entire target population. Measurement in calendar time, when possible, simplifies interpretability. CONCLUSION: Program evaluation design elements, including population stability and participant definitions, can influence the estimated magnitude of program savings for the payer and should be considered carefully. Time specifications can also affect interpretability and usefulness.

Association of a Care Coordination Model With Health Care Costs and Utilization: The Johns Hopkins Community Health Partnership (J-CHiP).

Importance: The Johns Hopkins Community Health Partnership was created to improve care coordination across the continuum in East Baltimore, Maryland. Objective: To determine whether the Johns Hopkins Community Health Partnership (J-CHiP) was associated with improved outcomes and lower spending. Design, Setting, and Participants: Nonrandomized acute care intervention (ACI) and community intervention (CI) Medicare and Medicaid participants were analyzed in a quality improvement study using difference-in-differences designs with propensity score-weighted and matched comparison groups. The study spanned 2012 to 2016 and took place in acute care hospitals, primary care clinics, skilled nursing facilities, and community-based organizations. The ACI analysis compared outcomes of participants in Medicare and Medicaid during their 90-day postacute episode with those of a propensity score-weighted preintervention group at Johns Hopkins Community Health Partnership hospitals and a concurrent comparison group drawn from similar Maryland hospitals. The CI analysis compared changes in outcomes of Medicare and Medicaid participants with those of a propensity score-matched comparison group of local residents. Interventions: The ACI bundle aimed to improve transition planning following discharge. The CI included enhanced care coordination and integrated behavioral support from local primary care sites in collaboration with community-based organizations. Main Outcomes and Measures: Utilization measures of hospital admissions, 30-day readmissions, and emergency department visits; quality of care measures of potentially avoidable hospitalizations, practitioner follow-up visits; and total cost of care (TCOC) for Medicare and Medicaid participants. Results: The CI group had 2154 Medicare beneficiaries (1320 [61.3%] female; mean age, 69.3 years) and 2532 Medicaid beneficiaries (1483 [67.3%] female; mean age, 55.1 years). For the CI group's Medicaid participants, aggregate TCOC reduction was $24.4 million, and reductions of hospitalizations, emergency department visits, 30-day readmissions, and avoidable hospitalizations were 33, 51, 36, and 7 per 1000 beneficiaries, respectively. The ACI group had 26 144 beneficiary-episodes for Medicare (13 726 [52.5%] female patients; mean patient age, 68.4 years) and 13 921 beneficiary-episodes for Medicaid (7392 [53.1%] female patients; mean patient age, 52.2 years). For the ACI group's Medicare participants, there was a significant reduction in aggregate TCOC of $29.2 million with increases in 90-day hospitalizations and 30-day readmissions of 11 and 14 per 1000 beneficiary-episodes, respectively, and reduction in practitioner follow-up visits of 41 and 29 per 1000 beneficiary-episodes for 7-day and 30-day visits, respectively. For the ACI group's Medicaid participants, there was a significant reduction in aggregate TCOC of $59.8 million and the 90-day emergency department visit rate decreased by 133 per 1000 episodes, but hospitalizations increased by 49 per 1000 episodes and practitioner follow-up visits decreased by 70 and 182 per 1000 episodes for 7-day and 30-day visits, respectively. In total, the CI and ACI were associated with $113.3 million in cost savings. Conclusions and Relevance: A care coordination model consisting of complementary bundled interventions in an urban academic environment was associated with lower spending and improved health outcomes.

Case Study: Johns Hopkins Community Health Partnership: A model for transformation.

To address the challenging health care needs of the population served by an urban academic medical center, we developed the Johns Hopkins Community Health Partnership (J-CHiP), a novel care coordination program that provides services in homes, community clinics, acute care hospitals, emergency departments, and skilled nursing facilities. This case study describes a comprehensive program that includes: a community-based intervention using multidisciplinary care teams that work closely with the patient's primary care provider; an acute care intervention bundle with collaborative team-based care; and a skilled nursing facility intervention emphasizing standardized transitions and targeted use of care pathways. The program seeks to improve clinical care within and across settings, to address the non-clinical determinants of health, and to ultimately improve healthcare utilization and costs. The case study introduces: a) main program features including rationale, goals, intervention design, and partnership development; b) illness burden and social barriers of the population contributing to care challenges and opportunities; and c) lessons learned with steps that have been taken to engage both patients and providers more actively in the care model. Urban health systems, including academic medical centers, must continue to innovate in care delivery through programs like J-CHiP to meet the needs of their patients and communities.

Behavioural health interventions in the Johns Hopkins Community Health Partnership: integrated care as a component of health systems transformation.

Health systems in the USA have received a mandate to improve quality while reining in costs. Several opportunities have been created to stimulate this transformation. This paper describes the design, early implementation and lessons learned for the behavioural components of the John Hopkins Community Health Partnership (J-CHiP) programme. J-CHiP is designed to improve health outcomes and reduce the total healthcare costs of a group of high healthcare use patients who are insured by the government-funded health insurance programmes, Medicaid and Medicare. These patients have a disproportionately high prevalence of depression, other psychiatric conditions, and unhealthy behaviours that could be addressed with behavioural interventions. The J-CHiP behavioural intervention is based on integrated care models, which include embedding mental health professionals into primary sites. A four-session behaviour-based protocol was developed to motivate self-efficacy through illness management skills. In addition to staff embedded in primary care, the programme design includes expedited access to specialist psychiatric services as well as a community outreach component that addresses stigma. The progress and challenges involved with developing this programme over a relatively short period of time are discussed.

