A Framework for Applying Global Learning to Improve Primary Health Care in the United States.

Background and objectives: Lessons from global health have long informed efforts to improve primary health care (PHC) in the United States (US). Despite this history, no generalizable framework exists to guide US stakeholders in the identification and application of ideas from abroad related to the key PHC components of community engagement and service delivery. We sought to develop such a framework. Methods: We reviewed the experience of Global to Local, a community-based organization (CBO) founded with a mission to apply global health strategies to improve the health in vulnerable populations in the US, and examined the experience of care delivery organizations in the US that have successfully implemented global-to-local solutions. Based on that experience, and supported by the advice of an expert panel, we developed a framework for applying global learning to improve US PHC. Findings: The framework includes six change concepts under three broad categories. The first category focuses on the need to actively and intentionally incorporate a global perspective in organizational program design and improvement activities. The second category addresses approaches to identifying global solutions related to community engagement and to health service delivery. The third category focuses on adaptation and implementation of lessons from global health in domestic contexts by applying relevant insights from dissemination and implementation science and diffusion of innovation theory. Conclusions: In the absence of a robust literature providing implementation guidance to US health systems and CBOs open to adopting or adapting PHC strategies and practices from other countries, the proposed framework synthesizing the experience of organizations that have done so can inform efforts to apply lessons from global health to improve PHC in the US.

Empanelment: A foundational component of primary health care.

Empanelment is a foundational strategy for building or improving primary health care systems and a critical pathway for achieving effective universal health coverage. However, there is little international guidance for defining empanelment or understanding how to implement empanelment systems in low- and middle-income countries. To fill this gap, a multi-country collaborative within the Joint Learning Network for Universal Health Coverage developed this empanelment overview, proposing a people-centered definition of empanelment that reflects the responsibility to proactively deliver primary care services to all individuals in a target population. This document, building on existing literature on empanelment and representing input from 10 countries, establishes standard concepts of empanelment and describes why and how empanelment is used. Finally, it identifies key domains that may influence effective empanelment and that must be considered in deciding how empanelment can be implemented. This document is designed to be a useful resource for health policymakers, planners and decision-makers in ministries of health, as well as front line providers of primary care service delivery who are working to ensure quality people-centered primary care to everyone everywhere.

Primary Care Collaboration to Improve Diagnosis and Screening for Colorectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a leading cause of cancer death, reducible by screening and early diagnosis, yet many patients fail to receive recommended screening. As part of an academic improvement collaborative, 25 primary care practices worked to improve CRC screening and diagnosis. METHODS: The project featured triannual learning sessions, monthly conference calls, practice coach support, and monthly reporting. The project phases included literature review and interviews with national leaders/organizations, development of driver diagrams to identify key factors and change ideas, project launch and practice team planning, and a practice improvement phase. RESULTS: The project activities included (1) inventory of barriers and best practices, (2) driver diagram to drive improvements, (3) list of changes to try, (4) compilation of lessons learned, and (5) five key changes to optimize screening and follow-up. Practices leveraged prior transformation efforts to track patients for screening and follow-up during and between office visits. By mapping processes, testing changes, and collecting data, sites targeted opportunities to improve quality, safety, efficiency, and patient and care team experience. Successful change interventions centered around partnering with gastroenterology, engaging leadership, leveraging registries and health information technology, promoting alternative screening options, and partnering with and supporting patients. Several practices achieved improvement in screening rates, while others demonstrated no change from baseline during the 10-month testing and implementation phase (July 2014-April 2015). CONCLUSION: The collaborative effectively engaged teams in a broad set of process improvements with key lessons learned related to barriers, information technology challenges, outreach challenges/strategies, and importance of stakeholder and patient engagement.

Practical Approaches for Achieving Integrated Behavioral Health Care in Primary Care Settings.

Behavioral health problems are common, yet most patients do not receive effective treatment in primary care settings. Despite availability of effective models for integrating behavioral health care in primary care settings, uptake has been slow. The Behavioral Health Integration Implementation Guide provides practical guidance for adapting and implementing effective integrated behavioral health care into patient-centered medical homes. The authors gathered input from stakeholders involved in behavioral health integration efforts: safety net providers, subject matter experts in primary care and behavioral health, a behavioral health patient and peer specialist, and state and national policy makers. Stakeholder input informed development of the Behavioral Health Integration Implementation Guide and the GROW Pathway Planning Worksheet. The Behavioral Health Integration Implementation Guide is model neutral and allows organizations to take meaningful steps toward providing integrated care that achieves access and accountability.

The safety net medical home initiative: transforming care for vulnerable populations.

BACKGROUND: Despite findings that medical homes may reduce or eliminate health care disparities among underserved and minority populations, most previous medical home pilot and demonstration projects have focused on health care delivery systems serving commercially insured patients and Medicare beneficiaries. OBJECTIVES: To develop a replicable approach to support medical home transformation among diverse practices serving vulnerable and underserved populations. DESIGN: Facilitated by a national program team, convening organizations in 5 states provided coaching and learning community support to safety net practices over a 4-year period. To guide transformation, we developed a framework of change concepts aligned with supporting tools including implementation guides, activity checklists, and measurement instruments. SUBJECTS: Sixty-five health centers, homeless clinics, private practices, residency training centers, and other safety net practices in Colorado, Idaho, Massachusetts, Oregon, and Pennsylvania. MEASURES: We evaluated implementation of the change concepts using the Patient-Centered Medical Home-Assessment, and conducted a survey of participating practices to assess perceptions of the impact of the technical assistance. RESULTS: All practices implemented key features of the medical home model, and nearly half (47.6%) implemented the 33 identified key changes to a substantial degree as evidenced by level A Patient-Centered Medical Home-Assessment scores. Two thirds of practices that achieved substantial implementation did so only after participating in the initiative for >2 years. By the end of the initiative, 83.1% of sites achieved external recognition as medical homes. CONCLUSIONS: Despite resource constraints and high-need populations, safety net clinics made considerable progress toward medical home implementation when provided robust, multimodal support over a 4-year period.

Unlocking the black box: supporting practices to become patient-centered medical homes.

BACKGROUND: Despite widespread interest in supporting primary care transformation, few evidence-based strategies for technical assistance exist. The Safety Net Medical Home Initiative (SNMHI) sought to develop a replicable and sustainable model for Patient-centered Medical Home practice transformation. OBJECTIVES: This paper describes the multimodal technical assistance approach used by the SNMHI and the participating practices' assessment of its value and helpfulness in supporting their transformation. RESULTS: Components of the technical assistance framework included: (1) individual site-level coaching provided by local medical home facilitators and supplemented by expert consultation; (2) regional and national learning communities of participating practices that included in-person meetings and field trips; (3) data monitoring and feedback including longitudinal feedback on medical home implementation as measured by the Patient-centered Medical Home-A; (4) written implementation guides, tools, and webinars relating to each of the 8 Change Concepts for Practice Transformation; and (5) small grant funds to support infrastructure and staff development. Overall, practices found the technical assistance helpful and most valued in-person, peer-to-peer-learning opportunities. Practices receiving technical assistance from membership organizations with which they belonged before the SNMHI scored higher on measures of medical home implementation than practices working with organizations with whom they had no prior relationship. CONCLUSIONS: There is an important role for both local and national organizations to provide nonduplicative, mutually reinforcing support for primary care transformation. How (in-person, between-peers) and by whom technical assistance is provided may be important to consider.

Improving care coordination in primary care.

