Pay-for-Performance and Veteran Care in the VHA and the Community: a Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Although pay-for-performance (P4P) strategies have been used by the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) for over a decade, the long-term benefits of P4P are unclear. The use of P4P is further complicated by the increased use of non-VHA healthcare providers as part of the Veterans Choice Program. We conducted a systematic review and key informant interviews to better understand the effectiveness and potential unintended consequences of P4P, as well as the implementation factors and design features important in both VHA and non-VHA/community settings. METHODS: We searched PubMed, PsycINFO, and CINAHL through March 2017 and reviewed reference lists. We included trials and observational studies of P4P targeting Veteran health. Two investigators abstracted data and assessed study quality. We interviewed VHA stakeholders to gain further insight. RESULTS: The literature search yielded 1031 titles and abstracts, of which 30 studies met pre-specified inclusion criteria. Twenty-five examined P4P in VHA settings and 5 in community settings. There was no strong evidence supporting the effectiveness of P4P in VHA settings. Interviews with 17 key informants were consistent with studies that identified the potential for overtreatment associated with performance metrics in the VHA. Key informants' views on P4P in community settings included the need to develop relationships with providers and health systems with records of strong performance, to improve coordination by targeting documentation and data sharing processes, and to troubleshoot the limited impact of P4P among practices where Veterans make up a small fraction of the patient population. DISCUSSION: The evidence to support the effectiveness of P4P on Veteran health is limited. Key informants recognize the potential for unintended consequences, such as overtreatment in VHA settings, and suggest that implementation of P4P in the community focus on relationship building and target areas such as documentation and coordination of care.

The Effects of Pay-for-Performance Programs on Health, Health Care Use, and Processes of Care: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: The benefits of pay-for-performance (P4P) programs are uncertain. PURPOSE: To update and expand a prior review examining the effects of P4P programs targeted at the physician, group, managerial, or institutional level on process-of-care and patient outcomes in ambulatory and inpatient settings. DATA SOURCES: PubMed from June 2007 to October 2016; MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Business Economics and Theory, Business Source Elite, Scopus, Faculty of 1000, and Gartner Research from June 2007 to February 2016. STUDY SELECTION: Trials and observational studies in ambulatory and inpatient settings reporting process-of-care, health, or utilization outcomes. DATA EXTRACTION: Two investigators extracted data, assessed study quality, and graded the strength of the evidence. DATA SYNTHESIS: Among 69 studies, 58 were in ambulatory settings, 52 reported process-of-care outcomes, and 38 reported patient outcomes. Low-strength evidence suggested that P4P programs in ambulatory settings may improve process-of-care outcomes over the short term (2 to 3 years), whereas data on longer-term effects were limited. Many of the positive studies were conducted in the United Kingdom, where incentives were larger than in the United States. The largest improvements were seen in areas where baseline performance was poor. There was no consistent effect of P4P on intermediate health outcomes (low-strength evidence) and insufficient evidence to characterize any effect on patient health outcomes. In the hospital setting, there was low-strength evidence that P4P had little or no effect on patient health outcomes and a positive effect on reducing hospital readmissions. LIMITATION: Few methodologically rigorous studies; heterogeneous population and program characteristics and incentive targets. CONCLUSION: Pay-for-performance programs may be associated with improved processes of care in ambulatory settings, but consistently positive associations with improved health outcomes have not been demonstrated in any setting. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs.

Health Disparities in Veterans: A Map of the Evidence.

BACKGROUND: Goals for improving the quality of care for all Veterans and eliminating health disparities are outlined in the Veterans Health Administration Blueprint for Excellence, but the degree to which disparities in utilization, health outcomes, and quality of care affect Veterans is not well understood. OBJECTIVES: To characterize the research on health care disparities in the Veterans Health Administration by means of a map of the evidence. RESEARCH DESIGN: We conducted a systematic search for research studies published from 2006 to February 2016 in MEDLINE and other data sources. We included studies of Veteran populations that examined disparities in 3 outcome categories: utilization, quality of health care, and patient health. MEASURES: We abstracted data on study design, setting, population, clinical area, outcomes, mediators, and presence of disparity for each outcome category. We grouped the data by population characteristics including race, disability status, mental illness, demographics (age, era of service, rural location, and distance from care), sex identity, socioeconomic status, and homelessness, and created maps illustrating the evidence. RESULTS: We reviewed 4249 citations and abstracted data from 351 studies which met inclusion criteria. Studies examining disparities by race/ethnicity comprised by far the vast majority of the literature, followed by studies examining disparities by sex, and mental health condition. Very few studies examined disparities related to lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender identity or homelessness. Disparities findings vary widely by population and outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Our evidence maps provide a "lay of the land" and identify important gaps in knowledge about health disparities experienced by different Veteran populations.