Chronic care improvement in primary care: evaluation of an integrated pay-for-performance and practice-based care coordination program among elderly patients with diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the effects of an intervention comprising (1) a practice-based care coordination program, (2) augmented by pay for performance (P4P) for meeting quality targets, and (3) complemented by a third-party disease management on quality of care and resource use for older adults with diabetes. DATA SOURCES/STUDY SETTING: Claims files of a managed care organization (MCO) for 20,943 adults aged 65 and older with diabetes receiving care in Alabama, Tennessee, or Texas, from January 2004 to March 2007. STUDY DESIGN: A quasi-experimental, longitudinal study in which pre- and postdata from 1,587 patients in nine intervention primary care practices were evaluated against 19,356 patients in MCO comparison practices (>900). Five incentivized quality measures, two nonincentivized measures, and two resource-use measures were investigated. We examined trends and changes in trends from baseline to follow-up, contrasting intervention and comparison group member results. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Quality of care generally improved for both groups during the study period. Only slight differences were seen between the intervention and comparison group trends and changes in trends over time. CONCLUSIONS: This study did not generate evidence supporting a beneficial effect of an on-site care coordination intervention augmented by P4P and complemented by third-party disease management on diabetes quality or resource use.

Guided care: a new frontier for adults with chronic conditions.

PURPOSE: This article describes "Guided Care," a promising new model of case management that includes disease management, self-management, transitional care, and caregiver support for multimorbid patients and their families. PRIMARY PRACTICE SETTINGS: Guided Care nurses, based at primary care practices, extend services to the home and all the other settings where their patients receive care. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: Guided Care nurses take responsibility for 50-60 multimorbid patients. For each patient, the nurse performs a home assessment and creates an evidence-based plan of care. In partnership with the primary physician, the Guided Care nurse then monitors and coaches the patient monthly, coordinates the patient's transitions between providers and sites of care, educates and supports family caregivers, and facilitates access to community resources. IMPLICATIONS FOR CASE MANAGEMENT PRACTICE: As a next stage in the evolution of case management, Guided Care may be supported by Medicare and, therefore, adopted widely throughout the American healthcare.

Guided care: cost and utilization outcomes in a pilot study.

Guided Care (GC) is an enhancement to primary care that incorporates the operative principles of disease management and chronic care innovations. In a 6-month quasi-experimental study, we compared the cost and utilization patterns of patients assigned to GC and Usual Care (UC). The setting was a community-based general internal medicine practice. The participants were patients of 4 general internists. They were older, chronically ill, community-dwelling patients, members of a capitated health plan, and identified as high risk. Using the Adjusted Clinical Groups Predictive Model (ACG-PM), we identified those at highest risk of future health care utilization. We selected the 75 highest-risk older patients of 2 internists at a primary care practice to receive GC and the 75 highest-risk older patients of 2 other internists in the same practice to receive UC. Insurance data were used to describe the groups' demographics, chronic conditions, insurance expenditures, and utilization. Among our results, at baseline, the GC (all targeted patients) and UC groups were similar in demographics and prevalence of chronic conditions, but the GC group had a higher mean ACG-PM risk score (0.34 vs. 0.20, p < 0.0001). During the following 6 months, the GC group had lower unadjusted mean insurance expenditures, hospital admissions, hospital days, and emergency department visits (p > 0.05). There were larger differences in insurance expenditures between the GC and UC groups at lower risk levels (at ACG-PM = 0.10, mean difference = $4340; at ACG-PM = 0.6, mean difference = $1304). Thirty-one of the 75 patients assigned to receive GC actually enrolled in the intervention. These results suggest that GC may reduce insurance expenditures for high-risk older adults. If these results are confirmed in larger, randomized studies, GC may help to increase the efficiency of health care for the aging American population.

Guided care for multimorbid older adults.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to test the feasibility of a new model of health care designed to improve the quality of life and the efficiency of resource use for older adults with multimorbidity. DESIGN AND METHODS: Guided Care enhances primary care by infusing the operative principles of seven chronic care innovations: disease management, self-management, case management, lifestyle modification, transitional care, caregiver education and support, and geriatric evaluation and management. To practice Guided Care, a registered nurse completes an educational program and uses a customized electronic health record in working with two to five primary care physicians to meet the health care needs of 50 to 60 older patients with multimorbidity. For each patient, the nurse performs a standardized comprehensive home assessment and then collaborates with the physician, the patient, and the caregiver to create two comprehensive, evidence-based management plans: a Care Guide for health care professionals, and an Action Plan for the patient and caregiver. Based in the primary care office, the nurse then regularly monitors the patient's chronic conditions, coaches the patient in self-management, coordinates the efforts of all involved health care professionals, smoothes the patient's transitions between sites of care, provides education and support for family caregivers, and facilitates access to community resources. RESULTS: A 1-year pilot test in a community-based primary care practice suggested that Guided Care is feasible and acceptable to physicians, patients, and caregivers. IMPLICATIONS: If successful in a controlled trial, Guided Care could improve the quality of life and efficiency of health care for older adults with multimorbidity.

Caring for children with special healthcare needs in the managed care environment.

Dramatic medical and technological advances over the past 15 years have resulted in the survival into adulthood of children with chronic health conditions. As this population subset has increased, the demand of caring for these children in the managed care arena has become challenging from a clinical, fiscal, and member satisfaction perspective. A disease management program was designed for children, ages birth through age 18, identified as having special needs at the time of birth or at any point throughout childhood related to disease processes such as diabetes, sickle cell disease, genetic aberrations, or the multiple complications of extreme prematurity. Components of the program included identification of the population, coordinated risk assessment, and ongoing case management interventions. Most important, outcome indicators were tracked to demonstrate program effectiveness. The formulation and function of a dedicated disease management database is also discussed.