Primary Care Practice Characteristics Associated With Medical Assistant Staffing Ratios.

This study characterized adult primary care medical assistant (MA) staffing. National Survey of Healthcare Organizations and Systems (n = 1,252) data were analyzed to examine primary care practice characteristics associated with MA per primary care clinician (PCC) staffing ratios. In 2021, few practices (11.4%) had ratios of 2 or more MAs per PCCs. Compared with system-owned practices, independent (odds ratio [OR] = 1.76, P <0.05) and medical group-owned (OR = 2.09, P <0.05) practices were more likely to have ratios of 2 or more MAs per PCCs, as were practices with organizational cultures oriented to innovation (P <0.05). Most primary care practices do not have adequate MA staffing.

How Do Accountable Care Organizations Deliver Preventive Care Services? A Mixed-Methods Study.

BACKGROUND: The Affordable Care Act and the introduction of accountable care organizations (ACOs) have increased the incentives for patients and providers to engage in preventive care, for example, through quality metrics linked to disease prevention. However, little is known about how ACOs deliver preventive care services. OBJECTIVE: To understand how Medicare ACOs provide preventive care services to their attributed patients. DESIGN: Mixed-methods study using survey data reporting Medicare ACO capabilities in patient care management and interviews with high-performing ACOs. PARTICIPANTS: ACO executives completed survey data on 283 Medicare ACOs. These data were supplemented with 39 interviews conducted across 18 Medicare ACOs with executive-level leaders and associated clinical and managerial staff. MAIN MEASURES: Survey measures included ACO performance, organizational characteristics, collaboration experience, and capabilities in care management and quality improvement. Telephone interviews followed a semi-structured interview guide and explored the mechanisms used, and motivations of, ACOs to deliver preventive care services. KEY RESULTS: Medicare ACOs that reported being comprehensively engaged in the planning and management of patient care - including conducting reminders for preventive care services - had more beneficiaries and had a history of collaboration experience, but were not more likely to receive shared savings or achieve high-quality scores compared to other surveyed ACOs. Interviews revealed that offering annual wellness visits and having a system-wide approach to closing preventive care gaps are key mechanisms used by high-performing ACOs to address patients' preventive care needs. Few programs or initiatives were identified that specifically target clinically complex patients. Aside from meeting patient needs, motivations for ACOs included increasing patient attribution and meeting performance targets. CONCLUSIONS: ACOs are increasingly motivated to deliver preventive care services. Understanding the mechanisms and motivations used by high-performing ACOs may help both providers and payers to increase the use of preventive care.

Drivers of poor medical care.

The global ubiquity of overuse and underuse of health-care resources and the gravity of resulting harms necessitate an investigation of drivers to inform potential solutions. We describe the network of influences that contribute to poor care and suggest that it is driven by factors that fall into three domains: money and finance; knowledge, bias, and uncertainty; and power and human relationships. In each domain the drivers operate at the global, national, regional, and individual level, and are modulated by the specific contexts within which they act. We discuss in detail drivers of poor care in each domain.

A method to create a standardized generic and condition-specific patient-reported outcome measure for patient care and healthcare improvement.

PURPOSE: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), which are generic or condition-specific, are used for a number of reasons, including clinical care, clinical trials, and in national-level efforts to monitor the quality of health care delivery. Creating PROMs that meet different purposes without overburdening patients, healthcare systems, providers, and data systems is paramount. The objective of this study was to test a generalizable method to incorporate condition-specific issues into generic PROM measures as a first step to producing PROMs that efficiently provide a standardized score. This paper outlines the method and preliminary findings focused on a PROM for osteoarthritis of the knee (OA-K). METHODS: We used a mixed-methods approach and PROMIS® measures to test development of a combined generic and OA-K-specific PROM. Qualitative methods included patient focus groups and provider interviews to identify impacts of OA-K important to patients. We then conducted a thematic analysis and an item gap analysis: identified areas covered by existing generic PROMIS measures, identified "gap" areas not covered, compared gap areas to legacy instruments to verify relevance, and developed new items to address gaps. We then performed cognitive testing on new items and drafted an OA-K-specific instrument based on findings. RESULTS: We identified 52 existing PROMIS items and developed 24 new items across 14 domains. CONCLUSIONS: We developed a process for creating condition-specific instruments that bridge gaps in existing generic measures. If successful, the methodology will create instruments that efficiently gather the patient's perspective while allowing health systems, researchers, and other interested parties to monitor and compare outcomes over time, conditions, and populations.

Variations in the intensive use of head CT for elderly patients with hemorrhagic stroke.

