Direct-to-Patient Telehealth: Opportunities and Challenges

Provision of healthcare services through telehealth continues to increase. This rise is driven by the several factors, such as improved access, decreased cost, patient convenience and positive patient satisfaction. Direct-to-patient (DTP) care delivery is the most popular form of telehealth. However, barriers exist to its widespread use in practice, such as lack of reimbursement, concern that the convenience of these services may raise utilization to the point that spending increases without increasing quality of care, concern about quality of care provided and low uptake by underrepresented or at risk populations. DTP offers opportunities to improve population health and provide value-based care within integrated health systems, but requires thoughtful implementation strategies that address patient and provider barriers to its use.

Trends in Mental and Physical Health-Related Quality of Life in Low-Income Older Persons in the United States, 2003 to 2017

This cross-sectional study of respondents to the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System survey assesses trends between 2003 and 2017 in mental and physical health-related quality of life in low-income US individuals 60 years or older.

Development of summary indices of antenatal care service quality in Haiti, Malawi and Tanzania

INTRODUCTION

Measuring quality of care in low-income and middle-income countries is complicated by the lack of a standard, universally accepted definition for 'quality' for any particular service, as well as limited guidance on which indicators to include in measures of quality of care, and how to incorporate those indicators into summary indices. The aim of this paper is to develop, characterise and compare a set of antenatal care (ANC) indices for facility readiness and provision of care.

METHODS

We created nine indices for facility readiness using three methods for selecting items and three methods for combining items. In addition, we created three indices for provision of care using one method for selecting items and three methods for combining items. For each index, we calculated descriptive statistics, categorised the continuous index scores using tercile cut points to assess comparability of facility classification, and examined the variability and distribution of scores.

RESULTS

Our results showed that, within a country, the indices were quite similar in terms of mean index score, facility classification, coefficient of variation, floor and ceiling effects, and the inclusion of items in an index with a range of variability. Notably, the indices created using principal components analysis to combine the items were the most different from the other indices. In addition, the index created by taking a weighted average of a core set of items had lower agreement with the other indices when looking at facility classification.

CONCLUSIONS

As improving quality of care becomes integral to global efforts to produce better health outcomes, demand for guidance on creating standardised measures of service quality will grow. This study provides health systems researchers with a comparison of methodologies commonly used to create summary indices of ANC service quality and it highlights the similarities and differences between methods.

Variation in Facility-Level Rates of All-Cause and Potentially Preventable 30-Day Hospital Readmissions Among Medicare Fee-for-Service Beneficiaries After Discharge From Postacute Inpatient Rehabilitation

IMPORTANCE

The Improving Medicare Post-Acute Care Transformation Act of 2014 mandated a quality measure of potentially preventable 30-day hospital readmission for inpatient rehabilitation facilities (IRFs). Examining IRF performance nationally may help inform health care quality initiatives for Medicare beneficiaries.

OBJECTIVE

To examine variation in Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Quality Reporting Program measures for US facility-level risk-adjusted all-cause and potentially preventable hospital readmission rates after inpatient rehabilitation.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This cohort study of Medicare claims data included 454 378 Medicare beneficiaries discharged from 1162 IRFs between June 1, 2013, and July 1, 2015. Data were analyzed March 23, 2018, through June 24, 2019.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

All-Cause Unplanned Readmission Measure for 30 Days Post Discharge From Inpatient Rehabilitation Facilities and the Potentially Preventable 30-Day Post-Discharge Readmission Measure for Inpatient Rehabilitation. Specifications from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services were followed to identify the cohort, define outcomes, and calculate risk-standardized facility-level rates.

RESULTS

Among a cohort of 454 378 patients, the mean (SD) age was 76.2 (10.6) years and 263 546 (58.0%) were women. The all-cause readmission rate was 12.3% (95% CI, 12.2%-12.4%), and the potentially preventable readmission rate was 5.3% (95% CI, 5.3%-5.4%). Across 1162 included IRFs, risk-standardized all-cause readmission rates ranged from 10.1% (95% CI, 8.9%-11.6%) to 15.9% (95% CI, 13.6-18.6%) and potentially preventable readmission rates ranged from 4.3% (95% CI, 3.7%-5.4%) to 7.3% (95% CI, 5.7%-8.3%). Using the All-Cause Unplanned Readmission Measure for 30 Days Post Discharge From Inpatient Rehabilitation Facilities, 16 IRFs (1.4%) had 95% CIs above the national mean rate, 1137 IRFs (97.9%) had 95% CIs containing the national mean rate, and 9 IRFs (0.8%) had 95% CIs below the national mean rate. Using the Potentially Preventable 30-Day Post-Discharge Readmission Measure for Inpatient Rehabilitation, 8 IRFs (0.7%) had 95% CIs above the national mean rate, 1153 IRFs (99.2%) had 95% CIs containing the national mean rate, and 1 IRF (0.1%) had a 95% CI below the national mean rate.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This cohort study found that readmission rates were lower when using the Potentially Preventable 30-Day Post-Discharge Readmission Measure for Inpatient Rehabilitation and further reduced discrimination between facilities compared with the recently discontinued All-Cause Unplanned Readmission Measure for 30 Days Post Discharge From Inpatient Rehabilitation Facilities. This finding may indicate there is a lack of room for improvement in readmission rates. Given the rationale of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services for removing measures that fail to discriminate quality performance, this suggests that the current readmission measure should not be implemented as part of the Inpatient Rehabilitation Quality Reporting Program.

