Time Kills: Impact of Socioeconomic Deprivation on Timely Access to Guideline-Concordant Treatment in Foregut Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Receipt of guideline-concordant treatment (GCT) is associated with improved prognosis in foregut cancers. Studies show that patients living in areas of high neighborhood deprivation have worse healthcare outcomes; however, its effect on GCT in foregut cancers has not been evaluated. We studied the impact of the area deprivation index (ADI) as a barrier to GCT. STUDY DESIGN: A single-institution retrospective review of 498 foregut cancer patients (gastric, pancreatic, and hepatobiliary adenocarcinoma) from 2018 to 2022 was performed. GCT was defined based on National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines. ADI, a validated measure of neighborhood disadvantage was divided into terciles (low, medium, and high) with high ADI indicating the most disadvantage. RESULTS: Of 498 patients, 328 (66%) received GCT: 66%, 72%, and 59% in pancreatic, gastric, and hepatobiliary cancers, respectively. Median (interquartile range) time from symptoms to workup was 6 (3 to 13) weeks, from diagnosis to oncology appointment was 4 (1 to 10) weeks, and from oncology appointment to treatment was 4 (2 to 10) weeks. Forty-six percent were diagnosed in the emergency department. On multivariable analyses, age 75 years or older (odds ratio [OR] 0.39 [95% CI 0.18 to 0.87]), Black race (OR 0.52 [95% CI 0.31 to 0.86]), high ADI (OR 0.25 (95% CI 0.14 to 0.48]), 6 weeks or more from symptoms to workup (OR 0.44 [95% CI 0.27 to 0.73]), 4 weeks or more from diagnosis to oncology appointment (OR 0.76 [95% CI 0.46 to 0.93]), and 4 weeks or more from oncology appointment to treatment (OR 0.63 [95% CI 0.36 to 0.98]) were independently associated with nonreceipt of GCT. CONCLUSIONS: Residence in an area of high deprivation predicts nonreceipt of GCT. This is due to multiple individual- and system-level barriers. Identifying these barriers and developing effective interventions, including community outreach and collaboration, leveraging telehealth, and increasing oncologic expertise in underserved areas, may improve access to GCT.

Examining Knowledge Management and the Culture Change Movement in Long-Term Care: A Study of High-Medicaid-Census Nursing Homes.

High-quality nursing home (NH) care has long been a challenge within the United States. For decades, policymakers at the state and federal levels have adopted and implemented regulations to target critical components of NH care outcomes. Simultaneously, our delivery system continues to change the role of NHs in patient care. For example, more acute patients are cared for in NHs, and the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) has implemented value payment programs targeting NH settings. As a part of these growing pressures from the broader healthcare delivery system, the culture-change movement has emerged among NHs over the past two decades, prompting NHs to embody more person-centered care as well as promote settings which resemble someone's home, as opposed to institutionalized healthcare settings. Researchers have linked culture change to high-quality outcomes and the ability to adapt and respond to the ever-changing pressures brought on by changes in our regulatory and delivery system. Making enduring culture change within organizations has long been a challenge and focus in NHs. Despite research suggesting that culture-change initiatives that promote greater resident-centered care are associated with several desirable patient outcomes, their adoption and implementation by NHs are resource intensive, and research has shown that NHs with high percentages of low-income residents are especially challenged to adopt these initiatives. This chapter takes a novel approach to examine factors that impact the adoption of culture-change initiatives by assessing knowledge management and the role of knowledge management activities in promoting the adoption of innovative care delivery models among under-resourced NHs throughout the United States. Using primary data from a survey of NH administrators, we conducted logistic regression models to assess the relationship between knowledge management and the adoption of a culture-change initiative as well as whether these relationships were moderated by leadership and staffing stability. Our study found that NHs were more likely to adopt a culture-change initiative when they had more robust knowledge management activities. Moreover, knowledge management activities were particularly effective at promoting adoption in NHs that struggle with leadership and nursing staff instability. Our findings support the notion that knowledge management activities can help NHs acquire and mobilize informational resources to support the adoption of care delivery innovations, thus highlighting opportunities to more effectively target efforts to stimulate the adoption and spread of these initiatives.

Does Interdisciplinary Care Team Care Management Improve Health Quality and Demonstrate Cost-Effectiveness?

