Considering the Environmental Impact of Practice-Based Research.

INTRODUCTION: Practice-based research networks (PBRNs) improve primary care by addressing issues that matter to clinicians. Building trust between researchers and care teams is essential to this process, which often requires visiting practices to cultivate relationships and perform research activities. However, in a recent study using practice facilitation to improve the delivery of a preventive service, the COVID-19 pandemic prompted us to convert all planned facilitation from an in-person to virtual format. This eliminated the need to commute by automobile to and from practices across the state, greatly reducing the carbon footprint of the study. METHODS: From practice facilitator field notes that detailed practice locations and number of sessions, we calculated the total number of driving miles averted by virtual facilitation. We then determined metric tons of carbon dioxide we avoided producing using the Environmental Protection Agency Greenhouse Gases Equivalencies Calculator. During post-intervention interviews, we assessed practices' perspectives and experiences with the virtual format. RESULTS: Three practice facilitators provided an average of 3.4 sessions for 64 practices. Virtual facilitation averted 32,574.8 drive miles and prevented the release of 12.7 metric tons of carbon dioxide, an offset equivalent to growing 210 trees for 10 years. Practices reported that virtual facilitation fostered greater engagement and allowed more clinicians and staff to attend sessions. DISCUSSION: Climate change poses a significant threat to the health of people and communities. Given their commitment to improving population health, it may be time for PBRNs to routinely assess their environmental impact and minimize preventable environmental costs.

Increased Organizational Stress in Primary Care: Understanding the Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic, Medicaid Expansion, and Practice Ownership.

BACKGROUND: Primary care is the foundation of health care, resulting in longer lives and improved equity. Primary care was the frontline of the COVID-19 pandemic public response and essential for access to care. Yet primary care faces substantial structural and systemic challenges. As part of a longitudinal analysis to track the capacity and health of primary care, we surveyed every primary care practice in Virginia in 2018 and again in 2022. METHODS: Surveys were emailed or mailed up to 6 times and nonresponders received a phone call. Questions assessed organizational characteristics, scope of care, capacity, and organizational stress in the prior year. From respondents, 39 clinicians, nurses, staff, administrators, and practice managers were interviewed. RESULTS: 526 out of 2296 primary care practices (23% response rate) completed the survey, with broad representation across geography, ownership, and payer mix. Compared with 2018, in 2022 there were increases in practices owned by health systems (25% vs 43%, P < .0001) and average percent of patients with Medicaid per practice (12% vs 22%, P < .0001). The percent of practices reporting any major stressor increased from 34% to 53% (P < .0001). The main increased stress was losing a clinician, with 13% of practices in 2018 versus 42% in 2022 reporting losing a clinician (P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: Primary care practices are resilient and continue to serve their communities, including a broad scope of services and care for underserved people. However, the COVID-19 pandemic caused significant stress. With an increase in clinicians leaving clinical practice, we anticipate worsening access to primary care.

Rising Racial Disparities in Opioid Mortality and Undertreatment of Opioid Use Disorder and Mental Health Comorbidities in Virginia.

Introduction: There were more than 100,000 fatal drug overdoses in the U.S. in 2021 alone. In recent years, there has been a shift in opioid mortality from predominantly White rural communities to Black urban communities. This study aimed to identify the Virginia communities disproportionately affected by the overdose crisis and to better understand the systemic factors contributing to disparities in opioid mortality. Methods: Using the state all-payer claims database, state mortality records, and census data, we created a multivariate model to examine the community-level factors contributing to racial disparities in opioid mortality. We used generalized linear mixed models to examine the associations between socioecologic factors and fatal opioid overdoses, opioid use disorder diagnoses, opioid-related emergency department visits, and mental health diagnoses. Results: Between 2015 and 2020, racial disparities in mortality widened. In 2020, Black males were 1.5 times more likely to die of an opioid overdose than White males (47.3 vs 31.6 per 100,000; p<0.001). The rate of mental health disorders strongly correlated with mortality (ß=0.53, p<0.001). Black individuals are not more likely to be diagnosed with opioid use disorder (ß=0.01, p=0.002) or with mental health disorders (ß= -0.12, p<0.001), despite higher fatal opioid overdoses. Conclusions: There are widening racial disparities in opioid mortality. Untreated mental health disorders are a major risk factor for opioid mortality. Findings show pathways to address inequities, including early linkage to care for mental health and opioid use disorders. This analysis shows the use of comprehensive socioecologic data to identify the precursors to fatal overdoses, which could allow earlier intervention and reallocation of resources in high-risk communities.