Multiyear Rehospitalization Rates and Hospital Outcomes in an Integrated Health Care System

IMPORTANCE

Since the introduction of the rehospitalization rate as a quality measure, multiple changes have taken place in the US health care delivery system. Interpreting rehospitalization rates without taking a global view of these changes and new data elements from comprehensive electronic medical records yields a limited assessment of the quality of care.

OBJECTIVE

To examine hospitalization outcomes from a broad perspective, including the implications of numerator and denominator definitions, all adult patients with all diagnoses, and detailed clinical data.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This cohort study obtained data from 21 hospitals in Kaiser Permanente Northern California (KPNC), an integrated health care delivery system that serves patients with Medicare Advantage plans, Medicaid, and/or Kaiser Foundation Health Plan. The KPNC electronic medical record system was used to capture hospitalization data for adult patients who were 18 years of age or older; discharged from June 1, 2010, through December 31, 2017; and hospitalized for reasons other than childbirth. Hospital stays for transferred patients were linked using public and internal sources.

EXPOSURES

Hospitalization type (inpatient, for observation only), comorbidity burden, acute physiology score, and care directives.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Mortality (inpatient, 30-day, and 30-day postdischarge), nonelective rehospitalization, and discharge disposition (home, home with home health assistance, regular skilled nursing facility, or custodial skilled nursing facility).

RESULTS

In total, 1 384 025 hospitalizations were identified, of which 1 155 034 (83.5%) were inpatient and 228 991 (16.5%) were for observation only. These hospitalizations involved 679 831 patients (mean [SD] age, 61.4 [18.1] years; 362 582 female [53.3%]). The number of for-observation-only hospitalizations increased from 16 497 (9.4%) in the first year of the study to 120 215 (20.5%) in the last period of the study, whereas inpatient hospitalizations with length of stay less than 24 hours decreased by 33% (from 12 008 [6.9%] to 27 108 [4.6%]). Illness burden measured using administrative data or acute physiology score increased significantly. The proportion of patients with a Comorbidity Point Score of 65 or higher increased from 20.5% (range across hospitals, 18.4%-26.4%) to 28.8% (range, 22.3%-33.0%), as did the proportion with a Charlson Comorbidity Index score of 4 or higher, which increased from 28.8% (range, 24.6%-35.0%) to 38.4% (range, 31.9%-43.4%). The proportion of patients at or near critical illness (Laboratory-based Acute Physiology Score [LAPS2] ≥110) increased by 21.4% (10.3% [range across hospitals, 7.4%-14.7%] to 12.5% [range across hospitals, 8.3%-16.6%]; P < .001), reflecting a steady increase of 0.07 (95% CI, 0.04-0.10) LAPS2 points per month. Unadjusted inpatient mortality in the first year of the study was 2.78% and in the last year was 2.71%; the corresponding numbers for 30-day mortality were 5.88% and 6.15%, for 30-day postdischarge mortality were 3.94% and 4.22%, and for nonelective rehospitalization were 12.00% and 12.81%, respectively. All outcomes improved after risk adjustment. Compared with the first month, the final observed to expected ratio was 0.79 (95% CI, 0.73-0.84) for inpatient mortality, 0.86 (95% CI, 0.82-0.89) for 30-day mortality, 0.90 (95% CI, 0.85-0.95) for 30-day nonelective rehospitalization, and 0.87 (95% CI, 0.83-0.92) for 30-day postdischarge mortality. The proportion of nonelective rehospitalizations meeting public reporting criteria decreased substantially over the study period (from 58.0% in 2010-2011 to 45.2% in 2017); most of this decrease was associated with the exclusion of observation stays.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This study found that in this integrated system, the hospitalization rate decreased and risk-adjusted hospital outcomes improved steadily over the 7.5-year study period despite worsening case mix. The comprehensive results suggest that future assessments of care quality should consider the implications of numerator and denominator definitions, display multiple metrics concurrently, and include all hospitalization types and detailed data.

Rhode Island's investment in primary care transformation: A case study

INTRODUCTION

Rhode Island has received national recognition as a leader in statewide, multipayer, multistakeholder initiatives that focus on investments in primary care as a strategy to build a strong delivery system foundation that delivers high-quality, affordable health care.

METHOD

For this case study we summarize key structural, process and outcomes factors and lessons learned from internal and external evaluations and project based and stakeholder-engaged quality improvement efforts that helped Rhode Island become the most improved U.S. health system over the past 5 years.

RESULTS

Rhode Island's Office of the Insurance Commissioner through a collaborative process contractually established per-member, per-month payments to practices that engaged in the statewide transformation program to the patient-centered medical home model of care and paid incentives for achieving quality, patient experience, and hospital utilization targets.

