Prevalence and Risk Profile Of Unread Messages To Patients In A Patient Web Portal.

BACKGROUND: Excitement around the adoption of electronic communication between physicians and patients is tempered by the possibility of increased clinical and legal risk. If patients do not read messages in a timely fashion, duplicative communication efforts may be required and patient safety may be jeopardized. OBJECTIVE: We sought to assess the prevalence and risk profile of unread messages in a mature patient portal. METHODS: We analyzed six years of messages (2005-2010) from physicians to patients to determine the prevalence and associated characteristics of unread messages in a patient portal. We focused on clinical messages, and excluded announcements. Because some physicians sent clinical messages to groups of patients, we labeled messages sent to more than 5 patients as "outreach" messages and excluded them from general analyses. We performed a chart review of 75 clinical messages to assess for harm. RESULTS: We found that 3% of clinical messages were unread after 21 days. Messages arriving outside of business hours were slightly more likely to go unread (RR 1.15 95% CI 1.11-1.19). Patients who were male (OR 1.14 CI 1.04-1.26) African American (OR 1.69 CI 1.29-2.22) or Hispanic (OR 1.74 CI 1.17-2.59), or in the lowest income group (OR 1.72 CI 1.19-2.49) were more likely to have unread messages. Chart review showed no evidence of harm, but 13% of sampled unread messages were associated with potential delays in care. Incidentally, we found 50% of the physician-initiated outreach messages were unread. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, secure messaging appears a safe form of communication, but systems to notify senders when messages are unread may have value. While most clinical messages were read, many outreach messages were not, providing caution for relying on such systems for information dissemination. Similar to other studies, differences by race and income were observed and require further study.

The quality of care received by HIV patients without a primary provider.

The goal of this study was to compare the quality of care received by HIV patients who report that their primary HIV care provider is a physician, a nurse practitioner (NP) or a physician assistant (PA) to that of patients who cannot identify a primary HIV provider. We used data from patients who participated in the HIV Cost and Services Utilization Study (HCSUS), a study of a probability sample of non-institutionalized HIV-infected individuals in care in the US. We compared patients who did and did not name a primary HIV care provider in terms of patient and care site characteristics, and level of clinician HIV expertise. Care quality measures included receipt of highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART), reported problems with care, satisfaction with care, unmet needs and perceived access to care. Patients in care who did not report having a primary HIV care provider received HAART at significantly lower rates (p<0.05) and were less satisfied with their care (p<0.05) than patients with a primary HIV care provider, after adjusting for illness severity and other patient characteristics. There were similar but non-significant trends for reported problems, unmet needs and perceived access to care. Patients who had lower income or were drug users were more likely not to have a primary provider. We conclude that having a primary HIV care provider who is knowledgeable about a patient's care is related to the quality of medical care received by persons with HIV infection.

Differences in patient and clinic characteristics at CARE Act funded versus non-CARE Act funded HIV clinics.

The Ryan White CARE Act supports comprehensive care to persons with HIV infection. With an annual budget of over $1 billion, it is the largest federally funded programme for HIV care in the USA. We analysed data from the HIV Costs and Services Utilization Study, a nationally representative sample of HIV patients. Patient data were collected in 1996-97 and clinic data were collected in 1998-99. We examined whether CARE Act funded clinics differed from other HIV clinics in (1) the characteristics of their patients, and (2) their organization, staffing, and services. We found that patients at CARE Act clinics were younger, less educated, poorer, and more likely to be female, non-white, unemployed, uninsured, and have heterosexual contact as an HIV risk factor, compared to patients at other HIV clinics. CARE Act clinics tended to specialize in HIV care, had more infectious disease specialists, had fewer total patients, and provided more support services (e.g. mental health, nutrition, case management, child care). These results are consistent with findings of other studies that were limited by non-probability samples or restricted geographical areas.

National quality monitoring of Medicare health plans: the relationship between enrollees' reports and the quality of clinical care.

