Impact of Healthcare Delivery System Type on Clinical, Utilization, and Cost Outcomes of Patient-Centered Medical Homes: a Systematic Review

The Impact of Delivery Reform on Health Information Exchange with Behavioral Health Providers: Results from a National Representative Survey of Ambulatory Physicians

Health information exchange (HIE) is an effective way to coordinate care, but HIE between health and behavioral health providers is limited. Recent delivery reform models, including the Accountable Care Organization (ACO) and Patient Centered Medical Home (PCMH) prioritize interprofessional collaboration, but little is known about their impact on behavioral health HIE. This study explores whether delivery reform participation affects behavioral health HIE among ambulatory health providers using pooled 2015-2019 data from the National Electronic Health Record Survey, a nationally representative survey of ambulatory physicians' technology use (n = 8,703). The independent variable in this analysis was provider participation in ACO, PCMH, Hybrid ACO-PCMH, or standard care. The dependent variable was HIE with behavioral health providers. Chi square analysis estimated unweighted rates of behavioral health HIE across reform models. Logistic regression estimated the impact of delivery reform participation on rates of behavioral health HIE. Unweighted estimates indicated that Hybrid ACO-PCMH providers had the highest rates of HIE (n = 330, 33%). In the fully adjust model, rates of HIE were higher among ACO (AOR = 2.66, p < .01), PCMH (AOR = 4.73, p < .001) and Hybrid ACO-PCMH participants (AOR = 5.55, p < .001) compared to standard care, but they did not significantly vary between delivery models. Physicians infrequently engage in HIE with behavioral health providers. Compared to standard care, higher rates of HIE were found across all models of delivery reform. More work is needed to identify common elements of delivery reform models that are most effective in supporting this behavior.

Economic aspects of prolonged home video-EEG monitoring: a simulation study

INTRODUCTION

Video EEG monitoring (VEM) is an important tool for characterizing clinical events suspected as seizures. It is also used for pre-surgical workups in patients with drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE). In-hospital VEM high cost, long admission waiting periods and some other inconveniences led to an interest in home VEM (HVEM). However, because antiseizure medications cannot be reduced at home, HVEM may require longer monitoring. While the economic aspect is one of the main motivations for HVEM, the cost of HVEM lasting several weeks has not been assessed.

METHODS

We modeled the cost of HVEM for 8 weeks and compared it to the cost of 1-week in-hospital VEM. Additionally, we modeled the per-patient cost for a combination of HVEM and in-hospital VEM, considering that if in a proportion of patients HVEM fails to achieve its goal, they should undergo in-hospital VEM with drug reduction.

RESULTS

The average cost of HVEM up to 4-6 weeks of monitoring was lower than that for the 1-week in-hospital VEM. Combining the 3-week HVEM with 1-week in-hospital VEM (if needed) reduced the per-patient cost by 6.6-28.6% as compared to the situation when all the patients with DRE were referred to the in-hospital VEM.

CONCLUSIONS

A prolonged intermittent HVEM can be cost-effective, especially if the minimal seizure frequency is about one seizure per week. The study findings support directing efforts into clinical trials and technology development.

Describing the evidence linking interprofessional education interventions to improving the delivery of safe and effective patient care: a scoping review

Empirical evidence indicates that collaborative interprofessional practice leads to positive health outcomes. Further, there is an abundance of evidence examining student and/or faculty perceptions of learning or satisfaction about the interprofessional education (IPE) learning experience. However, there is a dearth of research linking IPE interventions to patient outcomes. The objective of this scoping review was to describe and summarize the evidence linking IPE interventions to the delivery of effective patient care. A three-step search strategy was utilized for this review with articles that met the following criteria: publications dated 2015-2020 using qualitative, quantitative or mixed methods; the inclusion of healthcare professionals, students, or practitioners who had experienced IPE or training that included at least two collaborators within coursework or other professional education; and at least one of ten Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services quality measures (length of stay, medication errors, medical errors, patient satisfaction scores, medication adherence, patient and caregiver education, hospice usage, mortality, infection rates, and readmission rates). Overall, n=94 articles were identified, providing overwhelming evidence supporting a positive relationship between IPE interventions and several key quality health measures including length of stay, medical errors, patient satisfaction, patient or caregiver education, and mortality. Findings from this scoping review suggest a critical need for the development, implementation, and evaluation of IPE interventions to improve patient outcomes.

The Australian Health Care Homes trial: quality of care and patient outcomes. A propensity score-matched cohort study

OBJECTIVE

To assess the impact of the Health Care Homes (HCH) primary health care initiative on quality of care and patient outcomes.