This study evaluated the impact of an interdisciplinary care teams (IDCT) care management program on cost and quality outcomes using a novel algorithm to identify 400 high-risk patients out of 48,235 Medicare Advantage (MA) beneficiaries. Of the 400, 252 were enrolled in the IDCT care management intervention program, while the remaining 148 were not enrolled. A second comparison group consisted of 660 who were referred to the IDCT program but not selected by the algorithm. The program's effectiveness was evaluated 1-year postintervention. Analyses found that health care costs for members enrolled in the IDCT program were reduced by US$1,121.76 and US$1,625.61 per member per month, respectively, relative to those not enrolled and those enrolled by referral. The cost reduction from the program generated a net savings of US$1.9MM, covering the program's cost. Findings suggest IDCTs can cost-effectively manage populations of high-risk patients with better selection and fostering greater interdependence.

Association between Rural Residence and Processes of Care in Pancreatic Cancer Treatment.

BACKGROUND: Pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is an aggressive malignancy associated with poor outcomes. Surgical resection and receipt of multimodal therapy have been shown to improve outcomes in patients with potentially resectable PDAC; however treatment and outcome disparities persist on many fronts. The aim of this study was to analyze the relationship between rural residence and receipt of quality cancer care in patients diagnosed with non-metastatic PDAC. METHODS: Using the National Cancer Database, patients with non-metastatic pancreatic cancer were identified from 2006-2016. Patients were classified as living in metropolitan, urban, or rural areas. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify predictors of cancer treatment and survival. RESULTS: A total of 41,786 patients were identified: 81.6% metropolitan, 16.2% urban, and 2.2% rural. Rural residing patients were less likely to receive curative-intent surgery (p = 0.037) and multimodal therapy (p < 0.001) compared to their metropolitan and urban counterparts. On logistic regression analysis, rural residence was independently associated with decreased surgical resection [OR 0.82; CI 95% 0.69-0.99; p = 0.039] and multimodal therapy [OR 0.70; CI 95% 0.38-0.97; p = 0.047]. Rural residence independently predicted decreased overall survival [OR 1.64; CI 95% 1.45-1.93; p < 0.001] for all patients that were analyzed. In the cohort of patients who underwent surgical resection, rural residence did not independently predict overall survival [OR 0.97; CI 95% 0.85-1.11; p = 0.652]. CONCLUSIONS: Rural residence impacts receipt of optimal cancer care in patients with non-metastatic PDAC but does not predict overall survival in patients who receive curative-intent treatment.

Patterns and trends in local health departments' efforts to promote access to care in local communities throughout the United States: The contributions of governance structures.

Public health agencies like local health departments (LHDs) play an important role in addressing healthcare access disparities and service delivery gaps in local communities throughout the United States. Previous research has provided important snapshots into specific access issues confronted by LHDs; however, the literature lacks a more comprehensive view of LHDs' efforts to ensure broad access to care, how these have evolved over time more recently, and whether certain types of LHDs governance structures are more likely to engage in activities to ensure access to care. The purpose of this study was to address these gaps in the literature by exploring the prevalence of different activities to ensure access to care, describing how the prevalence of these activities have evolved over time, and examining whether the prevalence of these activities varied as a function of different governance structures. Using pooled, cross-sectional survey data from four waves of a survey (2009, 2013, 2016, 2019) of LHDs in the United States, the univariate and bivariate analysis revealed that, over time, LHDs have generally increased their efforts to assess gaps in access to healthcare services and across all healthcare categories (i.e., medical, dental, behavioural health) but especially for behavioural health. Poisson regression models showed that LHDs with a more decentralised decision-making structure were associated with more activities to ensure access to care, as compared to more centralised structures. Collectively, our findings indicate that despite growth in the number and percentage of LHDs assessing and addressing gaps in services, opportunities still exist to enhance access to healthcare services in local communities, particularly in the areas of dental and behavioural health. Our findings also suggest that stakeholders interested in improving LHDs' efforts to ensure access to care in local communities may want to pay close attention to governance features of LHDs.

Assessing the Impact of Interorganizational Linkages on Medical Home Model Adoption by U.S. Acute Care Hospitals.

