Implementation of Medical Homes in Federally Qualified Health Centers.

BACKGROUND: From 2011 through 2014, the Federally Qualified Health Center Advanced Primary Care Practice Demonstration provided care management fees and technical assistance to a nationwide sample of 503 federally qualified health centers to help them achieve the highest (level 3) medical-home recognition by the National Committee for Quality Assurance, a designation that requires the implementation of processes to improve access, continuity, and coordination. METHODS: We examined the achievement of medical-home recognition and used Medicare claims and beneficiary surveys to measure utilization of services, quality of care, patients' experiences, and Medicare expenditures in demonstration sites versus comparison sites. Using difference-in-differences analyses, we compared changes in outcomes in the two groups of sites during a 3-year period. RESULTS: Level 3 medical-home recognition was awarded to 70% of demonstration sites and to 11% of comparison sites. Although the number of visits to federally qualified health centers decreased in the two groups, smaller reductions among demonstration sites than among comparison sites led to a relative increase of 83 visits per 1000 beneficiaries per year at demonstration sites (P<0.001). Similar trends explained the higher performance of demonstration sites with respect to annual eye examinations and nephropathy tests (P<0.001 for both comparisons); there were no significant differences with respect to three other process measures. Demonstration sites had larger increases than comparison sites in emergency department visits (30.3 more per 1000 beneficiaries per year, P<0.001), inpatient admissions (5.7 more per 1000 beneficiaries per year, P=0.02), and Medicare Part B expenditures ($37 more per beneficiary per year, P=0.02). Demonstration-site participation was not associated with relative improvements in most measures of patients' experiences. CONCLUSIONS: Demonstration sites had higher rates of medical-home recognition and smaller decreases in the number of patients' visits to federally qualified health centers than did comparison sites, findings that may reflect better access to primary care relative to comparison sites. Demonstration sites had larger increases in emergency department visits, inpatient admissions, and Medicare Part B expenditures. (Funded by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.).

Culturally Competent Informed-Consent Process to Evaluate a Social Policy for Older Persons With Low Literacy: The Mexican Case.

The informed-consent process seeks to provide complete information to participants about a research project and to protect personal information they may disclose. In this article, we present an informed-consent process that we piloted and improved to obtain consent from older adults in Yucatan, Mexico. Respondents had limited fluency in Spanish, spoke the local Mayan language, and had some physical limitations due to their age. We describe how we adapted the informed-consent process to comply with U.S. and Mexican regulations, while simplifying the forms and providing them in Spanish and Mayan. We present the challenges and lessons learned when dealing with low-literacy older populations, some with diminished autonomy, in a bilingual context and a binational approach to the legal framework.

JOURNAL CLUB: Radiologists' Perceptions of Computerized Decision Support: A Focus Group Study From the Medicare Imaging Demonstration Project.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to discern radiologists' perceptions regarding the implementation of a decision support system intervention as part of the Medicare Imaging Demonstration project and the effect of decision support on radiologists' interactions with ordering clinicians, their radiology work flow, and appropriateness of advanced imaging. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: A focus group study was conducted with a diverse sample of radiologists involved in interpreting advanced imaging studies at Medicare Imaging Demonstration project sites. A semistructured moderator guide was used, and all focus group discussions were recorded and transcribed verbatim. Qualitative data analysis software was used to code thematic content and identify representative segments of text. Participating radiologists also completed an accompanying survey designed to supplement focus group discussions. RESULTS: Twenty-six radiologists participated in four focus group discussions. The following major themes related to the radiologists' perceptions after decision support implementation were identified: no substantial change in radiologists' interactions with referring clinicians; no substantial change in radiologist work flow, including protocol-writing time; and no perceived increase in imaging appropriateness. Radiologists provided suggestions for improvements in the decision support system, including increasing the usability of clinical data captured, and expressed a desire to have greater involvement in future development and implementation efforts. CONCLUSION: Overall, radiologists from health care systems involved in the Medicare Imaging Demonstration did not perceive that decision support had a substantial effect, either positive or negative, on their professional roles and responsibilities. Radiologists expressed a desire to improve efficiencies and quality of care by having greater involvement in future efforts.

