Association Between ICD-10 Codes for Social Needs and Subsequent Emergency and Inpatient Use.

BACKGROUND: International Classification of Diseases, 10th revision Z codes capture social needs related to health care encounters and may identify elevated risk of acute care use. OBJECTIVES: To examine associations between Z code assignment and subsequent acute care use and explore associations between social need category and acute care use. RESEARCH DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SUBJECTS: Adults continuously enrolled in a commercial or Medicare Advantage plan for ≥15 months (12-month baseline, 3-48 month follow-up). OUTCOMES: All-cause emergency department (ED) visits and inpatient admissions during study follow-up. RESULTS: There were 352,280 patients with any assigned Z codes and 704,560 sampled controls with no Z codes. Among patients with commercial plans, Z code assignment was associated with a 26% higher rate of ED visits [adjusted incidence rate ratio (aIRR) 1.26, 95% CI: 1.25-1.27] and 42% higher rate of inpatient admissions (aIRR 1.42, 95% CI: 1.39-1.44) during follow-up. Among patients with Medicare Advantage plans, Z code assignment was associated with 42% (aIRR 1.42, 95% CI: 1.40-1.43) and 28% (aIRR 1.28, 95% CI: 1.26-1.30) higher rates of ED visits and inpatient admissions, respectively. Within the Z code group, relative to community/social codes, socioeconomic Z codes were associated with higher rates of inpatient admissions (commercial: aIRR 1.10, 95% CI: 1.06-1.14; Medicare Advantage: aIRR 1.24, 95% CI 1.20-1.27), and environmental Z codes were associated with lower rates of both primary outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Z code assignment was independently associated with higher subsequent emergency and inpatient utilization. Findings suggest Z codes' potential utility for risk prediction and efforts targeting avoidable utilization.

Implementing and Enhancing Social and Economic Needs Screening at a Federally Qualified Health Center.

BACKGROUND: Programs to screen for social and economic needs (SENs) are challenging to implement. AIM: To describe implementation of an SEN screening program for patients obtaining care at a federally qualified health center (FQHC). SETTING: Large Chicago-area FQHC where many patients are Hispanic/Latino and insured through Medicaid. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION: In the program's phase 1 (beginning April 2020), a prescreening question asked about patients' interest in receiving community resources; staff then called interested patients. After several refinements (e.g., increased staffing, tailored reductions in screening frequency) to address challenges such as a large screening backlog, program phase 2 began in February 2021. In phase 2, a second prescreening question asked about patients' preferred modality to learn about community resources (text/email versus phone calls). PROGRAM EVALUATION: During phase 1, 8925 of 29,861 patients (30%) expressed interest in community resources. Only 40% of interested patients were successfully contacted and screened. In phase 2, 5781 of 21,737 patients (27%) expressed interest in resources; 84% of interested patients were successfully contacted by either text/email (43%) or phone (41%). DISCUSSION: Under one-third of patients obtaining care at an FQHC expressed interest in community resources for SENs. After program refinements, rates of follow-up with interested patients substantially increased.