BACKGROUND: The clinical quality of health plans varies. The associations between different measures of health plan quality are incompletely understood. OBJECTIVE: To assess the relationships between enrollee reports on the quality of health plans as measured by the Consumer Assessment of Health Plans Study (CAHPS 2.0) survey and the clinical quality of care measured by the Medicare Health Plan Employer Data and Information Set (HEDIS). DESIGN: Observational cohort study. SAMPLE: National sample of 233 Medicare health plans that reported data using the CAHPS 2.0 survey and Medicare HEDIS during 1998. MEASURES: Five composite measures and four ratings derived from the CAHPS survey and six measures of clinical quality from Medicare HEDIS. RESULTS: Two composite measures ("getting needed care" and "health plan information and customer service") were significantly associated with most of the HEDIS clinical quality measures. The proportion of enrollees having a personal doctor was also significantly associated with rates of mammography, eye exams for diabetics, beta-blocker use after myocardial infarction, and follow-up after mental health hospitalization. Enrollees' ratings of health plan care were less consistently associated with HEDIS performance. In multivariable analyses, the measure of health plan communication ("health plan information and customer service") was the most consistent predictor of HEDIS performance. CONCLUSIONS: The pattern of associations we observed among some of the measures suggests that the CAHPS survey and HEDIS are complementary quality monitoring strategies. Our results suggest that health plans that provide better access and customer service also provide better clinical care.

For-profit and not-for-profit health plans participating in Medicaid.

The proliferation of for-profit health plans has heightened concerns about quality of care, particularly with respect to Medicaid. We undertook this study to compare for-profit and not-for-profit health plans that participate in Medicaid, examining processes of care and the organizational characteristics related to utilization management, financial incentives, and quality of care. Our findings demonstrate that for-profit and not-for-profit plans appear to be more similar than dissimilar in many areas of management, although for-profit plans are more likely to use aggressive utilization review and have slightly less developed quality management systems. On balance, these findings should reassure critics of for-profit health care.

Managed care and market power: physician organizations in four markets.

Physicians and other providers have responded to the spread of managed care by adapting structures and strategies to accommodate or resist the pressures exerted on them to reduce costs. In this paper we examine how physician organizations have evolved in four markets and whether their features represent attempts to improve efficiency or resist change. The strategies adopted by physicians in terms of alignment with other providers and development of independent medical management capabilities appear to be sensitive to opportunities to reap cost savings and the competitiveness of physician, hospital, and health plan markets.

Personal, organizational, and market level influences on physicians' practice patterns: results of a national survey of primary care physicians.

BACKGROUND: One of the principal tenets of managed care is that physicians' clinical decisions can be influenced both to improve the quality and consistency of care and to decrease health care expenditures. Medical decision making, however, remains a complex phenomenon and the most important determinants of physicians' approaches to clinical decision making remain poorly understood. OBJECTIVES: To determine how clinical decisions are associated with individual characteristics, practice setting and organizational characteristics, attributes of the patient population under care, and the market environment. RESEARCH DESIGN: Cross-sectional, nationally representative survey of patient-care physicians. SUBJECTS: Primary care physicians who provide direct patient care at least 20 hours per week. MEASURES: Proportion of physicians who would order a referral, diagnostic test, or treatment for 5 clinical scenarios thought to be representative of discretionary medical decisions. RESULTS: Responses were received from 4,825 primary care physicians who cared for adult patients (Response Rate 65%). The distribution of results for each of the five clinical scenarios demonstrates significant variability both within and between physicians. No evidence was seen of a consistent practice style across the vignettes (eg, "aggressive" or "conservative"). The organizational setting of practice was the most consistent predictor of behavior across all the clinical scenarios, with the exception of back pain, which was minimally related to any of the environmental factors. When compared to physicians in solo practice, physicians in all other practice settings were less likely to order a test or referral or pursue treatment. Practice involvement with managed care and measures of financial influences and administrative strategies associated with managed care were minimally and inconsistently associated with reported physician behaviors. CONCLUSIONS: The ability of managed care to improve the quality and consistency of care while also controlling the costs of care depends on its ability to influence medical decisions. Our findings generally demonstrate that managed care has a weak influence on discretionary medical decisions and that the influence of managed care pales in comparison to personal and practice setting influences.

Health plan characteristics and consumers' assessments of quality.

Many purchasers and consumers of health care have become concerned about the quality of care being delivered in managed care plans. Little is known, however, about the health plan characteristics that are associated with better performance. We used survey responses from 82,583 Medicare beneficiaries from 182 health plans to study the association of consumers' assessments of care with health plan characteristics. For-profit and nationally affiliated health plans received much worse scores on the outcomes of interest, particularly for overall ratings of the health plan and composite measures of customer service and access to care. Health plans accredited by the National Committee for Quality Assurance did not receive higher scores.

Assessing the relationship between quality of care and the characteristics of health care organizations.