Medicare Imaging Demonstration Final Evaluation: Report to Congress.

Increasing use of advanced medical imaging is often cited as a key driver of cost growth in medical spending. In 2011, the Medicare Imaging Demonstration from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services began testing whether exposing ordering clinicians to appropriateness guidelines for advanced imaging would reduce ordering inappropriate images. The evaluation examined trends in advanced diagnostic imaging utilization starting January 1, 2009-more than two years before the beginning of the demonstration-to November 30, 2013-two months after the close of the demonstration. Small changes in ordering patterns were noted, but decision support systems were unable to assign appropriateness ratings to many orders, thus limiting the potential effectiveness of decision support. Many opportunities to refine decision support systems have been identified.

Development and evaluation of the CAHPS (Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems) survey for in-center hemodialysis patients.

BACKGROUND: The US Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services assess patient experiences of care as part of the end-stage renal disease prospective payment system and Quality Incentive Program. This article describes the development and evaluation of the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) In-Center Hemodialysis Survey. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted formative research to generate survey questions and performed statistical analyses to evaluate the survey's measurement properties. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: Formative research included focus groups, cognitive interviews, and field testing the survey with dialysis patients. MEASUREMENTS & OUTCOMES: We assessed internal consistency reliability (Cronbach alpha) and center-level reliability for 3 multi-item scales. We evaluated construct validity using correlations of the scales with global ratings of the kidney doctor, staff, and dialysis center. RESULTS: Response rate was 46% (1,454 completed surveys). Analyses support 3 multi-item scales: Nephrologists' Communication and Caring (7 items, alpha=0.89), Quality of Dialysis Center Care and Operations (22 items, alpha=0.93), and Providing Information to Patients (11 items, alpha=0.75). The communication scale was correlated the most strongly with the global rating of the "kidney doctor" (r=0.78). The Dialysis Center Care and Operations scale was correlated most strongly with global ratings of staff (r=0.75) and the center (r=0.69). Providing Information to Patients was correlated most strongly with the global rating of the staff (r=0.41). LIMITATIONS: A relatively small number of patients completed the survey in Spanish. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides support for the reliability and validity of the CAHPS In-Center Hemodialysis Survey for assessing patient experiences of care at dialysis facilities. The survey can be used to compare care provided at different facilities.

Development of items to assess patients' health literacy experiences at hospitals for the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) Hospital Survey.

BACKGROUND: The complexity of health information frequently exceeds patients' skills to understand and use it. Improvement in hospital communication has the potential to improve the quality of care. OBJECTIVE: To develop a set of items to supplement the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) Hospital Survey (HCAHPS) to assess how well hospitals communicate health information to inpatients. METHODS: We conducted an environmental scan and obtained input from stakeholders to identify domains and survey items, and cognitively tested the item set in English and Spanish. We administered the items to a random sample of adult hospital patients using mail and telephone data collection. We estimate item-scale correlations for hypothesized multi-item composites, internal consistency reliability for composites, correlations among composites, and regressed global rating of the hospital and a would you recommend the hospital items on HCAHPS existing core and the new composites to evaluate the unique contribution of each to these "bottom-line" measures. RESULTS: A total of 1013 surveys were obtained (55% response rate). With some exceptions, correlations between items and scales were consistent with the hypothesized item clusters. Three composites were identified: (1) communication about tests; (2) communication about how to care for self and medicines; and (3) communication about forms. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides support for the measurement properties of the HCAHPS Item Set for Addressing Health Literacy. It can serve as both a measure of whether healthcare providers in a hospital setting have communicated effectively with their patients and as a tool for quality improvement.

Development and evaluation of CAHPS survey items assessing how well healthcare providers address health literacy.