Checkup Visits in Adult Federally Qualified Health Center Patients: a Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Checkup visits (i.e., general health checks) can increase preventive service completion and lead to improved treatment of new chronic illnesses. After the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, preventive service completion decreased in many groups that receive care in safety net settings. OBJECTIVE: To examine potential benefits associated with checkups in federally qualified health center (FQHC) patients. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study, from March 2018 to February 2022. PATIENTS: Adults at seven FQHCs in Illinois. INTERVENTIONS: Checkups during a two-year Baseline (i.e., pre-COVID-19) period and two-year COVID-19 period. MAIN MEASURES: The primary outcome was COVID-19 period checkup completion. Secondary outcomes were: mammography completion; new diagnoses of four common chronic illnesses (hypertension, diabetes, depression, or high cholesterol), and; initiation of chronic illness medications. KEY RESULTS: Among 106,114 included patients, race/ethnicity was most commonly Latino/Hispanic (42.1%) or non-Hispanic Black (30.2%). Most patients had Medicaid coverage (40.4%) or were uninsured (33.9%). While 21.0% of patients completed a checkup during Baseline, only 15.3% did so during the COVID-19 period. In multivariable regression analysis, private insurance (versus Medicaid) was positively associated with COVID-19 period checkup completion (adjusted relative risk [aRR], 1.15; 95% confidence interval, [CI], 1.10-1.19), while non-Hispanic Black race/ethnicity (versus Latino/Hispanic) was inversely associated with checkup completion (aRR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.85-0.93). In secondary outcome analysis, COVID-19 period checkup completion was associated with 61% greater probability of mammography (aRR, 1.61; 95% CI, 1.52-1.71), and significantly higher probability of diagnosis, and treatment initiation, for all four chronic illnesses. In exploratory interaction analysis, checkup completion was more modestly associated with diagnosis and treatment of hypertension and high cholesterol in some younger age groups (versus age ≥ 65). CONCLUSIONS: In this large FQHC cohort, checkup completion markedly decreased during the pandemic. Checkup completion was associated with preventive service completion, chronic illness detection, and initiation of chronic illness treatment.

Association of primary care visit length with outpatient utilization, continuity, and care processes.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about how variation in the scheduled length of primary care visits can impact patients' patterns of health care utilization. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate how the scheduled length of in-person visits with primary care physicians (PCPs) was associated with PCP and patient characteristics, outpatient utilization, and preventive care receipt. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study examined data from a large American academic health system. PCP visit length template was defined as either 15- and 30-min scheduled appointments (i.e. 15/30), or 20- and 40-min scheduled appointments (i.e. 20/40). RESULTS: Of 222 included PCPs, 85 (38.3%) used the 15/30 template and 137 (61.7%) used the 20/40 template. The 15/30 group had higher proportions of male (49.4%, vs. 35.8% in the 20/40 group) and family medicine (37.6% vs. 21.2%) physicians. In adjusted patient-level analysis (N = 238,806), having a 15/30 PCP was associated with 9% more primary care visits (incidence rate ratio [IRR], 1.09; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.03-1.14), and 8% fewer specialty care visits (IRR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.86-0.98). PCP visit length template was not associated with significant differences in obstetrics/gynaecology visits, continuity of care, or preventive care receipt. In interaction analyses, having a 15/30 PCP was associated with additional primary care visits among non-Hispanic White patients (IRR, 1.10; 95% CI, 1.04-1.16) but not among non-Hispanic Black patients. CONCLUSION: PCPs' choices about the scheduled length of in-person visits may impact their patients' specialty care use, and have varying impacts across different racial/ethnic groups.

Association of Primary Care Physician Compensation Incentives and Quality of Care in the United States, 2012-2016.

BACKGROUND: Physician compensation incentives may have positive or negative effects on clinical quality. OBJECTIVE: To assess the association between various physician compensation incentives on technical indicators of primary care quality. DESIGN: Cross-sectional, nationally representative retrospective analysis. PARTICIPANTS: Visits by adults to primary care physicians in the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey from 2012-2016. We analyzed 49,580 sampled visits, representing 1.45 billion primary care visits. MAIN MEASURES: We assessed the association between 5 compensation incentives - quality measure performance, patient experience scores, individual productivity, practice financial performance, or practice efficiency - and 10 high-value and 7 low-value care measures as well as high-value and low-value care composites. KEY RESULTS: Quality measure performance was an incentive in 22% of visits; patient experience scores, 17%; individual productivity, 57%; practice financial performance, 63%; and practice efficiency, 12%. In adjusted models, none of the compensation incentives were consistently associated with individual high- and low-value measures. None of the compensation incentives were associated with high- or low-value care composites. For example, quality measure performance compensation was not significantly associated with high-value care (visits with quality incentive, 47% of eligible measures met; without quality incentive, 43%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.02; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.91 to 1.15) or low-value care (aOR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.82-1.19). Physician compensation incentives that might be expected to increase low-value care did not: patient experience (aOR for low-value care composite, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.65-1.05), individual productivity (aOR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.88-1.22), and practice financial performance (aOR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.81-1.36). CONCLUSION: In this retrospective, cross-sectional, nationally representative analysis of care in the United States, physician compensation incentives were not generally associated with more or less high- or low-value care.