In the past two decades, relationships among health plans, medical groups, and providers have grown more complex and the number of clinical management strategies has increased. In this context, determining the independent effect of a particular organizational strategy on quality of care has become more difficult. The authors review some of the issues a researcher must address when studying the relationship between organizational characteristics and quality of care. They offer criteria for selecting a research question, list organizational characteristics that may influence quality, and suggest sampling and study design techniques to reduce confounding. Since this type of research often requires a health care organization as collaborator, the authors discuss strategies for developing research partnerships and collecting data from the partner organization. Finally, they offer suggestions for translating research into policy.

How consumer assessments of managed care vary within and among markets.

This study investigated the extent to which the Consumer Assessments of Health Plans Survey (CAHPS) distinguishes performance of Medicare managed care (MMC) health plans. Results indicate that CAHPS ratings and report composites distinguish among plans both nationally and within markets. Global ratings of a health plan and reports on customer services varied strongly at the individual plan level, with smaller effects seen at regional and Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) levels. Ratings of doctors and health care, and reports on experiences in the doctor's office varied more among regions and among MSAs than among plans within the same MSA. These patterns are consonant with our hypotheses about the determinants of these ratings: customer service is a distinct plan function, but medical services are provided by networks that often overlap for plans in the same area. We conclude that the CAHPS-MMC survey can inform consumers choosing among plans as well as policymakers and researchers.

Dimensions of consumer-assessed quality of Medicare managed-care health plans.

OBJECTIVES: We investigated relationships at the health-plan level among member ratings of and reports on plans in the Consumer Assessment of Health Plans Survey (CAHPS). We sought a more parsimonious description of the reports that can be used in analyses of the distribution and correlates of consumer-assessed quality. SUBJECTS: There were 89,419 Medicare beneficiaries enrolled in 212 Medicare managed-care health plans who responded to CAHPS in 1998. MEASURES: There were 39 survey items measuring consumer ratings of and reports on care. METHODS: We adjusted correlations for sampling variability in the plan means and performed a principal factor analysis of the report items with oblique rotation. We grouped items that loaded heavily on the different factors, formed composites, and regressed rating items on the report composites. RESULTS: Four factors explained 75% of the variance in the reports. The corresponding groups of items were concerned with the following subjects: (1) interactions around delivery of care in the doctor's office; (2) customer service from the plan; (3) access to medical services provided by the plan, such as specialist care, equipment, therapy, or drugs; and (4) advice on health-promoting activities. Corrected Cronbach alpha for composites were 0.97, 0.93, 0.86, and 0.60. The "delivery" composite was strongly predictive of overall ratings of care, doctor, and specialist; the "customer" composite was strongly predictive of overall ratings of the plan. CONCLUSIONS: CAHPS distinguishes among dimensions of between-plan variability of consumer-assessed quality. Different global ratings are related to distinct groups of consumer reports on their experiences.

Quality management practices in Medicaid managed care: a national survey of Medicaid and commercial health plans participating in the Medicaid program.

CONTEXT: Rapid expansion of Medicaid managed care has raised concerns about the capacity and willingness of health plans enrolling Medicaid beneficiaries to provide high-quality care. Recently, legislation has facilitated market entry of Medicaid plans, health plans that draw most of their enrollment from the Medicaid population. OBJECTIVE: To characterize and compare the organizational characteristics and programs related to quality of care of commercial and Medicaid health plans that participate in the Medicaid program. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey conducted September 1997 to April 1998. SETTING: The Medicaid program in 11 states and the District of Columbia. PARTICIPANTS: All 154 health plans in these localities that provided prepaid general medical care to Medicaid beneficiaries during June 1997, of which 130 (84%) responded to the survey. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Health plan reports of structural characteristics, services offered, performance measurement and feedback, disease management programs, information systems capabilities, and provider network composition and relationships. RESULTS: Half of the respondents were Medicaid plans, with 75% or more of enrollees drawn from the Medicaid population. Medicaid plans tended to be smaller and newer than commercial plans that also served the Medicaid population and had more enabling programs targeting the special needs of the Medicaid population, such as inadequate transportation (85% of Medicaid plans vs 62% of commercial plans; P = .003) and illiteracy (66% vs 38%, respectively; P = .002). Overall, 71% of Medicaid plans vs 43% of commercial plans had enabling programs targeted at 6 or more of the 8 special needs we specified (P = .001). While commercial plans had a higher proportion of board-certified primary care physicians (81% vs 73%; P = .01), we found no major differences between Medicaid plans and commercial plans in collection and dissemination of performance measures, designation of specific areas for quality improvement, or use of disease management programs targeted at conditions prevalent in the Medicaid population. Neither commercial nor Medicaid plans reported high success in improving quality of care. CONCLUSIONS: Based on our survey, while Medicaid plans resemble commercial plans serving the Medicaid population in many aspects of quality management, they are more likely to target programs directed to the specific needs of the Medicaid population. Neither commercial nor Medicaid plans have notably strong records in actual quality improvement.