The medical home model aims to increase care coordination and health care quality. While the adoption of the model has been increasing, the role of U.S. acute care hospitals' interorganizational linkages on adoption is yet to be explored. Using a national sample of hospitals throughout the United States, we examined what interorganizational linkage features are associated with medical home adoption of hospital-owned physician practices and assess the pattern of adoption by acute care hospitals between 2011 and 2019. A generalized estimating equation with binomial distribution was utilized to assess the association between interorganizational linkages and medical home adoption. Hospitals with structural linkages and institutional linkages were more likely to have adopted the medical home. Moreover, the likelihood of medical home adoption increased relative to an increasing number of interorganizational linkages. Medical home adoption and dissemination efforts may be more effective when focused on hospitals possessing interorganizational linkages, specifically those with structural linkages.

Patient Vs. Soldier-Centered Medical Home: Comparing Access, Continuity, and Communication in the U.S. Army.

INTRODUCTION: Over the last 40 years, patient-centered medical home (PCMH) has evolved as the leading primary care practice model, replacing traditional primary care models in the United States and internationally. The goal of PCMH is to improve chronic condition management. In the U.S. Army, the scope of the medical home, which encompasses various care delivery platforms, including PCMH and soldier-centered medical home (SCMH), extends beyond the management of chronic illnesses. These medical home platforms are designed to support the unique health care needs of the U.S. Army's most vital asset-the soldier. The PCMHs and SCMHs within the U.S. Army employ patient-centered care principles while incorporating nationally recognized structural attributes and care processes that work together in a complex adaptive system to improve organizational and patient outcomes. However, U.S. Army policies dictate differences in the structures of PCMHs and SCMHs. Researchers suggest that differences in medical home structures can impact how organizations operationalize care processes, leading to unwanted variance in organizational and patient outcomes. This study aimed to compare 3 care processes (access to care, primary care manager continuity, and patient-centered communication) between PCMHs and SCMHs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective, cross-sectional, and correlational study. We used a subset of data from the Military Data Repository collected between January 1, 2018, and December 31, 2018. The sample included 266 medical home teams providing care for active duty soldiers. Only active duty soldiers were included in the sample. We reviewed current U.S. Army Medical Department policies to describe the structures and operational functioning of PCMHs and SCMHs. General linear mixed regressions were used to evaluate the associations between medical home type and outcome measures. The U.S. Army Medical Department Center and School Institutional Review Board approved this study. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in access to 24-hour and future appointments or soldiers' perception of access between PCMHs and SCMHs. There was no significant difference in primary care manager continuity. There was a significant difference in medical home team continuity (P < .001), with SCMHs performing better. There was no significant difference in patient-centered communication scores. Our analysis showed that while the PCMH and SCMH models were designed to improve primary care manager continuity, access to care, and communication, medical home teams within the U.S. Army are not consistently meeting the Military Health System standard of care benchmarks for these care processes. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings comparing 3 critical medical home care processes suggest that structural differences may impact continuity but not access to care or communication. There is an opportunity to further explore and improve access to appointments within 24 hours, primary care manager and medical home team continuity, perception of access to care, and the quality of patient-centered communication among soldiers. Knowledge gained from this study is essential to soldier medical readiness.

Predictors of Temporary Profile Days Among U.S. Army Active Duty Soldiers.