Interventions to Improve Pharmacological Adherence Among Adults With Psychotic Spectrum Disorders and Bipolar Disorder: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: It is unclear as to which interventions are effective at improving medication adherence in individuals with serious and persistent mental illness. The goal of this systematic review is to synthesize evidence examining the effectiveness, harms, and costs of interventions to improve medication adherence in patients with psychotic spectrum disorders and bipolar disorder. METHODS: We conducted a systematic search of several electronic databases through January 2015 using a structured search strategy. Studies were included if they involved adult patients in general mental health settings, reported both measures of medication adherence and clinical outcomes, and were of sufficient methodological rigor. Studies were quality assessed and synthesized using established methods. RESULTS: We identified 24 studies that met inclusion criteria. Overall, 20 studies addressed interventions in patients with psychotic spectrum disorders. These interventions varied widely, with generally mixed findings contributing to low or insufficient strength of evidence; studies involving family members and technology interventions were the most consistently associated with a positive effect; however, the strength of the evidence was low because of intervention heterogeneity. The evidence was insufficient to determine the effectiveness of interventions in patients with bipolar disorder. CONCLUSIONS: In individuals with psychotic spectrum disorders, interventions with family members or technology had the most consistent positive effect on adherence, although replication with objective adherence measures along with evaluation of harms and costs is needed. There was insufficient evidence to draw conclusions about interventions in individuals with bipolar disorder.

Catching the Zebra: Clinical Pearls and Pitfalls for the Successful Diagnosis of Zollinger-Ellison Syndrome.

Zollinger-Ellison syndrome (ZES) results from an ectopic gastrin-secreting tumor leading to peptic ulcer disease, reflux, and chronic diarrhea. While early recognition portends an excellent prognosis with >80% survival at 15 years, symptoms are often nonspecific making the diagnosis difficult to establish. Diagnosis involves a series of tests, including fasting gastrin, gastric pH, chromogranin A, and secretin stimulation. Performing these tests in the correct sequence and at the proper time is essential to avoid inaccurate results. Tumor localization is equally nuanced. Although providers have classically used 111indium-radiolabeled octreotide with somatostatin receptor scintigraphy to evaluate tumor size and metastases, recent studies have shown superior results with newer imaging modalities. In particular, 68gallium (68Ga)-labeled somatostatin radiotracers (i.e., 68Ga-DOTATOC, 68Ga-DOTANOC and 68Ga-DOTATATE) used with positron emission tomography/computed tomography can provide excellent results. Endoscopic ultrasound is another useful modality, particularly in patients with ZES in the setting of multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1. This review aims to provide clinicians with an overview of ZES with a focus on both clinical presentation and the proper utilization of the various biochemical and imaging tests available.

Radiofrequency Ablation Is Associated With Decreased Neoplastic Progression in Patients With Barrett's Esophagus and Confirmed Low-Grade Dysplasia.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Barrett's esophagus (BE) with low-grade dysplasia (LGD) can progress to high-grade dysplasia (HGD) and esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) has been shown to be an effective treatment for LGD in clinical trials, but its effectiveness in clinical practice is unclear. We compared the rate of progression of LGD after RFA with endoscopic surveillance alone in routine clinical practice. METHODS: We performed a retrospective study of patients who either underwent RFA (n = 45) or surveillance endoscopy (n = 125) for LGD, confirmed by at least 1 expert pathologist, from October 1992 through December 2013 at 3 medical centers in the United States. Cox regression analysis was used to assess the association between progression and RFA. RESULTS: Data were collected over median follow-up periods of 889 days (interquartile range, 264-1623 days) after RFA and 848 days (interquartile range, 322-2355 days) after surveillance endoscopy (P = .32). The annual rates of progression to HGD or EAC were 6.6% in the surveillance group and 0.77% in the RFA group. The risk of progression to HGD or EAC was significantly lower among patients who underwent RFA than those who underwent surveillance (adjusted hazard ratio = 0.06; 95% confidence interval: 0.008-0.48). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with BE and confirmed LGD, rates of progression to a combined end point of HGD and EAC were lower among those treated with RFA than among untreated patients. Although selection bias cannot be excluded, these findings provide additional evidence for the use of endoscopic ablation therapy for LGD.