A conceptual model of the effects of health care organizations on the quality of medical care.

There has been a great deal of interest in recent years in developing measures of health care quality that can be used to characterize and study the effects of health plans. However, because of the recent emergence of diverse types of health care organizations, it is often difficult to know which parts of a plan should be combined for analysis purposes. Also, simple taxonomies of health maintenance organizations (eg, staff, independent practice associations, group, and network) no longer adequately describe the diverse types of organizations that have become common. In this article we describe these trends, explain why older taxonomies of health care plans are not adequate, and present a new framework for characterizing and studying the effects of diverse types of plans.

Predicting in-hospital deaths from coronary artery bypass graft surgery. Do different severity measures give different predictions?

OBJECTIVES: Severity-adjusted death rates for coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery by provider are published throughout the country. Whether five severity measures rated severity differently for identical patients was examined in this study. METHODS: Two severity measures rate patients using clinical data taken from the first two hospital days (MedisGroups, physiology scores); three use diagnoses and other information coded on standard, computerized hospital discharge abstracts (Disease Staging, Patient Management Categories, all patient refined diagnosis related groups). The database contained 7,764 coronary artery bypass graft patients from 38 hospitals with 3.2% in-hospital deaths. Logistic regression was performed to predict deaths from age, age squared, sex, and severity scores, and c statistics from these regressions were used to indicate model discrimination. Odds ratios of death predicted by different severity measures were compared. RESULTS: Code-based measures had better c statistics than clinical measures: all patient refined diagnosis related groups, c = 0.83 (95% C.I. 0.81, 0.86) versus MedisGroups, c = 0.73 (95% C.I. 0.70, 0.76). Code-based measures predicted very different odds of dying than clinical measures for more than 30% of patients. Diagnosis codes indicting postoperative, life-threatening conditions may contribute to the superior predictive power of code-based measures. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical and code-based severity measures predicted different odds of dying for many coronary artery bypass graft patients. Although code-based measures had better statistical performance, this may reflect their reliance on diagnosis codes for life-threatening conditions occurring late in the hospitalization, possibly as complications of care. This compromises their utility for drawing inferences about quality of care based on severity-adjusted coronary artery bypass graft death rates.

Quality management by state Medicaid agencies converting to managed care: plans and current practice.

CONTEXT: Enrollment in Medicaid managed care plans has increased more than 5-fold in this decade, but how states monitor and encourage quality of care in these programs is not known. OBJECTIVE: To characterize the quality monitoring and assurance activities of state Medicaid agencies for Medicaid beneficiaries enrolled in comprehensive prepaid managed care programs. DESIGN: Structured telephone survey conducted between October 1996 and January 1997. SETTING: State Medicaid agencies. PARTICIPANTS: Representatives from all state Medicaid agencies, including the District of Columbia, with beneficiaries enrolled in comprehensive prepaid managed care plans as of July 1, 1996. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Proportion of states with specific quality monitoring and assurance activities for Medicaid managed care. RESULTS: We surveyed all 34 states enrolling beneficiaries in comprehensive managed care programs. In 1996, all 34 states enrolled the population receiving assistance from the Aid to Families With Dependent Children (AFDC) program, while only 21 (62%) and 15 (44%) enrolled the disabled and elderly populations, respectively. In the period 1995 to 1996, 19 states (63%) collected data on satisfaction with care, and 25 states (83%) collected data on childhood immunizations. No more than half of the states collected data on other selected measures of access and quality, but a substantial number planned to collect such data in 1997. While at most 37% of states were providing comparative data to health plans, up to 80% were planning to provide such information in 1997. Similarly, while at most 10% of states provided beneficiaries with such information, up to 38% planned to do so in 1997. The breadth of contracting requirements designed to assure quality varied substantially across states. CONCLUSIONS: State Medicaid agencies have already begun adapting to their new roles as purchasers of health care. Continued monitoring is essential to ensure that state agencies implement planned programs and that quality of care for Medicaid enrollees is preserved or improved.