Randomized Trial Evaluating Health System Expenditures with Transitional Care Services for Adults with No Usual Source of Care at Discharge.

BACKGROUND: Multidisciplinary transitional care services reduce readmissions for high-risk patients, but it is unclear if health system costs to offer these intensive services are offset by avoidance of higher downstream expenditures. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate net costs for a health system offering transitional care services DESIGN: One-year pragmatic, randomized trial PARTICIPANTS: Adults aged ≥ 18 without a usual source of follow-up care at the time of hospital discharge were enrolled through a high-volume, urban academic medical center in Chicago, IL, USA, from September 2015 through February 2016. INTERVENTIONS: Eligible patients were silently randomized before discharge by an automated electronic health record algorithm allocating them in a 1:3 ratio to receive routine coordination of post-discharge care (RC) versus being offered intensive, multidisciplinary transitional care (TC) services. MAIN MEASUREMENTS: Health system costs were collected from facility administrative systems and transformed to standardized costs using Medicare reference files. Multivariable generalized linear models estimated proportional differences in net costs over one year. KEY RESULTS: Study patients (489 TC; 164 RC) had a mean age of 44 years; 34% were uninsured, 55% had public insurance, and 49% self-identified as Black or Latinx. Over 90 days, cost differences between groups were not statistically significant. Over 180 days, the TC group had 41% lower ED/observation costs (adjusted cost ratio [aCR], 0.59; 95% CI, 0.36-0.97), 50% lower inpatient costs (aCR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.27-0.95), and 41% lower total healthcare costs (aCR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.36-0.99) than the RC group. Over 365 days, total cost differences remained of similar magnitude but no longer were statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Offering TC services for vulnerable adults at discharge reduced net health system expenditures over 180 days. The promising economic case for multidisciplinary transitional care interventions warrants further research. TRIAL REGISTRATION: National Clinical Trials Registry (NCT03066492).

Initiating second-line antidiabetic medication among older adults with type 2 diabetes on Metformin.

BACKGROUND: Antidiabetic medications (ADM), especially sulfonylureas (SFU) and basal insulin (BI), are associated with increased risk of hypoglycemia, which is especially concerning among older adults in poor health. The objective of this study was to investigate prescribing patterns of ADM in older adults according to their health status. METHODS: This case control study analyzed administrative claims between 2013 and 2017 from a large national payer. The study population was derived from a nationwide database of 84,720 U.S. adults aged ≥65, who were enrolled in Medicare Advantage health insurance plans. Participants had type 2 diabetes on metformin monotherapy, and started a second-line ADM during the study period. The exposure was a binary variable for health status, with poor health defined by end-stage medical conditions, dementia, or residence in a long-term nursing facility. The outcome was a variable identifying which second-line ADM class was started, categorized as SFU, BI, or other (i.e. all other ADM classes combined). RESULTS: Over half of participants (54%) received SFU as initial second-line ADM, 14% received BI, and 32% received another ADM. In multivariable models, the odds of filling SFU or BI was higher for participants in poor health than those in good or intermediate health [OR 1.13 (95% CI 1.05-1.21) and OR 2.34 (95% CI 2.14-2.55), respectively]. SFU and BI were also more commonly filled by older adults with poor glycemic control. CONCLUSIONS: Despite clinical consensus to use caution prescribing SFU and BI among older adults in poor health, these medications remain frequently used in this particularly vulnerable population.

General Health Checks in Adult Primary Care: A Review.