Implementation Processes and Pay for Performance in Healthcare: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Over the last decade, various pay-for-performance (P4P) programs have been implemented to improve quality in health systems, including the VHA. P4P programs are complex, and their effects may vary by design, context, and other implementation processes. We conducted a systematic review and key informant (KI) interviews to better understand the implementation factors that modify the effectiveness of P4P. METHODS: We searched PubMed, PsycINFO, and CINAHL through April 2014, and reviewed reference lists. We included trials and observational studies of P4P implementation. Two investigators abstracted data and assessed study quality. We interviewed P4P researchers to gain further insight. RESULTS: Among 1363 titles and abstracts, we selected 509 for full-text review, and included 41 primary studies. Of these 41 studies, 33 examined P4P programs in ambulatory settings, 7 targeted hospitals, and 1 study applied to nursing homes. Related to implementation, 13 studies examined program design, 8 examined implementation processes, 6 the outer setting, 18 the inner setting, and 5 provider characteristics. Results suggest the importance of considering underlying payment models and using statistically stringent methods of composite measure development, and ensuring that high-quality care will be maintained after incentive removal. We found no conclusive evidence that provider or practice characteristics relate to P4P effectiveness. Interviews with 14 KIs supported limited evidence that effective P4P program measures should be aligned with organizational goals, that incentive structures should be carefully considered, and that factors such as a strong infrastructure and public reporting may have a large influence. DISCUSSION: There is limited evidence from which to draw firm conclusions related to P4P implementation. Findings from studies and KI interviews suggest that P4P programs should undergo regular evaluation and should target areas of poor performance. Additionally, measures and incentives should align with organizational priorities, and programs should allow for changes over time in response to data and provider input.

Natural history and management of refractory benign esophageal strictures.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The natural history of refractory benign esophageal strictures (RBES) is unclear, and surgery or percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) may be the only viable long-term options. The aim of the present study was to assess the long-term outcomes of patients with RBES. METHODS: Clinical data of consecutive patients with RBES treated in the previous 15 years in 2 tertiary-care referral academic centers with specialized interest in esophageal stricture management were retrospectively analyzed. RBES was defined as the persistence and/or recurrence of dysphagia despite at least 5 dilation sessions and/or cycles with dilation to at least 14 mm. Information regarding the use of dilation or stents and the dysphagia-free period between subsequent interventions and adverse events was collected. Clinical success was defined as no need for endoscopic interventions for at least 6 months; unfavorable outcomes were defined as the need for endoscopic treatment at the end of follow-up, surgery, or percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG). Predictors of unfavorable outcomes were assessed by multivariate analysis. A linear mixed-effect model was used to measure dysphagia-free period changes over time. RESULTS: Overall, 70 patients with RBES (46 male; mean age 60 years) were followed for a mean of 43.9 months (range 3.7-157 months). Caustic, postradiotherapy, surgical, mixed, and postinflammatory etiology accounted for 10%, 14.3%, 31.4%, 40%, and 4.3% of causes, respectively. All patients underwent sequential sessions of pneumatic or bougie dilation, with a median of 15.5 dilation sessions per patient. Self-expandable metal stents (SEMSs) and biodegradable stents were placed in 18 (25.7%) and 14 (20%) patients, respectively. RBES resolution was achieved in only 22 of 70 (31.4%) patients. Two deaths (3%) were related to RBES. The success rate was lower in those who also were treated with endoprosthetics (odds ratio [OR] 3.7; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.01-18.0). The mean dysphagia-free period was 3.3 months (95% CI, 2.4-4.1) for patients treated with dilation and 2.4 months (95% CI, 1.2-3.6) for those treated with stents (P = .062). Over time, the total dysphagia-free period increased at a rate of 4.1 days (95% CI, 1.7-6.4) per dilation. There was no difference in the rate of change across groups defined by sex (P = .976), age (P = .633), or endoscopic treatment (P = .267). CONCLUSIONS: Our multicenter series showed a disappointing long-term outcome for RBES, with only 1 of 3 achieving clinical resolution. The dysphagia-free period was relatively short, affecting the quality of life. Endoprosthetics did not appear to affect the natural history of RBES.

Esophageal anastomotic strictures: outcomes of endoscopic dilation, risk of recurrence and refractory stenosis, and effect of foreign body removal.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Esophageal anastomotic strictures often require repeat dilation to relieve dysphagia. Little is known about factors that affect their remediation. We investigated long-term success and rates of recurrence or refractoriness after dilation and factors associated with refractory stenosis. METHODS: We performed a retrospective study of 74 patients with an anastomotic stricture that had been dilated during a 5-year period (564 dilations; median follow-up period, 8 months). A stricture was refractory if luminal patency could not be maintained after ≥5 dilation sessions during 10 weeks. RESULTS: Of the 74 patients, 93% had initial relief of dysphagia. The stricture recurred in 43% of patients, and 69% were considered refractory. Removal of sutures/staples protruding into the lumen did not accelerate time to initial patency (median, 37 days; interquartile range [IQR], 20-82 days) or lengthen the dysphagia-free interval (37.4 days; IQR, 8-41 weeks), compared with patients who did not undergo removal (initial patency, median 55 days; IQR, 14-109 days; P = .66 and median dysphagia-free interval, 21.7 days; IQR, 9-64 weeks; P = .8). Use of fluoroscopy during dilation (odds ratio, 8.92; 95% confidence interval, 1.98-40.14) was positively associated with development of refractory strictures, whereas neoadjuvant chemotherapy (odds ratio, 0.28; 95% confidence interval, 0.07-0.97) was inversely associated. Female sex and distal location of strictures increased risk of refractoriness as effect modifiers in multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopic dilation is highly successful in achieving luminal remediation, yet anastomotic strictures are often refractory and frequently recur. Removal of sutures/staples within the lumen does not help achieve patency. Need for fluoroscopic guidance indicates a high likelihood of refractoriness to dilation, whereas prior neoadjuvant chemotherapy indicates a lower risk.

Risk of recurrent or refractory strictures and outcome of endoscopic dilation for radiation-induced esophageal strictures.

BACKGROUND: Radiation therapy for head, neck, and esophageal cancer can result in esophageal strictures that may be difficult to manage. Radiation-induced esophageal strictures often require repeat dilation to obtain relief of dysphagia. This study aimed to determine the long-term clinical success and rates of recurrent and refractory stenosis in patients with radiation-induced strictures undergoing dilation. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study of patients with radiation-induced strictures who underwent endoscopic dilation by a single provider from October 2007-October 2012. Outcomes measured included long-term clinical efficacy, interval between sessions, number of dilations, and proportion of radiation strictures that were recurrent or refractory. Risk factors for refractory strictures were assessed. RESULTS: 63 patients underwent 303 dilations. All presented with a stricture >30 days after last radiation session. Clinical success to target diameter was achieved in 52 patients (83%). A mean of 3.3 (±2.6) dilations over a median period of 4 weeks was needed to achieve initial patency. Recurrence occurred in 17 (33%) at a median of 22 weeks. Twenty-seven strictures (43%) were refractory to dilation therapy. Fluoroscopy during dilation (OR 22.88; 95% CI 3.19-164.07), severe esophageal stenosis (lumen <9 mm) (OR 10.51; 95% CI 1.94-56.88), and proximal location with prior malignancy extrinsic to the lumen (OR 6.96; 95% CI 1.33-36.29) were independent predictors of refractory strictures in multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: (1) Radiation-induced strictures have a delayed onset (>30 days) from time of radiation injury. (2) Endoscopic dilation can achieve medium-term luminal remediation but the strictures have a high long-term recurrence rate of up to 33%. (3) Remediation of radiation strictures following laryngectomy can be achieved but require frequent dilations. (4) Clinical and procedural predictors may identify patients at high risk of refractory strictures. (5) The optimal strategy in highly selected refractory patients is not clear.