INTRODUCTION: More than 40,000 soldiers cannot deploy every year, which undermines readiness. The medical readiness of soldiers is a critical component of the overall operational readiness of the U.S. Army. Acute musculoskeletal injuries (MSIs) are the greatest threat to medical readiness. Medical providers place soldiers on temporary profiles to facilitate treatment and recovery of acute MSIs. Poorly managed temporary profiles negatively impact a soldier's work attendance, resulting in the loss or limitation of over 25 million workdays annually. Upgrading the electronic profile system and implementing the Army Medical Home has led to improvements in managing temporary profiles over the last decade. The Army Medical Home encompasses care delivery platforms, including the Patient-Centered Medical Home (PCMH) and Soldier-Centered Medical Home (SCMH). The structure of U.S. Army PCMHs and SCMHs differ in ways that may affect care processes and patient outcomes. Temporary profile management is an important soldier health outcome that has not been studied in relation to the U.S. Army's PCMH and SCMH structures or care processes. Access to care, continuity, and communication are three care processes that have been described as essential factors in reducing lost workdays and functional limitations in workers after an acute injury. Understanding the impact of the medical home on temporary profile days is vital to medical readiness. This study aimed to (1) compare temporary profile days between the U.S. Army PCMHs and SCMHs and (2) determine the influence of medical home structures and care processes on temporary profile days among active duty U.S. Army soldiers receiving care for MSIs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective, cross-sectional, and correlational study guided by Donabedian's conceptual framework. We used secondary data from the Military Data Repository collected in 2018. The sample included 27,214 temporary profile records of active duty U.S. Army soldiers and 266 U.S. Army PCMH and SCMH teams. We evaluated bivariate and multivariate associations between outcomes and predictors using general and generalized linear mixed regression models. The U.S. Army Medical Department Center and School Institutional Review Board approved this study. RESULTS: Total temporary profile days ranged from 1 to 357, with a mean of 37 days (95% CI [36.2, 37.0]). There was a significant difference in mean temporary profile days between PCMHs (43) and SCMHs (35) (P < 0.001). Soldiers in PCMHs were more likely to have temporary profiles over 90 days (OR = 1.54, 95% CI [1.17, 2.03]). Soldiers in the heavy physical demand category had fewer temporary profile days (P < 0.001) than those in the moderate physical demand category. Age, sex, rank level, physical demand category, profile severity, medical home type, the "explain things" communication subscale, and primary care manager continuity were significant predictors of temporary profile days. CONCLUSIONS: Excessive temporary profile days threaten medical readiness and overall soldier health. Aspects of the medical home structure and care processes were predictors of temporary profile days for musculoskeletal conditions. This work supports continued efforts to improve MSI-related outcomes among soldiers. Knowledge gained from this study can guide future research questions and help the U.S. Army better meet soldier needs.

Association between the number of adopted implementation strategies and contextual determinants: a mixed-methods study.

BACKGROUND: The successful implementation of evidence-based innovations to improve healthcare delivery often requires a well-planned strategy to support their use. With a greater recognition of the importance of an implementation process, researchers have turned their attention to implementation strategies and their customization to target specific organizational barriers and facilitators. Further, there is a paucity of empirical evidence demonstrating the link between implementation determinants and the number of selected implementation strategies. The purpose of this mixed methods analysis is to examine how formatively assessed barriers and facilitators to implementation relate to the number and type of implementation strategies adopted to address context-specific factors. METHODS: A mixed methods evaluation that included 15 rheumatology clinics throughout the United States that were planning for implementation of an evidence-based shared decision-making aid for patients with lupus. Quantitative data consisted of a count of the number of implementation strategies used by a clinic. Qualitative data collection was guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) and relied upon semi-structured interviews with 90 clinic members between November 2018 and August 2019. RESULTS: Using the CFIR, we found that local clinic factors (Inner Setting Domain) resulted in different perceptions about Planning and Executing the DA (Process Domain); these domains were most likely to distinguish between the number and type of implementation strategies adopted by the clinics. In contrast, Intervention characteristics, Individual Characteristics, and the Outer Setting did not differentiate between the groups with different numbers of implementation strategies. The number and type of chosen strategies were not those associated with the context-specific factors. CONCLUSIONS: Findings show that, despite recognition of the value of customizing implementation strategies for the contexts in which they are applied, they are too often chosen in a manner that fail to adequately reflect the diverse settings that may present unique factors associated with implementation. Our findings also highlight the importance of the inner context - both in terms of structural characteristics and existing work processes - as a driving factor for why some organizations select different numbers and types of implementation strategies.

Charting a Course: A Research Agenda for Studying the Governance of Health Care Networks.

Networked forms of organizing in health care are increasingly viewed as an effective means of addressing "wicked", multifaceted health and societal challenges. This is because networks attempt to address these challenges via collaborative approaches in which diverse stakeholders together define the problem(s) and implement solutions. Consequently, there has been a sharp increase in the number and types of networks used in health care. Despite this growth, our understanding of how these networks are governed has not kept pace. The purpose of this chapter is to chart a research agenda for scholars who are interested in studying health care network governance (i.e., the systems of rules and decision-making within networks), which is of particular importance in deliberate networks between organizations. We do so based on our knowledge of the literature and interviews with subject matter experts, both of which are used to identify core network governance concepts that represent gaps in our current knowledge. Our analysis identified various conceptualizations of networks and of their governance, as well as four primary knowledge gaps: "bread and butter" studies of network governance in health care, the role of single organizations in managing health care networks, governance through the life-cycle stages of health care networks, and governing across the multiple levels of health care networks. We first seek to provide some conceptual clarity around networks and network governance. Subsequently, we describe some of the challenges that researchers may confront while addressing the associated knowledge gaps and potential ways to overcome these challenges.