BACKGROUND: Although coordinating care is a defining characteristic of primary care, evidence suggests that both patients and providers perceive failures in communication and care when care is received from multiple sources. OBJECTIVES: To examine the utility of a newly developed Care Coordination Model in improving care coordination among participating practices in the Safety Net Medical Home Initiative (SNMHI). RESEARCH DESIGN: In this paper, we used correlation analysis to evaluate whether application of the elements of the Care Coordination Model by SNMHI sites, as measured by the Key Activities Checklist (KAC), was associated with more effective care coordination as measured by another instrument, the PCMH-A. MEASURES: SNMHI measures are practice self-assessments based on the 8 change concepts that define a PCMH, one of which is Care Coordination. For this study, we correlated 12 KAC items that describe activities felt to improve coordination of care with 5 PCMH-A items that indicate the extent to which a practice has developed the capability to effectively coordinate care. Practice staff indicated whether any of the KAC activities were being test, implemented, sustained, or not on 4 occasions. RESULTS: The Care Coordination Model elements-assume accountability, build relationships with care partners, support patients through the referral or transition process, and create connections to support information exchange-were positively correlated with some PCMH-A care coordination items but not others. Activities related to the model were most strongly correlated with following up patients seen in the Emergency Department or discharged from hospital. CONCLUSIONS: The analysis provides suggestive evidence that activities consistent with the 4 elements of the Care Coordination Model may enable safety net primary care to better coordinate care for its patients, but further study is clearly needed.

The Harvard Medical School Academic Innovations Collaborative: transforming primary care practice and education.

PROBLEM: Academic medical centers (AMCs) need new approaches to delivering higher-quality care at lower costs, and engaging trainees in the work of high-functioning primary care practices. APPROACH: In 2012, the Harvard Medical School Center for Primary Care, in partnership with with local AMCs, established an Academic Innovations Collaborative (AIC) with the goal of transforming primary care education and practice. This novel two-year learning collaborative consisted of hospital- and community-based primary care teaching practices, committed to building highly functional teams, managing populations, and engaging patients. The AIC built on models developed by Qualis Health and the Institute for Healthcare Improvement, optimized for the local AMC context. Foundational elements included leadership engagement and development, application of rapid-cycle process improvement, and the creation of teams to care for defined patient populations. Nineteen practices across six AMCs participated, with nearly 260,000 patients and 450 resident learners. The collaborative offered three 1.5-day learning sessions each year featuring shared learning, practice coaches, and improvement measures, along with monthly data reporting, webinars, and site visits. OUTCOMES: Validated self-reports by transformation teams showed that practices made substantial improvement across all areas of change. Important factors for success included leadership development, practice-level resources, and engaging patients and trainees. NEXT STEPS: The AIC model shows promise as a path for AMCs to catalyze health system transformation through primary care improvement. In addition to further evaluating the impact of practice transformation, expansion will require support from AMCs and payers, and the application of similar approaches on a broader scale.

Assessing progress toward becoming a patient-centered medical home: an assessment tool for practice transformation.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the properties of the Patient-Centered Medical Home Assessment (PCMH-A) as a tool to stimulate and monitor progress among primary care practices interested in transforming to patient-centered medical homes (PCMHs). STUDY SETTING: Sixty-five safety net practices from five states participating in a national demonstration program for PCMH transformation. STUDY DESIGN: Longitudinal analyses of PCMH-A scores were performed. Scores were reviewed for agreement and sites were categorized over time into one of five categories by external facilitators. Comparisons to key activity completion rates and NCQA PCMH recognition status were completed. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: Multidisciplinary teams at each practice completed the 33-item self-assessment tool every 6 months between March 2010 and September 2012. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Mean overall PCMH-A scores increased (7.2, March 2010, to 9.1, September 2012; [p < .01]). Increases were statistically significant for each of the change concepts (p < .05). Facilitators agreed with scores 82% of the time. NCQA-recognized sites had higher PCMH-A scores than sites that were not yet recognized. Sites that completed more transformation activities and progressed over defined tiers reported higher PCMH-A scores. Scores improved most in areas where technical assistance was provided. CONCLUSIONS: The PCMH-A was sensitive to change over time and provided an accurate reflection of practice transformation.

The changes involved in patient-centered medical home transformation.

In 2007, the major primary care professional societies collaboratively introduced a new model of primary care: the patient-centered medical home (PCMH). The published document outlines the basic attributes and expectations of a PCMH but not with the specificity needed to help interested clinicians and administrators make the necessary changes to their practice. To identify the specific changes required to become a medical home, the authors reviewed literature and sought the opinions of two multi-stakeholder groups. This article describes the eight consensus change concepts and 32 key changes that emerged from this process, and the evidence supporting their inclusion.