DESIGN, SETTING

Quasi-experimental, matched cohort study; analysis of general practice data extracts and linked administrative data from ten Australian primary health networks, 1 October 2017 - 30 June 2021.

PARTICIPANTS

People with chronic health conditions (practice data extracts: 9811; linked administrative data: 10 682) enrolled in the HCH 1 October 2017 - 30 June 2019; comparison groups of patients receiving usual care (1:1 propensity score-matched).

INTERVENTION

Participants were involved in shared care planning, provided enhanced access to team care, and encouraged to seek chronic condition care at the HCH practice where they were enrolled. Participating practices received bundled payments based on clinical risk tier.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Access to care, processes of care, diabetes-related outcomes, hospital service use, risk of death.

RESULTS

During the first twelve months after enrolment, the mean numbers of general practitioner encounters (rate ratio, 1.14; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.11-1.17) and Medicare Benefits Schedule claims for allied health services (rate ratio, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.24-1.33) were higher for the HCH than the usual care group. Annual influenza vaccinations (relative risk, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.17-1.22) and measurements of blood pressure (relative risk, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.08-1.11), blood lipids (relative risk, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.16-1.21), glycated haemoglobin (relative risk, 1.06; 95% CI, 1.03-1.08), and kidney function (relative risk, 1.13; 95% CI, 1.11-1.15) were more likely in the HCH than the usual care group during the twelve months after enrolment. Similar rate ratios and relative risks applied in the second year. The numbers of emergency department presentations (rate ratio, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.02-1.18) and emergency admissions (rate ratio, 1.13; 95% CI, 1.04-1.22) were higher for the HCH group during the first year; other differences in hospital use were not statistically significant. Differences in glycaemic and blood pressure control in people with diabetes in the second year were not statistically significant. By 30 June 2021, 689 people in the HCH group (6.5%) and 646 in the usual care group (6.1%) had died (hazard ratio, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.96-1.20).

CONCLUSIONS

The HCH program was associated with greater access to care and improved processes of care for people with chronic diseases, but not changes in diabetes-related outcomes, most measures of hospital use, or risk of death.

Involving community pharmacists in interprofessional collaboration in primary care: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The World Health Organization supports interprofessional collaboration in primary care. On over the past 20 years, community pharmacists had been taking a growing number of new responsibilities and they are recognized as a core member of collaborative care teams as patient-centered care providers. This systematic review aimed to describe interprofessional collaboration in primary care involving a pharmacist, and its effect on patient related outcomes.

METHODS

A systematic review of randomized controlled trials cited in the MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycInfo and CINAHL in English and French was conducted from inception to November 2022. Studies were included if they described an intervention piloted by a primary care provider and included a pharmacist and if they evaluated the effects of intervention on a disease or on patient related outcomes. The search generated 3494 articles. After duplicates were removed and titles and abstracts screened for inclusion, 344 articles remained.

RESULTS

Overall, 19 studies were included in the review and assessed for quality. We found 14 studies describing an exclusive collaboration between physician and pharmacist with for all studies a three-step model of pharmacist intervention: a medication review, an interview with the patient, and recommendations made to physician. Major topics in the articles eligible for inclusion included cardiovascular diseases with blood pressure, diabetes, dyslipidemia, and risk of cardiovascular diseases. Positive effects concerned principally blood pressure.

CONCLUSIONS

Collaboration involving pharmacists is mainly described in relation to cardiovascular diseases, for which patient-centered indicators are most often positive. It underscores the need for further controlled studies on pharmacist-involved interprofessional collaboration across various medical conditions to improve consensus on core outcomes measures.

The Impact of Involvement in Whole Health System for Veterans or Participating in It for Oneself on Job Attitudes in VA Employees

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study is to examine how involvement in the Whole Health System of care, clinically and personally (through employee-focused activities), would affect employee satisfaction, engagement, burnout, and turnover intent in the Veterans Health Administration.

METHODS

Multivariate logistic regression analysis of cross-sectional survey from Veterans Health Administration employees was used to determine the influence of Whole Health System involvement and Employee Whole Health participation on job attitudes.

RESULTS

Whole Health System involvement was associated higher job satisfaction, higher levels of engagement, lower burnout, and lower turnover intent. A similar pattern of results was identified when looking specifically at Employee Whole Health participation and associated job attitudes.

CONCLUSIONS

Employees who are either directly involved in delivering Whole Health services to veterans or who have participated in Whole Health programming for their own benefit may experience a meaningful positive impact on their well-being and how they experience the workplace.

