Self-Measured Blood Pressure Monitoring During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Perspectives From Community Health Center Clinicians.

ABSTRACT: The early period of the COVID-19 pandemic necessitated a rapid increase in out-of-office care. To capture the impact from COVID-19 on care for patients with hypertension, a questionnaire was disseminated to community health center clinicians. The extent, types, and causes of care delays and disruptions were assessed along with adaptations and innovations used to address them. Clinician attitudinal changes and perspectives on future hypertension care were also assessed. Of the 65 respondents, most (90.8%) reported their patients with hypertension experienced care delays or disruptions, including lack of follow-up, lack of blood pressure assessment, and missed medication refills or orders. To address care delays and disruptions for patients with hypertension, respondents indicated that their health center increased the use of telehealth or other technology, made home blood pressure devices available to patients, expanded outreach and care coordination, provided medication refills for longer periods of time, and used new care delivery options. The use of self-measured blood pressure monitoring (58.5%) and telehealth (43.1%) was identified as the top adaptations that should be sustained to increase access to and patient engagement with hypertension care; however, barriers to both remain. Policy and system level changes are needed to support value-based care models that include self-measured blood pressure and telehealth.

Metformin Prescription Rates for Patients with Prediabetes.

PURPOSE: Prediabetes is a serious public health concern, with 34.5% of US adults meeting the criteria for prediabetes. The American Diabetes Association has highlighted metformin therapy as a consideration for individuals with BMI ≥ 35 kg/m2, those aged < 60 years, and women with a history of gestational diabetes. We examined metformin prescription rates among a national sample of commercially insured, higher risk patients with prediabetes. METHODS: We gathered 2012 to 2018 demographic, laboratory, and prescription data for 53,551 patients with prediabetes from the IBM MarketScan research database. Our primary outcome was metformin prescription rates 1 or 3 years after a laboratory confirmation of prediabetes among patients who have a BMI ≥ 35 kg/m2 or are aged < 60 years. RESULTS: Overall, 2.4% (n = 1,124) of patients received a metformin prescription within 1 year of a laboratory confirmed prediabetes result, including 2.4% of patients aged < 60 years and 10.4% of those with BMI ≥ 35 kg/m2. By a 3 year follow-up, 4.1% (n = 1901) received a metformin prescription, including 3.9% of patients aged < 60 years and 14.0% with BMI ≥ 35 kg/m2. Patients who developed type 2 diabetes within the 1 (n = 2,769) or 3 year (n = 7,268) follow-up periods were excluded from analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Few prediabetes patients who were either obese or aged < 60 years received a metformin prescription between 2012 and 2018. Prescription rates increased slightly between 1 and 3 years after a prediabetes diagnosis, so strategies to support timely intervention among higher risk patients with prediabetes are critically needed.

Implementation of Diabetes Prevention in Health Care Organizations: Best Practice Recommendations.

Approximately 1 in 3 American adults has prediabetes, a condition characterized by blood glucose levels that are above normal, not in the type 2 diabetes ranges, and that increases the risk of developing type 2 diabetes. Evidence-based treatments can be used to prevent or delay type 2 diabetes in adults with prediabetes. The American Medical Association (AMA) has collaborated with health care organizations across the country to build sustainable diabetes prevention strategies. In 2017, the AMA formed the Diabetes Prevention Best Practices Workgroup (DPBP) with representatives from 6 health care organizations actively implementing diabetes prevention. Each organization had a unique strategy, but all included the National Diabetes Prevention Program lifestyle change program as a core evidence-based intervention. DPBP established the goal of disseminating best practices to guide other health care organizations in implementing diabetes prevention and identifying and managing patients with prediabetes. Workgroup members recognized similarities in some of their basic steps and considerations and synthesized their practices to develop best practice recommendations for 3 strategy maturity phases. Recommendations for each maturity phase are classified into 6 categories: (1) organizational support; (2) workforce and funding; (3) promotion and dissemination; (4) clinical integration and support; (5) evaluation and outcomes; (6) and program. As the burden of chronic disease grows, prevention must be prioritized and integrated into health care. These maturity phases and best practice recommendations can be used by any health care organization committed to diabetes prevention. Further research is suggested to assess the impact and adoption of diabetes prevention best practices.