DISCUSSION

Critical lessons learned include the importance of engaging stakeholders in systems change, measuring and monitoring primary care spending, and continuous learning and best-practice sharing. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

The Quality of Nursing Homes That Serve Patients With Human Immunodeficiency Virus

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

As the national population of persons living with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) ages, they will require greater postacute and long-term care use. Little is known about the quality of nursing homes (NHs) to which patients with HIV are admitted. In this study, we assess the association between the number of persons with HIV admitted annually to a given NH (HIV concentration) and that NH's quality outcomes.

DESIGN

A cross-sectional comparative study.

SETTING

NHs in nine states, from 2001 to 2012.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 46 918 NH-years accounting for 67 301 admissions by patients with HIV.

MEASUREMENTS

We used 100% Medicaid Analytic Extract, Minimum Dataset 2.0 and 3.0, and Medicare claims from 2001 to 2012 from nine states to examine the association between HIV concentration and NH quality. Persons were classified as HIV positive on the basis of all available data sources, and a NH's percentage of new admissions with HIV was calculated (HIV concentration). We then compared differences in star ratings, rehospitalization rates, NH survey deficiencies, and restraint use by a NH's percentage of admissions with HIV, using linear random effects models.

RESULTS

After adjusting for NH characteristics, zip code characteristics, and state and year fixed effects, NHs with greater than 0% to 5% of admissions with HIV had a 0.6 lower star rating (P < .001), and a 0.4% percentage point higher 30-day rehospitalization rate (P < .01), compared to those with no HIV admissions. NHs with 5% to 50% of admissions with HIV had 7.0 more deficiencies (P < .001), a 0.1 lower star rating (P < .001), and a 1.5 percentage point higher rehospitalization rate (P < .001).

CONCLUSION

Persons with HIV were generally admitted to lower-quality NHs compared to persons without HIV. More efforts are needed to ensure that persons with HIV have access to high-quality NHs. J Am Geriatr Soc 67:2615-2621, 2019.

Benchmarking Cancer Centers: From Care Pathways to Integrated Practice Units

Background: Structuring cancer care into pathways can reduce variability in clinical practice and improve patient outcomes. International benchmarking can help centers with regard to development, implementation, and evaluation. A further step in the development of multidisciplinary care is to organize care in integrated practice units (IPUs), encompassing the whole pathway and relevant organizational aspects. However, research on this topic is limited. This article describes the development and results of a benchmark tool for cancer care pathways and explores IPU development in cancer centers. Methods: The benchmark tool was developed according to a 13-step benchmarking method and piloted in 7 European cancer centers. Centers provided data and site visits were performed to understand the context in which the cancer center operates and to clarify additional questions. Benchmark data were structured into pathway development and evaluation and assessed against key IPU features. Results: Benchmark results showed that most centers have formalized multidisciplinary pathways and that care teams differed in composition, and found almost 2-fold differences in mammography use efficiency. Suggestions for improvement included positioning pathways formally and structurally evaluating outcomes at a sufficiently high frequency. Based on the benchmark, 3 centers indicating that they had a breast cancer IPU were scored differently on implementation. Overall, we found that centers in Europe are in various stages of development of pathways and IPUs, ranging from an informal pathway structure to a full IPU-type of organization. Conclusions: A benchmark tool for care pathways was successfully developed and tested, and is available in an open format. Our tool allows for the assessment of pathway organization and can be used to assess the status of IPU development. Opportunities for improvement were identified regarding the organization of care pathways and the development toward IPUs. Three centers are in varying degrees of implementation and can be characterized as breast cancer IPUs. Organizing cancer care in an IPU could yield multiple performance improvements.

Variation in Integrated Head and Neck Cancer Care: Impact of Patient and Hospital Characteristics

Background: Monitoring and effectively improving oncologic integrated care requires dashboard information based on quality registrations. The dashboard includes evidence-based quality indicators (QIs) that measure quality of care. This study aimed to assess the quality of current integrated head and neck cancer care with QIs, the variation between Dutch hospitals, and the influence of patient and hospital characteristics. Methods: Previously, 39 QIs were developed with input from medical specialists, allied health professionals, and patients' perspectives. QI scores were calculated with data from 1,667 curatively treated patients in 8 hospitals. QIs with a sample size of >400 patients were included to calculate reliable QI scores. We used multilevel analysis to explain the variation. Results: Current care varied from 29% for the QI about a case manager being present to discuss the treatment plan to 100% for the QI about the availability of a treatment plan. Variation between hospitals was small for the QI about patients discussed in multidisciplinary team meetings (adherence: 95%, range 88%-98%), but large for the QI about malnutrition screening (adherence: 50%, range 2%-100%). Higher QI scores were associated with lower performance status, advanced tumor stage, and tumor in the oral cavity or oropharynx at the patient level, and with more curatively treated patients (volume) at hospital level. Conclusions: Although the quality registration was only recently launched, it already visualizes hospital variation in current care. Four determinants were found to be influential: tumor stage, performance status, tumor site, and volume. More data are needed to assure stable results for use in quality improvement.

Variation in responsiveness to warranted behaviour change among NHS clinicians: novel implementation of change detection methods in longitudinal prescribing data

OBJECTIVES

To determine how clinicians vary in their response to new guidance on existing or new interventions, by measuring the timing and magnitude of change at healthcare institutions.

DESIGN

Automated change detection in longitudinal prescribing data.

SETTING

Prescribing data in English primary care.