Meta-Analysis of the Impact of Four Advanced Primary Care Redesign Initiatives on Medicare Expenditures

We conducted a secondary analysis of the evaluations of 22 sites participating in four primary care redesign initiatives funded by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services or the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation. Our objectives were to determine the overall impact of the initiatives on Medicare expenditures and whether specific site-level program features influenced expenditure findings. Averaged over sites, the mean intervention effect was a statistically insignificant US$26 per beneficiary per year. Policy implications from meta-regression results suggest that funders should consider supporting technical assistance efforts and pay for performance incentives to increase savings. There was no evidence that paying for medical home transformation produced savings in total cost of care. We estimate that in future evaluations, data from 35 sites would be needed to detect feature effects of US$300 per beneficiary per year.

Differences in Health Care Utilization of High-Need and High-Cost Patients of Federally Funded Health Centers Versus Other Primary Care Providers

BACKGROUND

Primary care providers (PCP) differ in their ability to address the needs and reduce use of costly services among complex Medicaid beneficiaries. Among PCPs, Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA)-funded health centers (HCs) are shown to provide high-value care.

OBJECTIVE

We compared health care utilization of complex Medicaid managed care beneficiaries whose PCPs were HCs versus 3 other groups.

RESEARCH DESIGN

Cross-sectional study using propensity score matching comparing health care use by provider type, controlling for demographics, health status, and other covariates.

SUBJECTS

California Medicaid administrative data for complex adult managed care beneficiaries with at least 1 primary care visit in 2018.

MEASURES

Primary and specialty care evaluation & management visits and services; emergency department (ED) visits; and hospitalizations. PCPs included HCs, clinics not funded by HRSA, solo, and group practice providers.

RESULTS

HRSA-funded HCs had lower predicted rates of specialty evaluation & management and other services than all others; lower predicted probability of any ED visits than clinics not funded by HRSA [54% (95% CI: 53%-55%) vs. 56% (95% CI: 55%-57%)] and group practice providers [51% (95% CI: 51%-52%) vs. 52% (95% CI: 52%-53%)]; and lower PP of any hospitalizations than solo [20% (95% CI: 19%-20%) vs. 23% (95% CI: 22%-24%)] and group practice providers [21% (95% CI: 20%-21%) vs. 24% (95% CI: 23%-24%)].

CONCLUSIONS

Differences in HC care delivery and practices were associated with lower use of specialty, ED, and hospitalization visits compared with other PCPs for complex Medicaid managed care beneficiaries. Understanding the underlying reasons for these utilization differences may promote better outcomes among these patients.

From Revolution to Evolution: Early Experience with Virtual-First, Outcomes-Based Primary Care

Primary care is foundational to health systems and a common good. The workforce is threatened by outdated approaches to organizing work, payment, and technology. Primary care work should be restructured to support a team-based model, optimized to efficiently achieve the best population health outcomes. In a virtual-first, outcomes-based primary care model, a majority of professional time for primary care team members is protected for virtual, asynchronous patient interactions, collaboration across clinical disciplines, and real-time management of patients with acute and complex concerns. Payments must be re-structured to cover the cost of, and reward the value created by, this advanced model. Technology investments should shift from legacy electronic health records to patient relationship management systems, built to support continuous, outcome-based care. These changes enable primary care team members to focus on building engaged, trusting relationships with patients and their families and collaborating on complex management decisions, and reconnecting team members with joy in clinical practice.

Transforming Primary Care in New York Through Patient-Centered Medical Homes: Findings From Qualitative Research

Background:

The patient-centered medical home (PCMH) model, an important component of healthcare transformation in the United States, is an approach to primary care delivery with the goal of improving population health and the patient care experience while reducing costs. PCMH research most often focuses on system level indicators including healthcare use and cost; descriptions of patient and provider experience with PCMH are relatively sparse and commonly limited in scope. This study, part of a mixed-methods evaluation of a multi-year New York State initiative to refine and expand the PCMH model, describes patient and provider experience with New York State PCMH and its key components.

Methods:

The qualitative component of the evaluation included focus groups with patients of PCMH practices in 5 New York State counties (n = 9 groups and 67 participants) and interviews with providers and practice administrators at New York State PCMH practices (n = 9 interviews with 10 participants). Through these focus groups and interviews, we elicited first-person descriptions of experiences with, as well as perspectives on, key components of the New York State PCMH model, including accessibility, expanded use of electronic health records, integration of behavioral health care, and care coordination.

Results:

There was evident progress and some satisfaction with the PCMH model, particularly regarding integrated behavioral health and, to some extent, expanded use of electronic health records. There was less evident progress with respect to improved access and reasonable wait times, which caused patients to continue to use urgent care or the emergency department as substitutes for primary care.

