Healthy People for the 21st Century: Understanding Use of Healthy People 2020 as a Web-Based Initiative.

OBJECTIVE: This study assesses how the nation's preeminent health promotion and disease prevention initiative, Healthy People, is utilized by key stakeholders. METHODS: A Web-based survey was administered to assess awareness and use of Healthy People among state, local, tribal health organizations and other key stakeholder groups. Follow-up interviews were conducted with a subset of respondents. RESULTS: Awareness and use of Healthy People have remained high among state, local, and tribal stakeholders. Healthy People 2020 is most frequently used as a data source. The Leading Health Indicators (LHIs) are an important element of the initiative, and nearly 90% of organizations that use the LHIs found them valuable. Awareness and use of other tools and resources are more limited. CONCLUSIONS: Healthy People continues to be a valued resource among public health stakeholders; however, continued outreach is needed to promote the use of tools and resources available on healthypeople.gov for this decade and beyond. Healthy People is a national initiative used most frequently as a data source by state and local health departments, tribal organizations, and other public health practitioners.

The healthy people initiative: understanding the user's perspective.

OBJECTIVE: After 30 years of implementation, this study provides the first assessment of how the nation's preeminent health promotion and disease prevention initiative, Healthy People, is utilized by key stakeholders in state, local, and tribal health organizations. METHODS: Surveys of state, local, and tribal health organizations were conducted in 2005 and 2009. Respondents completed a questionnaire about their organization's awareness and the use of Healthy People 2010. RESULTS: The awareness and use of Healthy People have grown over time. However, states are 32% more likely than local organizations and more than 200% more likely than tribal organizations to use Healthy People, demonstrating a continued need for targeted outreach directed toward local, tribal, and smaller health organizations. Different stakeholders appreciate different aspects of Healthy People. Barriers to increased use of Healthy People are primarily attributed to organizations, rather than the Healthy People initiative itself. Implementation planning for Healthy People 2020 is well aligned with users' recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: The Healthy People initiative is useful to different stakeholder groups in different ways. Encouraging and assisting users to adopt a broader set of its functionalities could increase the overall utility of the initiative.

Field test results of a new ambulatory care Medication Error and Adverse Drug Event Reporting System--MEADERS.

PURPOSE: In this study, we developed and field tested the Medication Error and Adverse Drug Event Reporting System (MEADERS)-an easy-to-use, Web-based reporting system designed for busy office practices. METHODS: We conducted a 10-week field test of MEADERS in which 220 physicians and office staff from 24 practices reported medication errors and adverse drug events they observed during usual clinical care. The main outcomes were (1) use and acceptability of MEADERS measured with a postreporting survey and interviews with office managers and lead physicians, and (2) distributions of characteristics of the medication event reports. RESULTS: A total of 507 anonymous event reports were submitted. The mean reporting time was 4.3 minutes. Of these reports, 357 (70%) included medication errors only, 138 (27%) involved adverse drug events only, and 12 (2.4%) included both. Medication errors were roughly equally divided among ordering medications, implementing prescription orders, errors by patients receiving the medications, and documentation errors. The most frequent contributors to the medication errors and adverse drug events were communication problems (41%) and knowledge deficits (22%). Eight (1.6%) of the reported events led to hospitalization. Reporting raised staff and physician awareness of the kinds of errors that occur in office medication management; however, 36% agreed or strongly agreed that the event reporting "has increased the fear of repercussion in the practice." Time pressure was the main barrier to reporting. CONCLUSIONS: It is feasible for primary care clinicians and office staff to report medication errors and adverse drug events to a Web-based reporting system. Time pressures and a punitive culture are barriers to event reporting that must be overcome. Further testing of MEADERS as a quality improvement tool is warranted.

Evaluation of the ESRD managed care demonstration operations.

Individuals with end stage renal disease (ESRD), most of whom are insured by Medicare, are generally prohibited from enrolling in Medicare managed care plans (MCPs). CMS offered ESRD patients the opportunity to participate in an ESRD managed care demonstration mandated by Congress. The demonstration tested whether managed care systems would be of interest to ESRD patients and whether these approaches would be operationally feasible and efficient for treating ESRD patients. This article examines the structure, implementation, and operational outcomes of the three demonstration sites, focusing on: the structure of these managed care programs for ESRD patients, requirements needed to attract and enroll patients, and the challenges of introducing managed care programs in the ESRD arena.

Patient selection in the ESRD managed care demonstration.

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Service's (CMS') end stage renal disease (ESRD) managed care demonstration offered an opportunity to assess patient selection among a chronically ill and inherently costly population. Patient selection refers to the phenomenon whereby those Medicare beneficiaries who choose to enroll or stay in health maintenance organizations (HMOs) are, on average, younger, healthier, and less costly to treat than beneficiaries who remain in the traditional Medicare fee-for-service (FFS) sector. The results presented in this article show that enrollees into the demonstration were generally younger and healthier than a representative group of comparison patients from the same geographic areas.

Quality of life and patient satisfaction: ESRD managed care demonstration.

To study the effects of managed care on dialysis patients, we compared the quality of life and patient satisfaction of patients in a managed care demonstration with three comparison samples: fee-for-service (FFS) patients, managed care patients outside the demonstration, and patients in a separate national study. Managed care patients were less satisfied than FFS patients about access to health care providers, but more satisfied with the financial benefits (copayment coverage, prescription drugs, and nutritional supplements) provided under the demonstration managed care plan (MCP). After 1 year in the demonstration, patients exhibited statistically and clinically significant increases in quality of life scores.

ESRD managed care demonstration: financial implications.

In 1996, CMS launched the end stage renal disease (ESRD) managed care demonstration to study the experience of offering managed care to ESRD patients. This article analyzes the financial impact of the demonstration, which sought to assess its economic impact on the Federal Government, the sites, and the ESRD Medicare beneficiaries. Medicare's costs for demonstration enrollees were greater than they would have been if these enrollees had remained in the fee-for-service (FFS) system. This loss was driven by the lower than average predicted Medicare spending given the demonstration patients' conditions. The sites experienced losses or only modest gains, primarily because they provided a larger benefit package than traditional Medicare coverage, including no patient obligations and other benefits, especially prescription drugs. Patient financial benefits were approximately $9,000 annually.