PURPOSE: To investigate the variability in head computed tomographic (CT) scanning in patients with hemorrhagic stroke in U.S. hospitals, its association with mortality, and the number of different physicians consulted. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study was approved by the Committee for the Protection of Human Subjects at Dartmouth College. A retrospective analysis of the Medicare fee-for-service claims data was performed for elderly patients admitted for hemorrhagic stroke in 2008-2009, with 1-year follow-up through 2010. Risk-adjusted primary outcome measures were mean number of head CT scans performed and high-intensity use of head CT (six or more head CT scans performed in the year after admission). We examined the association of high-intensity use of head CT with the number of different physicians consulted and mortality. RESULTS: A total of 53 272 patients (mean age, 79.6 years; 31 377 women [58.9%]) with hemorrhagic stroke were identified in the study period. The mean number of head CT scans conducted in the year after admission for stroke was 3.4; 8737 patients (16.4%) underwent six or more scans. Among the hospitals with the highest case volume (more than 50 patients with hemorrhagic stroke), risk-adjusted rates ranged from 8.0% to 48.1%. The correlation coefficient between number of physicians consulted and rates of high-intensity use of head CT was 0.522 (P < .01) for all hospitals and 0.50 (P < .01) for the highest-volume hospitals. No improvement in 1-year mortality was found for patients undergoing six or more head CT scans (odds ratio, 0.84; 95% confidence interval: 0.69, 1.02). CONCLUSION: High rates of head CT use for patients with hemorrhagic stroke are frequently observed, without an association with decreased mortality. A higher number of physicians consulted was associated with high-intensity use of head CT.

Validation of a new predictive risk model: measuring the impact of the major modifiable risks of death for patients and populations.

BACKGROUND: Modifiable risks account for a large fraction of disease and death, but clinicians and patients lack tools to identify high risk populations or compare the possible benefit of different interventions. METHODS: We used data on the distribution of exposure to 12 major behavioral and biometric risk factors inthe US population, mortality rates by cause, and estimates of the proportional hazards of risk factor exposure from published systematic reviews to develop a risk prediction model that estimates an adult's 10 year mortality risk compared to a population with optimum risk factors. We compared predicted risk to observed mortality in 8,241 respondents in NHANES 1988-1994 and NHANES 1999-2004 with linked mortality data up to the end of 2006. RESULTS: Predicted risk showed good discrimination with an area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve of 0.84 (standard error 0.01) for women and 0.84 (SE 0.01) for men. Across deciles of predicted risk, mortality was accurately predicted in men ((Χ (2) statistic = 12.3 for men, p=0.196) but slightly overpredicted in the highest decile among women (Χ (2) statistic = 22.8, p=0.002). Mortality risk was highly concentrated; for example, among those age 30-44 years, 5.1 % (95 % CI 4.1 % - 6.0 %) of the male and 5.9 % (95 % CI 4.8 % - 6.9 %) of the female population accounted for 25 % of the risk of death. CONCLUSION: The risk model accurately predicted mortality in a representative sample of the US population and could be used to help inform patient and provider decision-making, identify high risk groups, and monitor the impact of efforts to improve population health.

Physicians as part of the solution? Community-based participatory research as a way to get shared decision making into practice.

Although support among policy makers and academics for the wide scale adoption of shared decision making (SDM) is growing, actual implementation is slow, and faces many challenges. Extensive systemic barriers exist that prevent physicians from being able to champion SDM and lead practice change. In other areas of public health where implementation has been a challenge, community-based participatory research (CBPR) has effectively engaged resistant stakeholders to improve practice and the delivery of care. Might CBPR, defined broadly as research that engages participants in the conception, design, and implementation of relevant health programs, be a more effective way to engage physicians, patients, and managers in the implementation process? Consequently, we argue that adopting a participatory approach may help to overcome recognized barriers to progress in this area.

Innovation in the safety net: integrating community health centers through accountable care.