Importance: General health checks, also known as general medical examinations, periodic health evaluations, checkups, routine visits, or wellness visits, are commonly performed in adult primary care to identify and prevent disease. Although general health checks are often expected and advocated by patients, clinicians, insurers, and health systems, others question their value. Observations: Randomized trials and observational studies with control groups reported in prior systematic reviews and an updated literature review through March 2021 were included. Among 19 randomized trials (906 to 59 616 participants; follow-up, 1 to 30 years), 5 evaluated a single general health check, 7 evaluated annual health checks, 1 evaluated biannual checks, and 6 evaluated health checks delivered at other frequencies. Twelve of 13 observational studies (240 to 471 415 participants; follow-up, cross-sectional to 5 years) evaluated a single general health check. General health checks were generally not associated with decreased mortality, cardiovascular events, or cardiovascular disease incidence. For example, in the South-East London Screening Study (n = 7229), adults aged 40 to 64 years who were invited to 2 health checks over 2 years, compared with adults not invited to screening, experienced no 8-year mortality benefit (6% vs 5%). General health checks were associated with increased detection of chronic diseases, such as depression and hypertension; moderate improvements in controlling risk factors, such as blood pressure and cholesterol; increased clinical preventive service uptake, such as colorectal and cervical cancer screening; and improvements in patient-reported outcomes, such as quality of life and self-rated health. In the Danish Check-In Study (n = 1104), more patients randomized to receive to a single health check, compared with those randomized to receive usual care, received a new antidepressant prescription over 1 year (5% vs 2%; P = .007). In a propensity score-matched analysis (n = 8917), a higher percentage of patients who attended a Medicare Annual Wellness Visit, compared with those who did not, underwent colorectal cancer screening (69% vs 60%; P < .01). General health checks were sometimes associated with modest improvements in health behaviors such as physical activity and diet. In the OXCHECK trial (n = 4121), fewer patients randomized to receive annual health checks, compared with those not randomized to receive health checks, exercised less than once per month (68% vs 71%; difference, 3.3% [95% CI, 0.5%-6.1%]). Potential adverse effects in individual studies included an increased risk of stroke and increased mortality attributed to increased completion of advance directives. Conclusions and Relevance: General health checks were not associated with reduced mortality or cardiovascular events, but were associated with increased chronic disease recognition and treatment, risk factor control, preventive service uptake, and improved patient-reported outcomes. Primary care teams may reasonably offer general health checks, especially for groups at high risk of overdue preventive services, uncontrolled risk factors, low self-rated health, or poor connection or inadequate access to primary care.

Effects of 2 Forms of Practice Facilitation on Cardiovascular Prevention in Primary Care: A Practice-randomized, Comparative Effectiveness Trial.

BACKGROUND: Effective quality improvement (QI) strategies are needed for small practices. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare practice facilitation implementing point-of-care (POC) QI strategies alone versus facilitation implementing point-of-care plus population management (POC+PM) strategies on preventive cardiovascular care. DESIGN: Two arm, practice-randomized, comparative effectiveness study. PARTICIPANTS: Small and mid-sized primary care practices. INTERVENTIONS: Practices worked with facilitators on QI for 12 months to implement POC or POC+PM strategies. MEASURES: Proportion of eligible patients in a practice meeting "ABCS" measures: (Aspirin) Aspirin/antiplatelet therapy for ischemic vascular disease, (Blood pressure) Controlling High Blood Pressure, (Cholesterol) Statin Therapy for the Prevention and Treatment of Cardiovascular Disease, and (Smoking) Tobacco Use: Screening and Cessation Intervention, and the Change Process Capability Questionnaire. Measurements were performed at baseline, 12, and 18 months. RESULTS: A total of 226 practices were randomized, 179 contributed follow-up data. The mean proportion of patients meeting each performance measure was greater at 12 months compared with baseline: Aspirin 0.04 (95% confidence interval: 0.02-0.06), Blood pressure 0.04 (0.02-0.06), Cholesterol 0.05 (0.03-0.07), Smoking 0.05 (0.02-0.07); P<0.001 for each. Improvements were sustained at 18 months. At 12 months, baseline-adjusted difference-in-differences in proportions for the POC+PM arm versus POC was: Aspirin 0.02 (-0.02 to 0.05), Blood pressure -0.01 (-0.04 to 0.03), Cholesterol 0.03 (0.00-0.07), and Smoking 0.02 (-0.02 to 0.06); P>0.05 for all. Change Process Capability Questionnaire improved slightly, mean change 0.30 (0.09-0.51) but did not significantly differ across arms. CONCLUSION: Facilitator-led QI promoting population management approaches plus POC improvement strategies was not clearly superior to POC strategies alone.