Trends in perinatal and infant health disparities between rural American Indians and Alaska natives and rural Whites.

OBJECTIVES: We examined disparities in perinatal care, birth outcomes, and infant health between rural American Indian and Alaska Native (AIAN) persons and rural Whites over time. METHODS: We compared perinatal and infant health measures for 217 064 rural AIAN births and 5 032 533 rural non-Hispanic White births. RESULTS: Among American Indians and Alaska Natives, unadjusted rates of inadequate prenatal care (1985-1987, 36.3%; 1995-1997, 26.3%) and postneonatal death (1985-1987, 7.1 per 1000; 1995-1997, 4.8 per 1000) improved significantly. However, disparities between American Indians and Alaska Natives and Whites in adjusted odds ratios (AORs) of postneonatal death (1985-1987, AOR = 1.55; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.41, 1.71; 1995-1997, AOR = 1.46; 95% CI = 1.31, 1.64) and adjusted risk ratios (ARRs) of inadequate prenatal care (1985-1987, ARR = 1.67; 95% CI = 1.65, 1.69; 1995-1997, ARR = 1.84; 95% CI = 1.81, 1.87) persisted. CONCLUSIONS: Despite significant decreases in inadequate prenatal care and postneonatal death among American Indians and Alaska Natives, additional measures are needed to close persistent health gaps for this group.

Hospitals collaborate to decrease surgical site infections.

BACKGROUND: Despite a large body of evidence describing care processes known to reduce the incidence of surgical site infections, many are underutilized in practice. METHODS: Fifty-six hospitals volunteered to redesign their systems as part of the National Surgical Infection Prevention Collaborative, a 1-year demonstration project sponsored by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Each facility selected quality improvement objectives for a select group of surgical procedures and reported monthly clinical process measure data. RESULTS: Forty-four hospitals reported data on 35,543 surgical cases. Hospitals improved in measures related to appropriate antimicrobial agent selection, timing, and duration; normothermia; oxygenation; euglycemia; and appropriate hair removal. The infection rate decreased 27%, from 2.3% to 1.7% in the first versus last 3 months. CONCLUSIONS: The Collaborative demonstrated improvement in processes known to be associated with reduced risk of surgical site infections. Quality improvement organizations can be effective resources for quality improvement in the surgical arena.

A state-level application of the chronic illness breakthrough series: results from two collaboratives on diabetes in Washington State.

BACKGROUND: Breakthrough Series Collaboratives addressing chronic conditions have been conducted at the national level and in single health care delivery systems but not at the state level. Two state-level collaboratives were conducted: Diabetes Collaborative I (October 1999-November 2000) included 17 clinic teams from across the state, and Diabetes Collaborative II (February 2001-March 2002) included 30 teams and 6 health plans. METHODS: Both collaboratives took place in Washington State, where a diverse group of primary care practices participated, and health insurance plans partnered with the clinic teams. Teams individually tested and implement changes in their systems of care to address all components of the Chronic Care Model. RESULTS: All 47 teams completed the collaboratives, and all but one maintained a registry throughout the 13 months. Most teams demonstrated some amount of improvement on process and outcome measures that addressed blood sugar testing and control, blood pressure control, lipid testing and control, foot exams, dilated eye exams, and self-management goals. CONCLUSION: The benefits of holding collaboratives more locally include increased technical support and increased participation, translating into wider implementation of prevention-focused, patient-centered care.

Case studies from two collaboratives on diabetes in Washington State.

Two individual teams, one from a small, rural clinic and one from a larger urban health system, were able to introduce innovations in care and realize improvement in patient outcomes.

Improving the care of ESRD patients: a success story.