BACKGROUND: Safety net primary care providers, including as community health centers, have long been isolated from mainstream health care providers. Current delivery system reforms such as Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs) may either reinforce the isolation of these providers or may spur new integration of safety net providers. OBJECTIVE: This study examines the extent of community health center involvement in ACOs, as well as how and why ACOs are partnering with these safety net primary care providers. DESIGN: Mixed methods study pairing the cross-sectional National Survey of ACOs (conducted 2012 to 2013), followed by in-depth, qualitative interviews with a subset of ACOs that include community health centers (conducted 2013). PARTICIPANTS: One hundred and seventy-three ACOs completed the National Survey of ACOs. Executives from 18 ACOs that include health centers participated in in-depth interviews, along with leadership at eight community health centers participating in ACOs. MAIN MEASURES: Key survey measures include ACO organizational characteristics, care management and quality improvement capabilities. Qualitative interviews used a semi-structured interview guide. Interviews were recorded and transcribed, then coded for thematic content using NVivo software. KEY RESULTS: Overall, 28% of ACOs include a community health center (CHC). ACOs with CHCs are similar to those without CHCs in organizational structure, care management and quality improvement capabilities. Qualitative results showed two major themes. First, ACOs with CHCs typically represent new relationships or formal partnerships between CHCs and other local health care providers. Second, CHCs are considered valued partners brought into ACOs to expand primary care capacity and expertise. CONCLUSIONS: A substantial number of ACOs include CHCs. These results suggest that rather than reinforcing segmentation of safety net providers from the broader delivery system, the ACO model may lead to the integration of safety net primary care providers.

The rules of engagement: physician engagement strategies in intergroup contexts.

PURPOSE: Recognition of the importance and difficulty of engaging physicians in organisational change has sparked an explosion of literature. The social identity approach, by considering engagement in terms of underlying group identifications and intergroup dynamics, may provide a framework for choosing among the plethora of proposed engagement techniques. This paper seeks to address this issue. DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: The authors examined how four disparate organisations engaged physicians in change. Qualitative methods included interviews (109 managers and physicians), observation, and document review. FINDINGS: Beyond a universal focus on relationship-building, sites differed radically in their preferred strategies. Each emphasised or downplayed professional and/or organisational identity as befit the existing level of inter-group closeness between physicians and managers: an independent practice association sought to enhance members' identity as independent physicians; a hospital, engaging community physicians suspicious of integration, stressed collaboration among separate, equal partners; a developing integrated-delivery system promoted alignment among diverse groups by balancing "systemness" with subgroup uniqueness; a medical group established a strong common identity among employed physicians, but practised pragmatic co-operation with its affiliates. RESEARCH LIMITATIONS/IMPLICATIONS: The authors cannot confirm the accuracy of managers perceptions of the inter-group context or the efficacy of particular strategies. Nonetheless, the findings suggested the fruitfulness of social identity thinking in approaching physician engagement. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: Attention to inter-group dynamics may help organisations engage physicians more effectively. ORIGINALITY/VALUE: This study illuminates and explains variation in the way different organisations engage physicians, and offers a theoretical basis for selecting engagement strategies.

Safety Net Primary Care Capabilities After the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Importance: Federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) provide care to 30 million patients in the US and have shown better outcomes and processes than other practice types. Little is known about how the COVID-19 pandemic contributed to FQHC capabilities compared with other practices. Objective: To compare postpandemic operational characteristics and capabilities of FQHCs with non-FQHC safety net practices and non-FQHC, non-safety net practices. Design, Setting, and Participants: This nationally representative survey conducted from June 2022 to February 2023 with an oversampling of safety net practices in the US included practice leaders working in stratified random selection of practices based on FQHC status, Area Deprivation Index category, and ownership type per a health care network dataset. Exposures: Practice type: FQHC vs non-FQHC safety net and non-FQHC practices. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary care capabilities, including 2 measures of access and 11 composite measures. Results: A total of 1245 practices (221 FQHC and 1024 non-FQHC) responded of 3498 practices sampled. FQHCs were more likely to be independently owned and have received COVID-19 funding. FQHCs and non-FQHC safety net practices were more likely to be in rural areas. FQHCs significantly outperformed non-FQHCs on several capabilities even after controlling for practice size and ownership, including behavioral health provision (mean score, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.51-0.56), culturally informed services (mean score, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.53-0.58), screening for social needs (mean score, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.39-0.47), social needs referrals (mean score, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.48-0.57), social needs referral follow-up (mean score, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.27-0.36), and shared decision-making and motivational interviewing training (mean score, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.51-0.56). No differences were found in behavioral and substance use screening, care processes for patients with complex and high levels of need, use of patient-reported outcome measures, decision aid use, or after-hours access. Across all practices, most of the examined capabilities showed room for improvement. Conclusions and Relevance: The results of this survey study suggest that FQHCs outperformed non-FQHC practices on important care processes while serving a patient population with lower incomes who are medically underserved compared with patients in other practice types. Legislation to expand funding for the FQHC program should improve services for underserved populations and target current non-FQHC safety net practices to serve these populations. Increased support for these practices could improve primary care for rural populations.

Regional variations in diagnostic practices.