Development of a Smartphone App for Regional Care Coordination Among High-Risk, Low-Income Patients.

Background: Despite widespread adoption of health information technology, U.S. providers face persistent barriers to coordination of care. We sought to develop and implement a patient-centered smartphone app that facilitates care coordination when patients receive care at any hospital in a region. Materials and Methods: Partnering with patients and primary care teams at a federally qualified health center (FQHC), we developed an app that (1) used real-time location data to identify encounters at 41 regional hospitals; (2) sent notifications to users' phones, asking them to confirm hospital arrival/discharge, and; (3) sent automated messages to primary care teams about confirmed hospital encounters. App design included multiple, successive rounds of active patient participation. In a small beta test of the initial version of the app, high-risk, low-income FQHC patients ran the app on their phone for 3 months. A formative mixed methods evaluation examined the app's technical performance and user experience. Results: Twelve patients enrolled in the beta test and provided follow-up data; 11 (92%) were racial/ethnic minorities. Participants obtained emergency or inpatient care at four regional hospitals. The app had 75% sensitivity to detect events when notifications should have fired, and 90% positive predictive value (PPV) of events when notifications fired. Barriers to implementation related to the app's user interface and the performance of its location tracking algorithm. Conclusions: We partnered with patients from a traditionally underserved population to develop a new smartphone-based approach to regional care coordination. The app had moderate sensitivity and high PPV for identifying regional hospital visits.

Effects of a Transitional Care Practice for a Vulnerable Population: a Pragmatic, Randomized Comparative Effectiveness Trial.

BACKGROUND: There is limited experimental evidence on transitional care interventions beyond 30 days post-discharge and in vulnerable populations. OBJECTIVE: Evaluate effects of a transitional care practice (TC) that comprehensively addresses patients' medical and psychosocial needs following hospital discharge. DESIGN: Pragmatic, randomized comparative effectiveness trial. PATIENTS: Adults discharged from an initial emergency, observation, or inpatient hospital encounter with no trusted usual source of care. INTERVENTIONS: TC intervention included a scheduled post-discharge appointment at the TC practice, where a multidisciplinary team comprehensively assessed patients' medical and psychosocial needs, addressed modifiable barriers, and subsequent linkage to a new primary care source. Routine Care involved assistance scheduling a post-discharge appointment with a primary care provider that often partnered with the hospital where the initial encounter occurred. MAIN MEASURES: The primary outcome was a binary indicator of death or additional hospital encounters within 90 days of initial discharge. Secondary outcomes included any additional hospital encounters, and counts of hospital encounters, over 180 days. KEY RESULTS: Four hundred ninety patients were randomized to TC intervention and 164 to Routine Care; 34.6% were uninsured, 49.7% had Medicaid, and 57.4% were homeless or lived in a high-poverty area. There was no significant difference between arms in the 90-day probability of death or additional hospital encounters (relative risk [RR] 0.89; 0.91; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.74-1.13). However, TC patients had 37% and 35% lower probability of any inpatient admission over 90 days (RR 0.63; 95% CI 0.43-0.91) and 180 days (RR 0.65; 95% CI 0.47-0.89), respectively. Over 180 days, TC patients had 42% fewer inpatient admissions (incidence rate ratio 0.58; 95% CI 0.37-0.90). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients randomized to a patient-centered transitional care intervention, there was no significant reduction in 90-day probability of death or additional hospital encounters. However, there were significant decreases in measures of inpatient admissions over 180 days. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT03066492.

Practice Facilitators' and Leaders' Perspectives on a Facilitated Quality Improvement Program.