PARTICIPANTS

English general practices.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

In each practice the following were measured: the timing of the largest changes, steepness of the change slope (change in proportion per month), and magnitude of the change for two example time series (expiry of the Cerazette patent in 2012, leading to cheaper generic desogestrel alternatives becoming available; and a change in antibiotic prescribing guidelines after 2014, favouring nitrofurantoin over trimethoprim for uncomplicated urinary tract infection (UTI)).

RESULTS

Substantial heterogeneity was found between institutions in both timing and steepness of change. The range of time delay before a change was implemented was large (interquartile range 2-14 months (median 8) for Cerazette, and 5-29 months (18) for UTI). Substantial heterogeneity was also seen in slope following a detected change (interquartile range 2-28% absolute reduction per month (median 9%) for Cerazette, and 1-8% (2%) for UTI). When changes were implemented, the magnitude of change showed substantially less heterogeneity (interquartile range 44-85% (median 66%) for Cerazette and 28-47% (38%) for UTI).

CONCLUSIONS

Substantial variation was observed in the speed with which individual NHS general practices responded to warranted changes in clinical practice. Changes in prescribing behaviour were detected automatically and robustly. Detection of structural breaks using indicator saturation methods opens up new opportunities to improve patient care through audit and feedback by moving away from cross sectional analyses, and automatically identifying institutions that respond rapidly, or slowly, to warranted changes in clinical practice.

Navigating the Wild West of Medication Adherence Reporting in Specialty Pharmacy

Estimating medication adherence through the use of pharmacy claims-based adherence calculations such as medication possession ratio (MPR) and proportion of days covered (PDC) plays a significant role in specialty pharmacy practice. Although MPR and PDC are frequently used in clinical practice, calculation methodologies vary, making meaningful comparisons of adherence rates difficult. In addition, MPR and PDC are increasingly used by insurance companies, pharmacies, accrediting bodies, and drug manufacturers to demonstrate quality differences or clinical benefit across the specialty pharmacy industry. Therefore, recognizing the source and effect of calculation variability is necessary to fully understand reported adherence results. This article highlights the challenges in standardizing adherence methodologies, minimum methodology considerations that should be reported with MPR and PDC results, and key elements to consider when interpreting and applying adherence results. Further, recommendations are provided to promote a more consistent description of calculation methods and to aid pharmacies in adherence measure analysis, interpretation, and application to practice, with a focus on specialty pharmacy programs. A detailed description of methodology as outlined in this article must be provided to ensure reproducibility, external validation, and scientific rigor. In the absence of standardization, specialty pharmacies should be prudent in their use of adherence calculations as a clinical benchmarking tool or comparative quality indicator with outside organizations. Furthermore, specialty pharmacies should consider using current adherence measure calculations to identify and provide targeted interventions to patients with potential adherence problems and strive to better demonstrate ties between adherence measures and direct clinical and cost outcomes. DISCLOSURES: No outside funding supported the writing of this article. Anguiano is a speaker and research consultant for United Therapeutics. The other authors have nothing to disclose.

Citizen perspectives on the use of publicly reported primary care performance information: Results from citizen-patient dialogues in three Canadian provinces

OBJECTIVE

Performance measurement and reporting is proliferating in all sectors of the healthcare system, including primary care, despite a dearth of evidence on how the public uses reports on primary care performance. We explored how the public might use this information, to guide the development of effective reporting systems for primary care.

METHODS

We conducted six full-day deliberative dialogue sessions with a purposive sample of 56 citizen-patients across three Canadian provinces (British Columbia, Ontario and Nova Scotia). Participants identified how they would use publicly reported performance data. We conducted a thematic analysis of the data by region.

RESULTS

Common uses for primary care performance information emerged across all sessions. Participants most often discussed the utility of this information for community advocacy and participation in health system decision making. Similar barriers for using performance information to choose a primary care provider were identified in each region including the perceived lack of choice of providers and the high value placed on relationships with current providers. Finally, the value of public performance reporting in enhancing trust that people would receive good care was also a common theme.

CONCLUSIONS

Citizen-patient perspectives highlight that public reporting on primary care performance could promote the health system's responsiveness by enabling public engagement in decision making at the community level. The role of public reporting in promoting trust rather than empowering patient choice may reflect unique elements of the Canadian health system's context.

Discharge care quality in hospitalised elderly patients: Extended validation of the Discharge Care Experiences Survey

Background

The Discharge Care Experiences Survey (DICARES) was previously developed to measure quality of discharge care in elderly patients (≥ 65 years). The objective of this study was to test the factorial validity of responses of the DICARES, and to investigate its association with existing quality indicators.

Methods

We conducted a cross-sectional study at two hospitals in Bergen, Western Norway. A survey, including DICARES, was sent by postal mail to 1,418 patients 30 days after discharge from hospital. To test the previously identified three-factor structure of the DICARES we applied a first order confirmatory factor analysis with corresponding fit indices and reliability measures. Spearman’s correlation coefficients, and linear regression, was used to investigate the association of DICARES scores with the quality indicators Nordic Patient Experiences Questionnaire and emergency readmission within 30 days.

