Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 5 de 5
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Popul Health Manag ; 22(6): 529-535, 2019 12.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30942658

RESUMO

Audit and feedback is an effective method to improve attending physician performance. However, there are limited data on how audit and feedback impacts care provided by resident physicians. The authors conducted a 3-arm randomized clinical trial among internal medicine resident physicians to examine the impact of an audit and feedback intervention on ambulatory quality measures (AQMs). Residents in all 3 groups received an email containing the contact information of a population health coordinator and a list of AQMs (control). In addition, the Practice Target group received individual AQM data compared to the target AQM goals for all primary care practices. The Peer Comparison group received information on individual AQM data compared to the average performance of residents in the same postgraduate year. Residents in each intervention group received updated information 6 months later. Ten AQMs related to diabetes care, hypertension management, lipid control, and cancer screening, as well as a composite quality score, were examined at baseline, 6 months, and 13 months. At 13 months follow-up, the Practice Target group had statistically significant improvement in cervical cancer screening rate (77% vs. 65.3%), colorectal cancer screening rate (72.5% vs. 64.6%), and composite quality score (71.7% vs 65.4%) compared to baseline. Providing internal medicine residents with individual AQMs data compared to target goal for the practice led to statistically significant improvement in cancer screening rates and the composite quality score. Audit and feedback may be a relatively simple yet effective tool to improve population health in the resident clinic setting.

3.
J Gen Intern Med ; 33(4): 463-470, 2018 04.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29313223

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Healthcare systems use population health management programs to improve the quality of cardiovascular disease care. Adding a dedicated population health coordinator (PHC) who identifies and reaches out to patients not meeting cardiovascular care goals to these programs may help reduce disparities in cardiovascular care. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether a program that used PHCs decreased racial/ethnic disparities in LDL cholesterol and blood pressure (BP) control. DESIGN: Retrospective difference-in-difference analysis. PARTICIPANTS: Twelve thousdand five hundred fifty-five primary care patients with cardiovascular disease (cohort for LDL analysis) and 41,183 with hypertension (cohort for BP analysis). INTERVENTION: From July 1, 2014-December 31, 2014, 18 practices used an information technology (IT) system to identify patients not meeting LDL and BP goals; 8 practices also received a PHC. We examined whether having the PHC plus IT system, compared with having the IT system alone, decreased racial/ethnic disparities, using difference-in-difference analysis of data collected before and after program implementation. MAIN MEASURES: Meeting guideline concordant LDL and BP goals. KEY RESULTS: At baseline, there were racial/ethnic disparities in meeting LDL (p = 0.007) and BP (p = 0.0003) goals. Comparing practices with and without a PHC, and accounting for pre-intervention LDL control, non-Hispanic white patients in PHC practices had improved odds of LDL control (OR 1.20 95% CI 1.09-1.32) compared with those in non-PHC practices. Non-Hispanic black (OR 1.15 95% CI 0.80-1.65) and Hispanic (OR 1.29 95% CI 0.66-2.53) patients saw similar, but non-significant, improvements in LDL control. For BP control, non-Hispanic white patients in PHC practices (versus non-PHC) improved (OR 1.13 95% CI 1.05-1.22). Non-Hispanic black patients (OR 1.17 95% CI 0.94-1.45) saw similar, but non-statistically significant, improvements in BP control, but Hispanic (OR 0.90 95% CI 0.59-1.36) patients did not. Interaction testing confirmed that disparities did not decrease (p = 0.73 for LDL and p = 0.69 for BP). CONCLUSIONS: The population health management intervention did not decrease disparities. Further efforts should explicitly target improving both healthcare equity and quality. Clinical Trials #: NCT02812303 ( ClinicalTrials.gov ).


Assuntos
Doenças Cardiovasculares/etnologia , Doenças Cardiovasculares/terapia , Disparidades em Assistência à Saúde/etnologia , Gestão da Saúde da População , Atenção Primária à Saúde/métodos , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Doenças Cardiovasculares/economia , Estudos de Coortes , Feminino , Disparidades em Assistência à Saúde/economia , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Atenção Primária à Saúde/economia , Estudos Retrospectivos
4.
Am J Manag Care ; 23(12): 728-735, 2017 Dec.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29261239

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: We implemented a health information technology-enabled population health management program for chronic disease management in academic hospital-affiliated primary care practices, then compared quality-of-care outcome measures among practices assigned a central population health coordinator (PHC) and those not assigned a PHC. STUDY DESIGN: Quasi-experimental. METHODS: Central PHCs were nonrandomly assigned to 8 of 18 practices. They met with physicians, managed lists of patients not at goal in chronic disease registries, and performed administrative tasks. In non-PHC practices, existing staff remained responsible for these tasks. The primary outcome was difference-in-differences over the 6-month follow-up period between PHC and non-PHC practices for outcome measures for diabetes (low-density lipoprotein cholesterol [LDL-C], glycated hemoglobin [A1C], and blood pressure [BP] goal attainment), cardiovascular disease (LDL-C goal attainment), and hypertension (BP goal attainment). Secondary outcomes included process measures only (obtaining LDL-C, A1C, and BP readings) and cancer screening test completion. RESULTS: The difference in the percentage point (PP) increase in outcome measures over follow-up was greater in PHC practices than non-PHC practices for all measures among patients with diabetes (LDL-C, 4.6 PP; A1C, 4.8 PP; BP, 4.7 PP), cardiovascular disease (LDL-C, 3.3 PP), and hypertension (BP, 2.3 PP) (adjusted P all <.001). Changes in cancer screening outcomes, which were not a focus of PHC efforts, were similar between PHC and non-PHC practices. CONCLUSIONS: Use of central PHCs led to greater improvement in short-term chronic disease outcome measures compared with patients in practices not assigned a central PHC.


Assuntos
Doença Crônica/terapia , Implementação de Plano de Saúde/métodos , Atenção Primária à Saúde/organização & administração , Doenças Cardiovasculares/terapia , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/terapia , Gerenciamento Clínico , Feminino , Humanos , Hipertensão/terapia , Masculino , Neoplasias/terapia , Saúde da População
5.
Am J Med Qual ; 32(4): 397-405, 2017.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27259871

RESUMO

Improving glycemic control across a primary care diabetes population is challenging. This article describes the development, implementation, and outcomes of the Diabetes Care Collaborative Model (DCCM), a collaborative team care process focused on promoting effective insulin use targeting patients with hyperglycemia in a patient-centered medical home model. After a pilot, the DCCM was implemented in 18 primary care practices affiliated with an academic medical center. Its implementation was associated with improvements in glycemic control and increase in insulin prescription longitudinally and across the entire population, with a >1% reduction in the proportion of glycated hemoglobin >9% at 2 years after the implementation compared with the 2 years prior ( P < .001). Facilitating factors included diverse stakeholder engagement, institutional alignment of priorities, awarding various types of credits for participation and implementation to providers, and a strong theoretical foundation using the principles of the collaborative care model.


Assuntos
Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/tratamento farmacológico , Hipoglicemiantes/uso terapêutico , Insulina/uso terapêutico , Equipe de Assistência ao Paciente/organização & administração , Atenção Primária à Saúde/organização & administração , Centros Médicos Acadêmicos , Idoso , Glicemia , Comportamento Cooperativo , Feminino , Hemoglobina A Glicada , Humanos , Hipoglicemiantes/administração & dosagem , Capacitação em Serviço , Insulina/administração & dosagem , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Assistência Centrada no Paciente/organização & administração
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA