ProvenCare lung cancer: a multi-institutional improvement collaborative.

Geisinger's ProvenCare™ Program (for elective coronary artery bypass surgery, total hip replacement, and others) has shown that the principles of reliability science, facilitated by a robust electronic health record and institutional commitment, allow the re-engineering of complicated clinical processes. This eliminates unwarranted variation and promotes the completion of evidence-based elements of care. It has not been established that ProvenCare can be generalized to other institutions. Now, under the auspices of the American College of Surgeons Commission on Cancer, ProvenCare has been adapted to a multi-institutional collaborative for the care of the patient with resectable lung cancer.

ProvenCare perinatal: a model for delivering evidence/ guideline-based care for perinatal populations.

BACKGROUND: Geisinger Health System (GHS) has applied its ProvenCare model to demonstrate that a large integrated health care delivery system, enabled by an electronic health record (EHR), could reengineer a complicated clinical process, reduce unwarranted variation, and provide evidence-based care for patients with a specified clinical condition. In 2007 GHS began to apply the model to a more complicated, longer-term condition of "wellness"--perinatal care. ADAPTING PROVENCARE TO PERINATAL CARE: The ProvenCare Perinatal initiative was more complex than the five previous ProvenCare endeavors in terms of breadth, scope, and duration. Each of the 22 sites created a process flow map to depict the current, real-time process at each location. The local practice site providers-physicians and mid-level practitioners-reached consensus on 103 unique best practice measures (BPMs), which would be tracked for every patient. These maps were then used to create a single standardized pathway that included the BPMs but also preserved some unique care offerings that reflected the needs of the local context. RESULTS: A nine-phase methodology, expanded from the previous six-phase model, was implemented on schedule. Pre- to postimplementation improvement occurred for all seven BPMs or BPM bundles that were considered the most clinically relevant, with five statistically significant. In addition, the rate of primary cesarean sections decreased by 32%, and birth trauma remained unchanged as the number of vaginal births increased. CONCLUSIONS: Preliminary experience suggests that integrating evidence/guideline-based best practices into work flows in inpatient and outpatient settings can achieve improvements in daily patient care processes and outcomes.

Clinical microsystems, Part 4. Building innovative population-specific mesosystems.

BACKGROUND: In 2005, the Geisinger Health System (Danville, Pennsylvania) developed ProvenCare, first applied to coronary artery bypass graft (CABG), as an innovative provider-driven quality improvement program to promote reliable delivery of evidence-based best practices. A new mesosystem is created for each ProvenCare model, integrating the care delivery process between contributing microsystems and defining new mesosystem leadership. The approach has been expanded to many patient populations, including percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). A NEW PCI MESOSYSTEM: In 2007 clinical microsystem thinking was applied to PCI: understanding the current processes and patterns, assembling the frontline professionals to redesign the processes, and using a beta-test phase to measure the changes and adjust accordingly, until the best process was established. A new mesosystem team was created to ensure that the right care is delivered at the tight time. REFINING IMPLEMENTATION: In the course of developing the CABG initiative, Geisinger established role definitions to keep teams on track; a comprehensive plan from design through execution and follow-up; and guiding principles established for the teams engaged in designing, developing, and implementing ProvenCare programs. PRELIMINARY EXPERIENCE: For the 40 measurable process elements in the PCI mesosystem pathway, as of month seven (July 2008) of the beta-test phase, 55% of the patients received 100% of the identified process elements. CONCLUSION: Geisinger Health System has joined different microsystems to form an innovative mesosystem capable of producing reliable, evidence-based care for patient subpopulations. This approach to embedding evidence-based care into routine care delivery can be adapted by others.

Clinical microsystems, part 1. The building blocks of health systems.

BACKGROUND: Wherever, however, and whenever health care is delivered-no matter the setting or population of patients-the body of knowledge on clinical microsystems can guide and support innovation and peak performance. Many health care leaders and staff at all levels of their organizations in many countries have adapted microsystem knowledge to their local settings. CLINICAL MICROSYSTEMS: A PANORAMIC VIEW: HOW DO CLINICAL MICROSYSTEMS FIT TOGETHER? As the patient's journey of care seeking and care delivery takes place over time, he or she will move into and out of an assortment of clinical microsystems, such as a family practitioner's office, an emergency department, and an intensive care unit. This assortment of clinical microsystems-combined with the patient's own actions to improve or maintain health--can be viewed as the patient's unique health system. This patient-centric view of a health system is the foundation of second-generation development for clinical microsystems. LESSONS FROM THE FIELD: These lessons, which are not comprehensive, can be organized under the familiar commands that are used to start a race: On Your Mark, Get Set, Go! ... with a fourth category added-Reflect: Reviewing the Race. These insights are intended as guidance to organizations ready to strategically transform themselves. CONCLUSION: Beginning to master and make use of microsystem principles and methods to attain macrosystem peak performance can help us knit together care in a fragmented health system, eschew archipelago building in favor of nation-building strategies, achieve safe and efficient care with reliable handoffs, and provide the best possible care and attain the best possible health outcomes.

"ProvenCareSM": a provider-driven pay-for-performance program for acute episodic cardiac surgical care.

OBJECTIVE: To test whether an integrated delivery system could successfully implement an evidence-based pay-for-performance program for coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery. METHODS: The program consisted of 3 components: (1) establishing implementable best practices; (2) developing risk-based pricing; (3) establishing a mechanism for patient engagement. Surgeons reviewed all class I and IIa "2004 American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Guidelines for CABG Surgery" and translated them into 40 verifiable behaviors. These were imbedded within a new ProvenCareSM program and "hardwired" within the electronic health record system, including order sets, templates, and "time outs". Concurrently preoperative, inpatient, and postoperative care within 90 days was packaged into a fixed price. A Patient Compact was developed to highlight the importance of patient activation. All elective CABG patients treated between February 2, 2006 and February 2, 2007 were included (ProvenCareSM Group) and compared with 137 patients treated in 2005 (Conventional Care Group). RESULTS: Initially, only 59% of patients received all 40 best practice components. At 3 months, program compliance reached 100%, but fell transiently to 86% over the next 3 months. Reliability subsequently increased to 100% and was sustained for the remainder of the study period. The overall trend in reliability was significant at P=0.001. Thirty-day clinical outcomes showed improved trends () but only the likelihood of discharge to home reached statistical significance. Length of stay decreased by 16% and mean hospital charges fell 5.2%.(Table is included in full-text article.) CONCLUSION: A provider-driven pay-for-performance process for CABG, enabled by an electronic health record system, can reliably deliver evidence-based care, fundamentally alter reimbursement incentives, and may ultimately improve outcomes and reduce resource use.

A hub-and-spoke model of care: providing specialty care in patients' own communities.

The authors describe how they used lessons learned in increasing office efficiency to improve primary care providers' ability to arrange for many specialty consultations and care within a reasonable driving distance for patients.