Results

A total of 493 (35%) patients completed the survey. The mean age of the respondents was 79 years (SD = 8) and 52% were women. The confirmatory factor analysis showed acceptable fit. Cronbach’s α between items within factors was 0.82 (Coping after discharge), 0.71 (Adherence to treatment), and 0.66 (Participation in discharge planning). DICARES was moderately correlated with the Nordic Patient Experiences Questionnaire (rho = 0.49, P < 0.001). DICARES overall score was higher in patients with no readmissions compared to those who were emergency readmitted within 30 days (P < 0.001), indicating that more positive experiences were associated with fewer readmissions.

Conclusions

DICARES appears to be a feasible instrument for measuring quality of discharge care in elderly patients (≥ 65 years). This brief questionnaire seems to be sensitive with regard to readmission, and independent of comorbidity. Further studies of patients’ experiences are warranted to identify elements that impact on discharge care in other patient groups.

Establishing a composite neonatal adverse outcome indicator using English hospital administrative data

OBJECTIVE

We adapted a composite neonatal adverse outcome indicator (NAOI), originally derived in Australia, and assessed its feasibility and validity as an outcome indicator in English administrative hospital data.

DESIGN

We used Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) data containing information infants born in the English National Health Service (NHS) between 1 April 2014 and 31 March 2015. The Australian NAOI was mapped to diagnoses and procedure codes used within HES and modified to reflect data quality and neonatal health concerns in England. To investigate the concurrent validity of the English NAOI (E-NAOI), rates of NAOI components were compared with population-based studies. To investigate the predictive validity of the E-NAOI, rates of readmission and death in the first year of life were calculated for infants with and without E-NAOI components.

RESULTS

The analysis included 484 007 (81%) of the 600 963 eligible babies born during the timeframe. 114/148 NHS trusts passed data quality checks and were included in the analysis. The modified E-NAOI included 23 components (16 diagnoses and 7 procedures). Among liveborn infants, 5.4% had at least one E-NAOI component recorded before discharge. Among newborns discharged alive, the E-NAOI was associated with a significantly higher risk of death (0.81% vs 0.05%; p<0.001) and overnight hospital readmission (15.7% vs 7.1%; p<0.001) in the first year of life.

CONCLUSIONS

A composite NAOI can be derived from English hospital administrative data. This E-NAOI demonstrates good concurrent and predictive validity in the first year of life. It is a cost-effective way to monitor neonatal outcomes.

Pharmaceutical companies information and antibiotic prescription patterns: A follow-up study in Spanish primary care

Objectives

To assess the impact of sources of drug information on antibiotic prescribing patterns (quantity and quality) among primary care physicians.

Methods

We conducted a cohort study on primary care physicians who were actively engaged in medical practice in 2010 in a region in north-west Spain (Galicia), fulfilling inclusion criteria (n = 2100). As the independent variable, we took the perceived utility of 6 sources of information on antibiotics, as measured by the validated KAAR-11 questionnaire. As dependent variables, we used: (1) a quality indicator (appropriate quality, defined as any case where 6 of the 12 indicators proposed by the European Surveillance of Antimicrobial Consumption Network [ESAC-Net] were better than the mean values for Spain); and, (2) a quantity indicator (high prescribing), defined as any case where defined daily doses (DDD) per 1 000 inhabitants per day of antibacterials for systemic use were higher than the mean values for Spain. The adjusted odds ratio for a change in the interquartile range (IqOR) for each sources of information on antibiotics was calculated using Generalized Linear Mixed Models.

Results

The questionnaire response rate was 68%. Greater perceived utility of pharmaceutical sales representatives increases the risk of having high prescribing (1/IqOR = 2.50 [95%CI: 1.63–3.66]) and reduces the probability of having appropriate quality (1/IqOR = 2.28 [95%CI: 1.77–3.01]). Greater perceived utility of clinical guidelines increases the probability of having appropriate quality (1/IqOR = 1.25 [95%CI: 1.02–1.54]) and reduces the probability of high prescribing (1/IqOR = 1.25 [95%CI: 1.02–1.54]).

Conclusions

Sources of information on antibiotics are an important determinant of the quantity and quality of antibiotic prescribing in primary care. Commercial sources of information influence prescribing negatively, and clinical guidelines are associated with better indicators.

Primary Care Practices' Ability to Report Electronic Clinical Quality Measures in the EvidenceNOW Southwest Initiative to Improve Heart Health

IMPORTANCE

The capability and capacity of primary care practices to report electronic clinical quality measures (eCQMs) are questionable.

OBJECTIVE

To determine how quickly primary care practices can report eCQMs and the practice characteristics associated with faster reporting.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This quality improvement study examined an initiative (EvidenceNOW Southwest) to enhance primary care practices' ability to adopt evidence-based cardiovascular care approaches: aspirin prescribing, blood pressure control, cholesterol management, and smoking cessation (ABCS). A total of 211 primary care practices in Colorado and New Mexico participating in EvidenceNOW Southwest between February 2015 and December 2017 were included.

INTERVENTIONS

Practices were instructed on eCQM specifications that could be produced by an electronic health record, a registry, or a third-party platform. Practices received 9 months of support from a practice facilitator, a clinical health information technology advisor, and the research team. Practices were instructed to report their baseline ABCS eCQMs as soon as possible.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The main outcome was time to report the ABCS eCQMs. Cox proportional hazards models were used to examine practice characteristics associated with time to reporting.

RESULTS

Practices were predominantly clinician owned (48%) and in urban or suburban areas (71%). Practices required a median (interquartile range) of 8.2 (4.6-11.9) months to report any ABCS eCQM. Time to report differed by eCQM: practices reported blood pressure management the fastest (median [interquartile range], 7.8 [3.5-10.4] months) and cholesterol management the slowest (median [interquartile range], 10.5 [6.6 to >12] months) (log-rank P < .001). In multivariable models, the blood pressure eCQM was reported more quickly by practices that participated in accountable care organizations (hazard ratio [HR], 1.88; 95% CI, 1.40-2.53; P < .001) or participated in a quality demonstration program (HR, 1.58; 95% CI, 1.14-2.18; P = .006). The cholesterol eCQM was reported more quickly by practices that used clinical guidelines for cardiovascular disease management (HR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.18-1.53; P < .001). Compared with Federally Qualified Health Centers, hospital-owned practices had greater ability to report blood pressure eCQMs (HR, 2.66; 95% CI, 95% CI, 1.73-4.09; P < .001), and clinician-owned practices had less ability to report cholesterol eCQMs (HR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.35-0.76; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this study, time to report eCQMs varied by measure and practice type, with very few practices reporting quickly. Practices took longer to report a new cholesterol measure than other measures. Programs that require eCQM reporting should consider the time and effort practices must exert to produce reports. Practices may benefit from additional support to succeed in new programs that require eCQM reporting.

Are service and patient indicators different in the presence or absence of nurse practitioners? The EDPRAC cohort study of Australian emergency departments

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the impact of nurse practitioner (NP) service in Australian public hospital emergency departments (EDs) on service and patient safety and quality indicators.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Cohort study comprising ED presentations (July 2013-June 2014) for a random sample of hospitals, stratified by state/territory and metropolitan versus non-metropolitan location; and a retrospective medical record audit of ED re-presentations.

METHODS

Service indicator data (patient waiting times for Australasian Triage Scale categories 2, 3, 4 and 5; number of patients who did not-wait; length of ED stay for non-admitted patients) were compared between EDs with and without NPs using logistic regression and Cox proportional hazards regression, adjusting for hospital and patient characteristics and correlation of outcomes within hospitals. Safety and quality indicator data (rates of ED unplanned re-presentations) for a random subset of re-presentations were compared using Poisson regression.

RESULTS

Of 66 EDs, 55 (83%) provided service indicator data on 2 463 543 ED patient episodes while 58 (88%) provided safety and quality indicator data on 2853 ED re-presentations. EDs with NPs had significantly (p<0.001) higher rates of waiting times compared with EDs without NPs. Patients presenting to EDs with NPs spent 13 min (8%) longer in ED compared with EDs without NPs (median, (first quartile-third quartile): 156 (93-233) and 143 (84-217) for EDs with and without NPs, respectively). EDs with NPs had 1.8% more patients who did not wait, but similar re-presentations rates as EDs with NPs.

CONCLUSIONS

EDs with NPs had statistically significantly lower performance for service indicators. However, these findings should be treated with caution. NPs are relatively new in the ED workforce and low NP numbers, staffing patterns and still-evolving roles may limit their impact on service indicators. Further research is needed to explain the dichotomy between the benefits of NPs demonstrated in individual clinical outcomes research and these macro system-wide observations.

Postoperative complications in gastrointestinal surgery: A “hidden” basic quality indicator

Postoperative complications represent a basic quality indicator for measuring outcomes at surgical units. At present, however, they are not systematically measured in all surgical procedures. A more accurate assessment of their impact could help to evaluate the real morbidity associated with different surgical interventions, establish measures for improvement, increase efficiency and identify benchmarking services. The Clavien-Dindo Classification is the most widely used system worldwide for assessing postoperative complications. However, the postoperative period is summarized by the most serious complication without taking into account others of lesser magnitude. Recently, two new scoring systems have emerged, the Comprehensive Complication Index and the Complication Severity Score, which include all postoperative complications and quantify them from 0 (no complications) to 100 (patient’s death), These allow the comparison of results. It is important to train surgical staff to report and classify complications and to record 90-d morbidity rates in all patients. Comparisons with other services must take into account patient comorbidities and the complexity of the particular surgical procedure. To avoid subjectivity and bias, external audits are necessary. In addition, ensuring transparency in the reporting of the results is an urgent obligation.

The association between quality measures of medical university press releases and their corresponding news stories-Important information missing

BACKGROUND

The news media is a key source for health and medical information, and relies to a large degree on material from press releases (PR). Medical universities are key players in the dissemination of PRs. This study aims to 1) explore the relation between the quality of press releases (PRs) from medical universities and their corresponding news stories (NSs) and 2) to identify the likelihood that specific scientific and interest-raising measures appear or are omitted in PRs and NSs.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

In this retrospective study using quantitative content analysis, PRs (n = 507) from 21 medical universities in Germany, the Netherlands, Sweden, the USA and the UK were retrieved. Of all PRs, 33% had media coverage, resulting in 496 NSs. With two codebooks, 18 scientific (e.g. reporting the study design of the study correctly) and 7 interest-raising measures (e.g. words like 'ground-breaking') were evaluated in the PRs and NSs. For all measures the percentage of presence in NSs and PRs was calculated, together with a Mean PR Influence Factor. Quality of PRs and NSs was defined as a score, based on 12 of the 18 scientific measures. Mean (SD) NS quality score was 6.5 (1.7) which was significantly lower than the PR score of 8.0 (1.5). The two quality scores were significantly correlated. Quality measures that were frequently omitted included reporting important study limitations (present in 21% of PRs, 21% of NSs), funding (59% of PRs, 7% of NSs) and conflicts of interest (16% of PRs, 3% of NSs). We did not evaluate the quality of the scientific papers (SPs), and can therefore not determine if the quality of PRs and NSs is associated with the quality of SPs.

CONCLUSIONS

This large study of medical university press releases and corresponding news stories showed that important measures of a scientific study such as funding and study limitations were omitted to a very large extent. The lay public and health personnel as well as policy makers, politicians and other decision makers may be misled by incomplete and partly inaccurate representations of scientific studies which could negatively affect important health-related behaviours and decisions.

Primary care performance of alternatively licenced physicians in Ontario, Canada: a cross-sectional study using administrative data

OBJECTIVES

Medical Regulatory Authorities (MRAs) provide licences to physicians and monitor those physicians once in practice to support their continued competence. In response to physician shortages, many Canadian MRAs developed alternative licensure routes to allow physicians who do not meet traditional licensure criteria to obtain licences to practice. Many physicians have gained licensure through alternative routes, but the performance of these physicians in practice has not been previously examined. This study compared the performance of traditionally and alternatively licenced physicians in Ontario using quality indicators of primary care. The purpose of this study was to examine the practice performance of alternatively licenced physicians and provide evaluative evidence for alternative licensure policies.

DESIGN

A cross-sectional retrospective examination of Ontario health administrative data was conducted using Poisson regression analyses to compare the performance of traditionally and alternatively licenced physicians.

SETTING

Primary care in Ontario, Canada.

PARTICIPANTS

All family physicians who were licenced in Ontario between 2000 and 2012 and who had complete medical billing data in 2014 were included (n=11 419).

OUTCOME MEASURES

Primary care quality indicators were calculated for chronic disease management, preventive paediatric care, cancer screening and hospital readmission rates using Ontario health administrative data.

RESULTS

Alternatively licenced physicians performed similarly to traditionally licenced physicians in many primary care performance measures. Minimal differences were seen across groups in indicators of diabetic care, congestive heart failure care, asthma care and cancer screening rates. Larger differences were found in preventive care for children less than 2 years of age, particularly for alternatively licenced physicians who entered Ontario from another Canadian province.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings demonstrate that alternatively licenced physicians perform similarly to traditionally licenced physicians across many indicators of primary care. Our study also demonstrates the utility of administrative data for examining physician performance and evaluating medical regulatory policies and programmes.

Examining the weekend effect across ICU performance metrics

BACKGROUND

Known colloquially as the "weekend effect," the association between weekend admissions and increased mortality within hospital settings has become a highly contested topic over the last two decades. Drawing interest from practitioners and researchers alike, a sundry of works have emerged arguing for and against the presence of the effect across various patient cohorts. However, it has become evident that simply studying population characteristics is insufficient for understanding how the effect manifests. Rather, to truly understand the effect, investigations into its underlying factors must be considered. As such, the work presented in this manuscript serves to address this consideration by moving beyond identification of patient cohorts to examining the role of ICU performance.

METHODS

Employing a comprehensive, publicly available database of electronic medical records (EMR), we began by utilizing multiple logistic regression to identify and isolate a specific cohort in which the weekend effect was present. Next, we leveraged the highly detailed nature of the EMR to evaluate ICU performance using well-established ICU quality scorecards to assess differences in clinical factors among patients admitted to an ICU on the weekend versus weekday.

RESULTS

Our results demonstrate the weekend effect to be most prevalent among emergency surgery patients (OR 1.53; 95% CI 1.19, 1.96), specifically those diagnosed with circulatory diseases (P<.001). Differences between weekday and weekend admissions for this cohort included a variety of clinical factors such as ventilatory support and night-time discharges.

CONCLUSIONS

This work reinforces the importance of accounting for differences in clinical factors as well as patient cohorts in studies investigating the weekend effect.

What publicly available quality metrics do hip and knee arthroplasty patients care about most when selecting a hospital in Maryland: a discrete choice experiment

OBJECTIVE

To quantify which publicly reported hospital quality metrics have the greatest impact on a patient's simulated hospital selection for hip or knee arthroplasty.

DESIGN

Discrete choice experiment.

SETTING

Two university-affiliated orthopaedic clinics in the greater Baltimore area, Maryland, USA.

PARTICIPANTS

One hundred and twenty-eight patients who were candidates for total hip or knee arthroplasty.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

The effect and magnitude of acceptable trade-offs between publicly reported hospital quality parameters on patients' decision-making strategies using a Hierarchical Bayes model.