The Primary Care Spend Model: a systems approach to measuring investment in primary care.

Increased investment in primary care is associated with lower healthcare costs and improved population health. The allocation of scarce resources should be driven by robust models that adequately describe primary care activities and spending within a health system, and allow comparisons within and across health systems. However, disparate definitions result in wide variations in estimates of spending on primary care. We propose a new model that allows for a dynamic assessment of primary care spending (PC Spend) within the context of a system's total healthcare budget. The model articulates varied definitions of primary care through a tiered structure which includes overall spending on primary care services, spending on services delivered by primary care professionals and spending delivered by providers that can be characterised by the '4Cs' (first contact, continuous, comprehensive and coordinated care). This unifying framework allows a more refined description of services to be included in any estimate of primary care spend and also supports measurement of primary care spending across nations of varying economic development, accommodating data limitations and international health system differences. It provides a goal for best accounting while also offering guidance, comparability and assessments of how primary care expenditures are associated with outcomes. Such a framework facilitates comparison through the creation of standard definitions and terms, and it also has the potential to foster new areas of research that facilitate robust policy analysis at the national and international levels.

Development, Value, and Implications of a Comprehensive Primary Care Payment Calculator for Family Medicine Report From Family Medicine for America's Health Payment Tactic Team.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Fee for service (FFS), the dominant payment model for primary care in the United States, compensates physicians based on volume. There are many initiatives exploring alternative payment models that prioritize value over volume. The Family Medicine for America's Health (FMAHealth) Payment Team has developed a comprehensive primary care payment (CPCP) model to support the move from activity- and volume-based payment to performance-based payment for value. METHODS: In 2016-2017, the FMAHealth Payment Team performed a comprehensive study of the current state of primary care payment models in the United States. This study explored the features, motivations, successes, and failures of a wide variety of payment arrangements. RESULTS: The results of this work have informed a definition of comprehensive primary care payment (CPCP) as well as a CPCP calculator. This quantitative methodology calculates a base rate and includes modifiers that recognize the importance of infrastructure and resources that have been found to be successful in innovative models. The modifiers also incorporate adjustments for chronic disease burden, social determinants of health, quality, and utilization. CONCLUSIONS: The calculator and CPCP methodology offer a potential roadmap for transitioning from volume to value and details how to calculate such an adjustable comprehensive payment. This has impact and interest for all levels of the health care system and is intended for use by practices of all types as well as health systems, employers, and payers.

Digital Health-Supported Lifestyle Change Programs to Prevent Type 2 Diabetes.

IN BRIEF Type 2 diabetes can be prevented or delayed in people with prediabetes through participation in an intensive lifestyle change program (LCP), particularly one based on the Diabetes Prevention Program research study. Digital health offers opportunities to extend the reach of such LCPs and possibly improve on these programs, which traditionally have been delivered in person. In this review, we describe the current state of evidence regarding digital health-supported LCPs and discuss gaps in research and opportunities for future efforts.

A community mobilizes to end medical apartheid.

PROBLEM: People of color suffer worse health outcomes than their White counterparts due, in part, to limited access to high-quality specialty care. PURPOSE: This article describes the events that led to the Bronx Health REACH coalition's decision to file a civil rights complaint with the New York State Office of the Attorney General alleging that three academic medical centers in New York City discriminated on the basis of payer status and race in violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Hill-Burton Act, New York State regulations, and New York City Human Rights Law. KEY POINTS: Although the problem has not yet been resolved, the related community mobilization efforts have raised public awareness about the impact of disparate care, strengthened the coalition's commitment to achieve health equality, and garnered support among many city and state legislators. CONCLUSION: Community groups and professionals with relevant expertise can tackle complex systemic problems, but they must be prepared for a long and difficult fight.