PURPOSE: Practice facilitation is a promising approach to helping practices implement quality improvements. Our purpose was to describe practice facilitators' and practice leaders' perspectives on implementation of a practice facilitator-supported quality improvement program and describe where their perspectives aligned and diverged. METHODS: We conducted interviews with practice leaders and practice facilitators who participated in a program that included 35 improvement strategies aimed at the ABCS of heart health (aspirin use in high-risk individuals, blood pressure control, cholesterol management, and smoking cessation). Rapid qualitative analysis was used to collect, organize, and analyze the data. RESULTS: We interviewed 17 of the 33 eligible practice leaders, and the 10 practice facilitators assigned to those practices. Practice leaders and practice facilitators both reported value in the program's ability to bring needed, high-quality resources to practices. Practice leaders appreciated being able to set the schedule for facilitation and select among the 35 interventions. According to practice facilitators, however, relying on practice leaders to set the pace of the intervention resulted in a lower level of program intensity than intended. Practice leaders preferred targeted assistance, particularly electronic health record documentation guidance and linkages to state smoking cessation programs. Practice facilitators reported that the easiest interventions were those that did not alter care practices. CONCLUSIONS: The dual perspectives of practice leaders and practice facilitators provide a more holistic picture of enablers and barriers to program implementation. There may be greater opportunities to assist small practices through simple, targeted practice facilitator-supported efforts rather than larger, comprehensive quality improvement projects.

Promoting Responsible Electronic Documentation: Validity Evidence for a Checklist to Assess Progress Notes in the Electronic Health Record.

Construct: We aimed to develop an instrument to measure the quality of inpatient electronic health record- (EHR-) generated progress notes without requiring raters to review the detailed chart or know the patient. BACKGROUND: Notes written in EHRs have generated criticism for being unnecessarily long and redundant, perpetuating inaccuracy and obscuring providers' clinical reasoning. Available assessment tools either focus on outpatient progress notes or require chart review by raters to develop familiarity with the patient. APPROACH: We used medical literature, local expert review, and attending focus groups to develop and refine an instrument to evaluate inpatient progress notes. We measured interrater reliability and scored the selected-response elements of the checklist for a sample of 100 progress notes written by PGY-1 trainees on the general medicine service. RESULTS: We developed an instrument with 18 selected-response items and four open-ended items to measure the quality of inpatient progress notes written in the EHR. The mean Cohen's kappa coefficient demonstrated good agreement at .67. The mean note score was 66.9% of maximum possible points (SD = 10.6, range = 34.4%-93.3%). CONCLUSIONS: We present validity evidence in the domains of content, internal structure, and response process for a new checklist for rating inpatient progress notes. The scored checklist can be completed in approximately 7 minutes by a rater who is not familiar with the patient and can be done without extensive chart review. We further demonstrate that trainee notes show substantial room for improvement.

Procedure Delays and Time of Day Are Not Associated With Reductions in Quality of Screening Colonoscopies.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: There have been conflicting results from studies to determine whether factors unrelated to endoscopist skill, such as fatigue, affect the quality of screening colonoscopy. We studied the effects of human and system factors on screening colonoscopy withdrawal time and likelihood of detecting an adenoma in a large cohort of patients. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of operation and quality improvement data in colonoscopies performed at single academic medical center from November 2012 through February 2014. We collected data from the Northwestern Medicine Enterprise Data Warehouse on endoscopy procedure reports, patient demographics, and pathology reports of all patients undergoing endoscopy. We identified all screening colonoscopies during the study period and determined whether an adenoma was identified in each screening colonoscopy procedure. Our study included data from 7004 screening colonoscopies of patients 50-75 years old performed by endoscopists who performed at least 100 screening colonoscopies during the study period (n = 18). RESULTS: Approximately 27% of procedures began on time; the median colonoscope insertion time was 5.9 minutes (interquartile range, 4.0-8.6). In multivariable logistic regression analysis adjusting for covariates and endoscopist-level clustering, adenoma detection was not associated with procedure delay (P = .48), hour of day (P = .40), or performing the second of 2 colonoscopy blocks in 1 day (P = .88). Adenoma detection was associated with insertion time overall (P = .006), but there was no consistent directional relationship across insertion quintiles. CONCLUSIONS: Procedure delays and measured factors associated with fatigue, including time of day and multiple procedure blocks, do not reduce the odds of detecting an adenoma. Adenoma detection varies widely among providers, so efforts to improve adenoma detection should focus mainly on optimizing physician skill.