RESULTS

Publicly reported information on patient perceptions of attention to alleviation of postoperative pain had the most influence on simulated hospital choice (20.7%), followed by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) rates (18.8%). The understandability of the discharge instructions was deemed the least important attribute with a relative importance of 6.9%. Stratification of these results by insurance status and duration of pain prior to surgery revealed that patient demographics and clinical presentation affect the decision-making paradigm.

CONCLUSIONS

Publicly available information regarding hospital performance is of interest to hip and knee arthroplasty patients. Patients are willing to accept suboptimal understanding of discharge instructions, lower hospital ratings and suboptimal cleanliness in exchange for better postoperative pain management, lower MRSA rates, and lower complication rates.

Template matching for benchmarking hospital performance in the veterans affairs healthcare system

Comparing hospital performance in a health system is traditionally done with multilevel regression models that adjust for differences in hospitals' patient case-mix. In contrast, "template matching" compares outcomes of similar patients at different hospitals but has been used only in limited patient settings.Our objective was to test a basic template matching approach in the nationwide Veterans Affairs healthcare system (VA), compared with a more standard regression approach.We performed various simulations using observational data from VA electronic health records whereby we randomly assigned patients to "pseudo hospitals," eliminating true hospital level effects. We randomly selected a representative template of 240 patients and matched 240 patients on demographic and physiological factors from each pseudo hospital to the template. We varied hospital performance for different simulations such that some pseudo hospitals negatively impacted patient mortality.Electronic health record data of 460,213 hospitalizations at 111 VA hospitals across the United States in 2015.We assessed 30-day mortality at each pseudo hospital and identified lowest quintile hospitals by template matching and regression. The regression model adjusted for predicted 30-day mortality (as a measure of illness severity).Regression identified the lowest quintile hospitals with 100% accuracy compared with 80.3% to 82.0% for template matching when systematic differences in 30-day mortality existed.The current standard practice of risk-adjusted regression incorporating patient-level illness severity was better able to identify lower-performing hospitals than the simplistic template matching algorithm.

Mortality for emergency laparotomy is not affected by the weekend effect: a multicentre study

INTRODUCTION

The 'weekend effect' describes variation in outcomes of patients treated over the weekend compared with those treated during weekdays. This study examines whether a weekend effect exists for patients who undergo emergency laparotomy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data entered into the National Emergency Laparotomy Audit between 2014 and 2017 at four NHS trusts in England and Wales were analysed. Patients were grouped into those admitted on weekdays and those on weekends (Friday 5pm to Monday 8am). Patient factors, markers of quality of care and patient outcomes were compared. Secondary analysis was performed according to the day of surgery.

RESULTS

After exclusion of patients who underwent laparotomy more than one week after admission to hospital, a total of 1717 patients (1138 patients admitted on weekdays and 579 admitted on weekends) were analysed. Age, preoperative lactate and P-POSSUM scores were not significantly different between the two groups. Time from admission to consultant review, decision to operate, commencement of antibiotics and theatre were not significantly different. Grades of operating surgeon were also similar in both groups. Inpatient 60-day mortality was 12.5% on weekdays and 12.8% on weekends (P = 0.878). Median length of postoperative stay was 12 days in both groups. When analysed according to day of surgery, only number of hours from admission to antibiotics (12.8 weekday vs 9.4 weekend, P = 0.046) and number of hours to theatre (26.5 weekday vs 24.1 hours weekend, P = 0.020) were significantly different.

DISCUSSION

Quality of care and clinical outcomes for patients undergoing emergency laparotomy during the weekend are not significantly different to those carried out during weekdays.

Surgeon-Level Variation in Utilization of Local Staging and Neoadjuvant Therapy for Stage II-III Rectal Adenocarcinoma

INTRODUCTION

Neoadjuvant therapy (NT) is the standard of care for clinical stage II-III rectal adenocarcinoma, but utilization remains suboptimal. We aimed to determine the underlying reasons for omission of local staging and NT.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study of patients with clinical stage II-III or undocumented clinical stage/pathologic stage II-III rectal adenocarcinoma who were treated in 2010-2016 in one of nine Intermountain Healthcare hospitals. The outcomes of omission of local staging and NT were examined with multivariable models. Risk- and reliability-adjusted rates of local staging and NT were calculated for surgeons who treated ≥ 3 patients. Pathologic and long-term outcomes were examined after excluding patients who were not resected or who underwent local excision (N = 11).

RESULTS

Local staging was omitted in 43/240 (17.9%) patients and NT was omitted in 41/240 (17.1%). The strongest risk factors for local staging and NT omission were upper rectal tumors and surgeons who treated ≤ 3 cases/year. Thirty-six of 41 (87.8%) cases of omitted NT had local staging omitted. Adjusted surgeon-specific local staging rates varied 1.6-fold (56.3-92.4%) and NT rates varied 2.8-fold (34.1-97.1%). Surgeon local staging and NT rates were strongly correlated (r = 0.92). NT was associated with lower rates of positive circumferential radial margins (7.9 vs. 20.0%; P = 0.02), node positivity (33.3 vs. 55.0%; P = 0.01), and local recurrences (7.6 vs. 14.9% at 5 years; P = 0.0176).

CONCLUSIONS

NT omission should be understood as a consequence of surgeon failure to perform local staging in most cases. Quality improvement efforts should focus on improving utilization of local staging.