Medicare's health care quality improvement program (HCQIP) is a national effort to improve beneficiaries' quality of care. The end stage renal disease (ESRD) HCQIP was implemented in 1994 in response to criticism about the poor quality of care received by ESRD patients. Quality improvement efforts initiated by the ESRD Networks and dialysis providers in response to the HCQIP have demonstrated substantial improvement in care for dialysis patients. This article describes the evolution of the ESRD HCQIP and its successful application in the ESRD program.

Developing clinical performance measures based on the Dialysis Outcomes Quality Initiative Clinical Practice Guidelines: process, outcomes, and implications.

BACKGROUND: The National Kidney Foundation-Dialysis Outcomes Quality Initiative (NKF-DOQI) Clinical Practice Guidelines established a widely accepted set of recommendations for high-quality dialysis care. To enhance the End-Stage Renal Disease Core Indicators Project, an ongoing effort to assess and improve dialysis care in the United States, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) commissioned a project to develop clinical performance measures (CPMs) based on the NKF-DOQI guidelines. METHODS: The CMS contracted with Qualis Health, a private nonprofit organization serving as a Medicare Quality Improvement Organization, to facilitate a 9-month project to develop dialysis CPMs with the participation of a broad range of stakeholders from the renal community. Work groups were established to develop CPMs addressing 4 areas: hemodialysis adequacy, peritoneal dialysis adequacy, vascular access management, and anemia management. The NKF-DOQI guidelines were prioritized based on the strength of the evidence supporting the guidelines, the feasibility of developing performance measures, and the significance of the areas addressed to the quality of care delivered to dialysis patients. Expert panels developed data specifications, sampling approaches, data-collection tools, and analytic strategies. RESULTS: Sixteen CPMs were developed based on 22 of 114 NKF-DOQI guidelines. After establishing reliability through field-testing of data-collection instruments, the CPMs were applied to a sample of 8,838 randomly selected hemodialysis patients and 1,650 randomly selected adult peritoneal dialysis patients in summer 1999. CONCLUSION: The development of CPMs based on the NKF-DOQI Clinical Practice Guidelines for dialysis care was accomplished in a timely and effective manner by engaging a broad range of stakeholders and technical experts. The CPMs are important tools to assess and improve the quality of dialysis care in the United States. Few comparable efforts exist in other fields of medicine.

Motivational brochures increase the number of medicare-eligible persons with diabetes making therapeutic footwear claims.

OBJECTIVE: This study tests the hypothesis that Medicare beneficiaries at high risk of foot complications who are mailed a motivational brochure describing the Medicare diabetes-related therapeutic footwear benefit will increase their therapeutic footwear-related Medicare claims. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: In this quasi-experimental study, a motivational brochure was mailed in the summer of 1997 to 5,872 Medicare beneficiaries in Washington, Alaska, and Idaho who were identified as being at high risk for foot-related claims on the basis of their prior Medicare claims history. Beneficiaries were identified through footwear claims made in these states-and also in three comparison states (Oregon, Montana, and Wyoming)-during the 18 months before and after the mailing. Linear regression was used to compare the number of persons making claims in the intervention states with the comparison states before, at the time of, and after the mailing. RESULTS: Before the intervention, the number of persons making claims was increasing in the non-intervention states and decreasing in the intervention states. During the first month after the intervention mailing, the number of persons making claims remained nearly the same in non-intervention states, but increased 13 persons per month in intervention states (95% CI 3.5-11 persons/month). After the intervention, the number of persons making claims continued to increase similarly in both intervention and non-intervention states. CONCLUSIONS: Mailed motivational brochures were associated with an increase in the number of persons making therapeutic footwear claims. Randomized trials should confirm these findings.

Developing dialysis facility-specific performance measures for public reporting.

The Balanced Budget Act (BBA) of 1997 directed CMS to implement a system to measure and report the quality of dialysis services under Medicare by 2000. Because of this tight timeframe, a rapid-cycle measurement development process was initiated to develop dialysis facility-specific measures that could be released to the public. The result was "Dialysis Facility Compare" which has served as a template for the development of public reporting initiatives for other providers in the Medicare Program. This article describes the process used for developing and reporting these performance measures and the lessons learned for future work in this area.