Primary Care: A Critical Stopgap of Mental Health Services During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in a worsening mental health crisis, while also dramatically reducing access to in-person primary care services. Primary care, an essential provider of mental health services, rapidly adopted telemedicine to address behavioral health needs. Here we examine the provision of mental health services by primary care during the pandemic, including the essential use of telemedicine. METHODS: Data were collected via a series of national, cross-sectional surveys of primary care clinicians in November 2020 by the Larry A. Green Center. The survey was distributed through a network of partner organizations and subscribers. Descriptive and chi squared analysis were utilized. RESULTS: Among 1,472 respondents, 88% reported increased mental health needs and 37% reported higher rates of substance use among patients. Most (65%) clinicians became more involved in providing mental health support, and 64% reported using telemedicine to provide behavioral health services. Phone-based care was more common for care delivery among patients who were uninsured (60% vs 42%, P < .01), Medicare beneficiaries (45% vs 36%, P < .05), non-English speaking (67% vs 40%, P < .001), and racial and ethnic minorities (58% vs 34%, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Primary care is a leading provider of mental health services and has played a critical role during the pandemic. Primary care clinicians have strong relationships with their patients as well as outreach within communities that may otherwise struggle to access mental health services. The use of telemedicine in primary care, and specifically phone-based services, has been an essential tool to providing equitable access to mental health services.

Health Equity: The Only Path Forward for Primary Care.

The 2021 National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) report on Implementing High-Quality Primary Care identifies 5 high-level objectives regarding payment, access, workforce development, information technology, and implementation. Nine junior primary care leaders (3 internal medicine, 3 family medicine, 3 pediatrics) invited from broad geographies, practice settings, and academic backgrounds used appreciative inquiry to identify priorities for the future of primary care. Highlighting the voices of these early career clinicians, we propose a response to the report from the perspective of early career primary care physicians. Health equity must be the foundation of the future of primary care. Because Barbara Starfield's original 4 Cs (first contact, coordination, comprehensiveness, and continuity) may not be inclusive of the needs of under-resourced communities, we promote an extension to include 5 additional Cs: convenience, cultural humility, structural competency, community engagement, and collaboration. We support the NASEM report's priorities and its focus on achieving health equity. We recommend investing in local communities and preparatory programs to stimulate diverse individuals to serve in health care. Finally, we support a blended value-based care model with risk adjustment for the social complexity of our patients.Appeared as Annals "Online First" article.

Charging migrants for health care could compromise public health and increase costs for the NHS.

BACKGROUND: This study explores the implications of the UK Department of Health's intention to introduce charging for undocumented migrants for primary health care. METHODS: Following a background review of relevant recent literature, 12 in-depth qualitative interviews were conducted with experts on vulnerable populations in England and/or the English health care system, in collaboration with Doctors of the World UK. Data were analysed qualitatively using thematic coding and framework analysis. RESULTS: Stakeholders were concerned that implementing charging for migrants in England could deter medically necessary treatment, leading to threats to public health and increased health care costs. Interviewees identified potential challenges and opportunities provided by the Health and Social Care Act 2012 to improve health care for migrants. CONCLUSIONS: There are considerable concerns about adverse consequences of implementing charges for undocumented migrants. It will be essential to evaluate the effects of this policy once it is implemented.