Diagnostic colonoscopy following a positive fecal occult blood test in community health center patients.

PURPOSE: Fecal occult blood testing (FOBT) is a pragmatic screening option for many community health centers (CHCs), but FOBT screening programs will not reduce mortality if patients with positive results do not undergo diagnostic colonoscopy (DC). This study was conducted to investigate DC completion among CHC patients. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study used data from three CHCs in the Midwest and Southwest. The primary study outcome was DC completion within 6 months of positive FOBT among adults age 50-75. Patient data was collected using automated electronic queries. Manual chart reviews were conducted if queries produced no evidence of DC. Poisson regression models described adjusted relative risks (RRs) of DC completion. RESULTS: The study included 308 patients; 63.3 % were female, 48.7 % were Spanish speakers and 35.7 % were uninsured. Based on combined query and chart review findings, 51.5 % completed DC. Spanish speakers were more likely than English speakers to complete DC [RR 1.19; 95 % confidence interval (CI) 1.04-1.36; P = 0.009], and DC completion was lower among patients with 0 visits than those with 1-2 visits (RR 2.81; 95% CI 1.83-4.33; P < 0.001) or ≥3 visits (RR 3.06; 95% CI 1.57-5.95; P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: DC completion was low overall, which raises concerns about whether FOBT can reduce CRC mortality in practice. Further research is needed to understand whether CHC navigator programs can achieve very high DC rates. If organizations use FOBT as their primary CRC screening approach and a substantial number of patients receive positive results, both screening rates and DC rates should be measured.

Two-year follow-up of the effectiveness of a multifaceted intervention to improve adherence to annual colorectal cancer screening in community health centers.

PURPOSE: We previously found that a multifaceted outreach intervention achieved 82 % annual adherence to colorectal cancer (CRC) screening with fecal occult blood testing (FOBT). This study assessed adherence to FOBT after a second outreach. METHODS: We followed 225 patients in community health centers in Chicago, Illinois, who were randomized to the intervention group. Our primary analysis focused on 124 patients who completed FOBT during the first outreach and were due again for annual FOBT; 90% were Latino, 87% preferred to speak Spanish, and 77% were uninsured. Second outreach consisted of (1) a mailed reminder letter, a free fecal immunochemical test (FIT) with postage-paid return envelope, (2) automated phone and text messages, (3) automated reminders 2 weeks later if the FIT was not returned, and (4) a telephone call after 3 months. Our main outcome was completion of FIT within 6 months of the due date. We also analyzed the proportion of the original 225 patients who were fully screened for CRC over the 2-year study period. RESULTS: A total of 88.7% of patients completed a FIT within 6 months of their second outreach. Over the 2 years since the first outreach, 71.6% of the 225 patients assigned to the intervention group were fully up to date on CRC screening, another 11.1% had been screened suboptimally, and 17.3% were inadequately screened or not screened. CONCLUSIONS: It is possible to achieve high rates of CRC screening over a 2-year period for vulnerable populations using outreach with FIT as a primary strategy.