Discrimination hurts: The effect of discrimination on the development of chronic pain.

We examine the hypothesis that psychological distress due to perceived discrimination can result in chronic pain, where perceived discrimination is based on age, gender, race, ethnicity, disability, sexual orientation, height/weight, religion, and other characteristics. Using a sample of 1908 individuals from the two most recent waves (2004-2006 and 2013-2014) of panel data from the National Survey of Midlife Development in the United States, we apply instrumental variables regression where measures of daily and lifetime perceived discrimination are instruments whose effects on chronic pain are mediated by psychological distress. We find statistically significant dose-response relationships between daily perceived discrimination and psychological distress, between lifetime perceived discrimination and psychological distress, and between psychological distress and chronic pain. Based on our instrumental variables regression model, we estimate that 4.1 million people in the US in 2016, aged 40 and older, experience chronic pain that is caused by increased psychological distress, where psychological stress has increased due to perceived discrimination.

Early Performance in Medicaid Accountable Care Organizations: A Comparison of Oregon and Colorado.

Importance: Several state Medicaid reforms are under way, but the relative performance of different approaches is unclear. Objective: To compare the performance of Oregon's and Colorado's Medicaid Accountable Care Organization (ACO) models. Design, Setting, and Participants: Oregon initiated its Medicaid transformation in 2012, supported by a $1.9 billion investment from the federal government, moving most Medicaid enrollees into 16 Coordinated Care Organizations, which managed care within a global budget. Colorado initiated its Medicaid Accountable Care Collaborative in 2011, creating 7 Regional Care Collaborative Organizations that received funding to coordinate care with providers and connect Medicaid enrollees with community services. Data spanning July 1, 2010, through December 31, 2014 (18 months before intervention and 24 months after intervention, treating 2012 as a transition year) were analyzed for 452 371 Oregon and 330 511 Colorado Medicaid enrollees, assessing changes in outcomes using difference-in-differences analyses of regional focus, primary care homes, and care coordination. Oregon's Coordinated Care Organization model was more comprehensive in its reform goals and in the imposition of downside financial risk. Exposures: Regional focus, primary care homes, and care coordination in Medicaid ACOs. Main Outcomes and Measures: Performance on claims-based measures of standardized expenditures and utilization for selected services, access, preventable hospitalizations, and appropriateness of care. Results: In a total of 782 882 Medicaid enrollees, 45.0% were male, with mean (SD) age 16.74 (14.41) years. Standardized expenditures for selected services declined in both states during the 2010-2014 period, but these decreases were not significantly different between the 2 states. Oregon's model was associated with reductions in emergency department visits (-6.28 per 1000 beneficiary-months; 95% CI, -10.51 to -2.05) and primary care visits (-15.09 visits per 1000 beneficiary-months; 95% CI, -26.57 to -3.61), improvements in acute preventable hospital admissions (-1.01 admissions per 1000 beneficiary-months; 95% CI, -1.61 to -0.42), 3 of 4 measures of access (well-child visits, ages 3-6 years, 2.69%; 95% CI, 1.20% to 4.19%; adolescent well-care visits, 6.77%; 95% CI, 5.22% to 8.32%; and adult access to preventive ambulatory care, 1.26%; 95% CI, 0.28% to 2.25%), and 1 of 4 measures of appropriateness of care (avoidance of head imaging for uncomplicated headache, 2.59%; 95% CI, 1.35% to 3.83%). Conclusions and Relevance: Two years into implementation, Oregon's and Colorado's Medicaid ACO models exhibited similar performance on standardized expenditures for selected services. Oregon's model, marked by a large federal investment and movement to global budgets, was associated with improvements in some measures of utilization, access, and quality, but Colorado's model paralleled Oregon's on several other metrics.