BACKGROUND: The complexity of health information often exceeds patients' skills to understand and use it. OBJECTIVE: To develop survey items assessing how well healthcare providers communicate health information. METHODS: Domains and items for the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) Item Set for Addressing Health Literacy were identified through an environmental scan and input from stakeholders. The draft item set was translated into Spanish and pretested in both English and Spanish. The revised item set was field tested with a randomly selected sample of adult patients from 2 sites using mail and telephonic data collection. Item-scale correlations, confirmatory factor analysis, and internal consistency reliability estimates were estimated to assess how well the survey items performed and identify composite measures. Finally, we regressed the CAHPS global rating of the provider item on the CAHPS core communication composite and the new health literacy composites. RESULTS: A total of 601 completed surveys were obtained (52% response rate). Two composite measures were identified: (1) Communication to Improve Health Literacy (16 items); and (2) How Well Providers Communicate About Medicines (6 items). These 2 composites were significantly uniquely associated with the global rating of the provider (communication to improve health literacy: P<0.001, b=0.28; and communication about medicines composite: P=0.02, b=0.04). The 2 composites and the CAHPS core communication composite accounted for 51% of the variance in the global rating of the provider. A 5-item subset of the Communication to Improve Health Literacy composite accounted for 90% of the variance of the original 16-item composite. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides support for reliability and validity of the CAHPS Item Set for Addressing Health Literacy. These items can serve to assess whether healthcare providers have communicated effectively with their patients and as a tool for quality improvement.

Improving access to and utilization of adolescent preventive health care: the perspectives of adolescents and parents.

PURPOSE: To examine the perspectives of publicly insured adolescents and their parents on ways to encourage adolescent utilization of preventive health services. METHODS: We conducted eight focus groups with 77 adolescents enrolled in a large Medicaid managed care plan in Los Angeles County, California, and two focus groups with 21 of their parents. Discussions were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using the constant comparative method of qualitative analysis. RESULTS: Adolescents and parents reported that the most effective way to encourage preventive care utilization among teens was to directly address provider-level barriers related to the timeliness, privacy, confidentiality, comprehensiveness, and continuity of their preventive care. They reported that incentives (e.g., cash, movie tickets, gift cards) might also be an effective way to increase preventive care utilization. To improve adolescent receipt of surveillance and guidance on sensitive health-related topics, most adolescents suggested that the best way to encourage clinician-adolescent discussion was to increase private face-to-face discussions with a clinician with whom they had a continuous and confidential relationship. Adolescents reported that the use of text messaging, e-mail, and Internet for providing information and counseling on various sensitive health-related topics would also encourage adolescent utilization of preventive health services. Parents, however, more often preferred that their teen receive these services through in-office discussions and clinician-provided brochures. CONCLUSIONS: State agencies, health plans, clinics, and individual providers may consider focusing their efforts to improve adolescents' utilization of preventive services on basic structural and quality of care issues related to the clinician-patient relationship, access to services, and confidentiality.

Patient preferences regarding antiretroviral therapy.

Antiretroviral medications for HIV infection can be combined into dozens of recommended regimens. However, little is known about patient preferences regarding antiretroviral therapy. We assessed the impact of clinician-mutable adherence barriers by conducting four patient focus groups (two English and two Spanish) consisting of 30 patients that focused discussion on antiretroviral treatment preferences. We also surveyed antiretroviral treatment preference from 31 subjects using the method of paired comparisons in which subjects indicated their preferences of regimen potency, pill burden, inconvenience, and side-effects using a 10-point rating scale. We found that most patients would tolerate severe side-effects, inconvenience, and large pill burden to have a potent antiretroviral regimen. In our population, patients generally preferred regimens with fewer side-effects to those with less inconvenience. Pill burden was of least importance among the domains studied. These preferences should be considered when selecting a regimen and developing interventions to improve antiretroviral adherence and patient outcomes.