Assessing the Performance Value of the Baldrige Journey: A Comparison of Baldrige Applicants and Nonapplicants.

GOAL: The national Baldrige program has supported performance excellence in healthcare since 1999. Previous studies have compared the performance of Baldrige hospital recipients to nonrecipients. This study, however, sought to address the question of whether the mere pursuit of the Baldrige award provides value. METHODS: This study used propensity score matching with linear and quantile regression techniques to understand the impact of hospitals applying the Baldrige Excellence Framework across a comprehensive set of standardized industry performance measures, regardless of award recognition. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: The analysis demonstrated that Baldrige applicants outperformed non-Baldrige applicants in select operational measures of efficiency (such as inpatient average length of stay), patient experience, and financial measures (including return on net assets, days in accounts receivable, and expenses as a percentage of patient revenues). However, there was no statistically significant difference in clinical performance between Baldrige applicants and nonapplicants. PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS: The findings from this study suggest that hospital leaders can realize significant gains with select operational and financial measures without compromising clinical outcomes when applying the Baldrige Excellence Framework to their organizations.

Service Profiles in Substance Use Disorder Treatment: Are Treatment Facilities Consistent In Service Mix and Service Offerings?

OBJECTIVE: Substance use disorder (SUD) treatment facilities are the specialty treatment settings for individuals with SUDs and offer a variety of services for their treatment and long-term management. Despite the recommendations from evidence-based practice guidelines, individual facilities differ in terms of the number and type of services offered, resulting in gaps in service availability. The purpose of this study was to examine whether systematic differences exist among SUD treatment facilities based on the facility's service mix. METHOD: Publicly available data on SUD treatment facilities within the United States were obtained from the National Survey of Substance Abuse Treatment Services (N-SSATS) for 2015-2018. Latent class analysis was used to identify the presence of different service profiles (i.e., classes of facilities) based on service mix and bivariate analysis to determine organizational characteristics associated with each profile. RESULTS: SUD treatment facilities systematically differ in service mix, and we identified three distinct service profiles--broad, high-prevalence; narrow, nonmedical; and broad, intermediate-prevalence. The distribution of facilities across the three profiles varied considerably, with a majority (90%) of facilities belonging to the broad, high-prevalence service profile, whereas 9.5% belonged to the narrow, nonmedical profile and the remainder (<1% of all facilities) to the broad, intermediate-prevalence service profile. CONCLUSIONS: The three service profiles and the distribution of facilities within each profile identified in this study highlight challenges and opportunities for practitioners and policymakers. The findings also suggest several avenues for future research in the area of policy, organizational strategy, and service delivery within SUD treatment.

Participation in Value-Based Payment Programs and U.S. Acute Care Hospital Population Health Partnerships.

GOAL: The goal of this study was to describe the prevalence and pattern of population health partnerships by hospitals and examine whether these partnerships were associated with different types of payment model programs. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of 3,012 U.S. hospitals using data from the American Hospital Association's Annual Survey, the Area Health Resources File, and the County Health Rankings & Roadmaps data. We ran a multivariable Poisson regression model to examine the relationship between value-based payment designs and the number of population health partnerships. Binary logistic regression models were used to assess whether participation in value-based payment design programs was associated with specific types of population health partnerships. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We found that two thirds or more of hospitals used more informal collaborative partnerships with local or state government, faith-based organizations, and local businesses; formal alliances were most common with health insurance companies and other healthcare providers. Accountable care organizations and bundled payment program participation were associated with greater numbers of population health partnerships, whereas hospital ownership of a health plan was not associated with significantly greater numbers of population health partnerships. APPLICATIONS TO PRACTICE: Hospitals were engaged in an intermediate number of partnerships (mean = 3.5, out of 8.0 possible), with opportunities for more partnerships with specific types of organizations (faith-based organizations, health insurance companies). Our findings also suggest that certain types of payment models, particularly those that are less capital intensive and entail less extensive organizational transformation on the part of hospitals, may support hospital engagement in population health partnerships. Hospital leaders need to monitor these partnerships continually to determine if they can capitalize on opportunities to play a more prominent role in population health management in local communities.