Comparative Effectiveness of Multifaceted Outreach to Initiate Colorectal Cancer Screening in Community Health Centers: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

INTRODUCTION: Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates are low among vulnerable populations. Fecal immunochemical tests (FITs) are one screening modality with few barriers. Studies have shown that outreach can improve CRC screening, but little is known about its effectiveness among individuals with no CRC screening history. We sought to determine whether outreach increases FIT uptake among patients with no CRC screening history compared to usual care. METHODS: This study was a patient-level randomized controlled trial, including 420 patients who had never completed CRC screening and were eligible for FIT; 66% were female, 62.1% were Latino, and 70.7% were uninsured. The main outcome measure was FIT completion within 6 months of the randomization date. We assessed FIT completion at different time points corresponding to receipt of outreach components. All analyses were re-run with 12-month data. RESULTS: Patients who received outreach were more likely to complete FIT than those in usual care (36.7% vs. 14.8%; p < 0.001). FIT completion was more common among patients with increased clinic visits. The difference in FIT completion between the outreach and usual care groups decreased over time. DISCUSSION: The intervention improved FIT uptake among patients with no CRC screening history. However, the intervention was less effective than in a previous trial targeting patients due for repeat screening. Additional research is needed to determine the best methods for improving CRC screening among this hard-to-reach group.

A Randomized Comparative Effectiveness Trial for Preventing Type 2 Diabetes.

OBJECTIVES: We evaluated the weight loss effectiveness of a YMCA model for the Diabetes Prevention Program (DPP) lifestyle intervention. METHODS: Between July 2008 and November 2010, we individually randomized 509 overweight or obese, low-income, nondiabetic adults with elevated blood glucose in Indianapolis, Indiana, to receive standard care plus brief lifestyle counseling or be offered a group-based YMCA adaptation of the DPP (YDPP). Primary outcome was mean weight loss difference at 12 months. In our intention-to-treat analyses, we used longitudinal linear or logistic regression, multiply imputing missing observations. We used instrumental variables regression to estimate weight loss effectiveness among participants completing 9 or more intervention lessons. RESULTS: In the YDPP arm, 161 (62.6%) participants attended ≥ 1 lesson and 103 (40.0%) completed 9 or more lessons. In intention-to-treat analysis, mean 12-month weight loss was 2.3 kilograms (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.1, 3.4 kg) more for the YDPP arm than for standard care participants. In instrumental variable analyses, persons attending 9 or more lessons had a 5.3-kilogram (95% CI = 2.8, 7.9 kg) greater weight loss than did those with standard care alone. CONCLUSIONS: The YMCA model for DPP delivery achieves meaningful weight loss at 12 months among low-income adults.

Specialty use among patients with treated hypertension in a patient-centered medical home.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about how delivery of primary care in the patient-centered medical home (PCMH) influences outpatient specialty care use. OBJECTIVE: To describe changes in outpatient specialty use among patients with treated hypertension during and after PCMH practice transformation. DESIGN: One-group, 48-month interrupted time series across baseline, PCMH implementation and post-implementation periods. PATIENTS: Adults aged 18-85 years with treated hypertension. INTERVENTION: System-wide PCMH redesign implemented across 26 clinics in an integrated health care delivery system, beginning in January 2009. MAIN MEASURES: Resource Utilization Band variables from the Adjusted Clinical Groups case mix software characterized overall morbidity burden (low, medium, high). Negative binomial regression models described adjusted annual differences in total specialty care visits. Poisson regression models described adjusted annual differences in any use (yes/no) of selected medical and surgical specialties. KEY RESULTS: Compared to baseline, the study population averaged 7% fewer adjusted specialty visits during implementation (P < 0.001) and 4% fewer adjusted specialty visits in the first post-implementation year (P = 0.02). Patients were 12% less likely to have any cardiology visits during implementation and 13% less likely during the first post-implementation year (P < 0.001). In interaction analysis, patients with low morbidity had at least 27% fewer specialty visits during each of 3 years following baseline (P < 0.001); medium morbidity patients had 9% fewer specialty visits during implementation (P < 0.001) and 5% fewer specialty visits during the first post-implementation year (P = 0.007); high morbidity patients had 3% (P = 0.05) and 5% (P = 0.009) higher specialty use during the first and second post-implementation years, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest that more comprehensive primary care in this PCMH redesign enabled primary care teams to deliver more hypertension care, and that many needs of low morbidity patients were within the scope of primary care practice. New approaches to care coordination between primary care teams and specialists should prioritize high morbidity, clinically complex patients.