BACKGROUND: Current methods of risk adjustment rely on diagnoses recorded in clinical and administrative records. Differences among providers in diagnostic practices could lead to bias. METHODS: We used Medicare claims data from 1999 through 2006 to measure trends in diagnostic practices for Medicare beneficiaries. Regions were grouped into five quintiles according to the intensity of hospital and physician services that beneficiaries in the region received. We compared trends with respect to diagnoses, laboratory testing, imaging, and the assignment of Hierarchical Condition Categories (HCCs) among beneficiaries who moved to regions with a higher or lower intensity of practice. RESULTS: Beneficiaries within each quintile who moved during the study period to regions with a higher or lower intensity of practice had similar numbers of diagnoses and similar HCC risk scores (as derived from HCC coding algorithms) before their move. The number of diagnoses and the HCC measures increased as the cohort aged, but they increased to a greater extent among beneficiaries who moved to regions with a higher intensity of practice than among those who moved to regions with the same or lower intensity of practice. For example, among beneficiaries who lived initially in regions in the lowest quintile, there was a greater increase in the average number of diagnoses among those who moved to regions in a higher quintile than among those who moved to regions within the lowest quintile (increase of 100.8%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 89.6 to 112.1; vs. increase of 61.7%; 95% CI, 55.8 to 67.4). Moving to each higher quintile of intensity was associated with an additional 5.9% increase (95% CI, 5.2 to 6.7) in HCC scores, and results were similar with respect to laboratory testing and imaging. CONCLUSIONS: Substantial differences in diagnostic practices that are unlikely to be related to patient characteristics are observed across U.S. regions. The use of clinical or claims-based diagnoses in risk adjustment may introduce important biases in comparative-effectiveness studies, public reporting, and payment reforms.

Regional intensity of vascular care and lower extremity amputation rates.

OBJECTIVE: Because patient-level differences do not fully explain the variation in lower extremity amputation rates across the United States, we hypothesized that variation in intensity of vascular care may also affect regional rates of amputation and examined the relationship between the intensity of vascular care and the population-based rate of major lower extremity amputation (above-knee or below-knee) from vascular disease. METHODS: Intensity of vascular care was defined as the proportion of Medicare patients who underwent any vascular procedure in the year before amputation, calculated at the regional level (2003 to 2006), using the 306 hospital referral regions in the Dartmouth Atlas of Healthcare. The relationship between intensity of vascular care and major amputation rate, at the regional level, was examined between 2007 and 2009. RESULTS: Amputation rates varied widely by region, from one to 27 per 10,000 Medicare patients. Compared with regions in the lowest quintile of amputation rate, patients in the highest quintile were commonly African American (50% vs 13%) and diabetic (38% vs 31%). Intensity of vascular care also varied across regions: <35% of patients underwent revascularization in the lowest quintile of intensity, whereas nearly 60% underwent revascularization in the highest quintile. Overall, an inverse correlation was found between intensity of vascular care and the amputation rate, ranging from R = -0.36 for outpatient diagnostic and therapeutic procedures to R = -0.87 for inpatient surgical revascularizations. Analyses adjusting for patient characteristics and socioeconomic status found patients in high-intensity vascular care regions were significantly less likely to undergo amputation without an antecedent attempt at revascularization (odds ratio, 0.37; 95% confidence interval, 0.34-0.37; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: The intensity of vascular care provided to patients at risk for amputation varies, and regions with the most intensive vascular care have the lowest amputation rate, although the observational nature of these associations do not impart causality. High-risk patients, especially African American diabetic patients residing in low-intensity vascular care regions, represent an important target for systematic efforts to reduce amputation risk.

Who's Accountable? Low-Value Care Received By Medicare Beneficiaries Outside Of Their Attributed Health Systems.

Policy makers and payers increasingly hold health systems accountable for spending and quality for their attributed beneficiaries. Low-value care-medical services that offer little or no benefit and have the potential for harm in specific clinical scenarios-received outside of these systems could threaten success on both fronts. Using national Medicare data for fee-for-service beneficiaries ages sixty-five and older and attributed to 595 US health systems, we describe where and from whom they received forty low-value services during 2017-18 and identify factors associated with out-of-system receipt. Forty-three percent of low-value services received by attributed beneficiaries originated from out-of-system clinicians: 38 percent from specialists, 4 percent from primary care physicians, and 1 percent from advanced practice clinicians. Recipients of low-value care were more likely to obtain that care out of system if age 75 or older (versus ages 65-74), male (versus female), non-Hispanic White (versus other races or ethnicities), rural dwelling (versus metropolitan dwelling), more medically complex, or experiencing lower continuity of care. However, out-of-system service receipt was not associated with recipients' health systems' accountable care organization status. Health systems might improve quality and reduce spending for their attributed beneficiaries by addressing out-of-system receipt of low-value care-for example, by improving continuity.