Conclusions:

It is critical to understand the strengths and limitations of the PCMH model, so as to continue to improve upon and promote it. Strengths of the model were evident to participants in this study; however, challenges were also described. It is important to note that these challenges are difficult to separate from wider healthcare system issues, including inadequate incentives for value-based care, and carry implications for PCMH and other models of healthcare delivery.

Mental health care integration and primary care patient experience in the Veterans Health Administration

BACKGROUND

Mental health specialists and care managers facilitate comprehensive care provision within medical homes. Despite implementation challenges, mental health integration is thought to improve patient-centered primary care.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the relationship between primary care patient experience and mental health integration.

RESEARCH DESIGN

Cross-sectional surveys from 168 primary care clinicians (PCPs) (n = 226) matched with assigned patients' surveys (n = 1734) in one Veterans Health Administration (VA) region, fiscal years 2012-2013. Multilevel regression models examined patient experience and mental health integration, adjusting for patient and PCP characteristics.

MEASURES

Patient experience outcomes were (1) experience with PCP and (2) receipt of comprehensive care, such as talked about "stress". Independent variables represented mental health integration- (1) PCP-rated communication with mental health and (2) proportion of clinic patients who saw integrated specialists.

RESULTS

50% and 43% of patients rated their PCPs 10/10 and reported receiving comprehensive care, respectively. Neither patient experience or receipt of comprehensive care was significantly associated with PCP's ratings of communication with mental health, nor with proportion of clinic patients who saw integrated specialists. Among a subsample of patients who rated their mental health as poor/fair, however, we detected an association between proportion of clinic patients who saw integrated specialists and patient experience (odds ratio = 1.05, 95% confidence interval = 1.01-1.09, p = .01).

CONCLUSIONS

No association was observed between mental health integration and primary care patients' reported care experiences, but a significant association existed among patients who reported poor/fair mental health. More research is needed to understand patient experiences with regard to care model implementation.

Patient centered dental home: Building a framework for dental quality measurement and improvement

INTRODUCTION

This article presents results of the second phase of a project to develop a patient-centered dental home (PCDH) model. Aims of PCDH model development include broadening the scope of prior dental home definitions to include populations across the lifespan, developing a quality measurement framework to facilitate quality assessment and improvement, and promoting opportunities for medical-dental integration through alignment with existing PCMH models. This phase determined the components, or conceptual subdivisions, associated with a previously developed PCDH definition and characteristics.

METHODS

We used a modified Delphi process to obtain structured feedback and gain consensus among the project national advisory committee (NAC). The process included a web-based survey that asked NAC members to rank the importance of each potential component on a scale of 1-9. Criteria for consensus on component inclusion/exclusion combined a median rating and measure of disagreement. Respondents were also encouraged to provide open-ended feedback regarding rationale for component ratings and additional suggested components.

RESULTS

A total of 47 out of 51 members completed the survey. All 34 components met the quantitative criteria for inclusion in the PCDH model. Changes were made to components based on open-ended feedback.

CONCLUSIONS

This project phase further developed a PCDH measurement framework that aims to guide practice transformation, quality measurement and improvement in dental care delivery, as well as integration between medicine and dentistry. Using a Delphi approach with a broad group of stakeholders ensured that components had face validity and were conceptually aligned with the PCDH definition and characteristics.

Measuring care coordination in German primary care - adaptation and psychometric properties of the Medical Home Care Coordination Survey

BACKGROUND

Continuity of care is associated with many benefits for patients and health care systems. Therefore measuring care coordination - the deliberate organization of patient care activities between two or more participants - is especially needed to identify entries for improvement. The aim of this study was the translation and cultural adaptation of the Medical Home Care Coordination Survey (MHCCS) into German, and the examination of the psychometric properties of the resulting German versions of the MHCCS-P (patient version) and MHCCS-H (healthcare team version).

METHODS

We conducted a paper-based, cross-sectional survey in primary care practices in three German federal states (Schleswig-Holstein, Hamburg, Baden-Württemberg) with patients and health care team members from May 2018 to April 2019. Descriptive item analysis, factor analysis, internal consistency and convergent, discriminant and predictive validity of the German instrument versions were calculated by using SPSS 25.0 (Inc., IBM).

RESULTS

Response rates were 43% (n = 350) for patients and 34% (n = 141) for healthcare team members. In total, 300 patient questionnaires and 140 team member questionnaires could be included into further analysis. Exploratory factor analyses resulted in three domains in the MHCCS-D-P and seven domains in the MHCCS-D-H: "link to community resources", "communication", "care transitions", and additionally "self-management", "accountability", "information technology for quality assurance", and "information technology supporting patient care" for the MHCCS-D-H. The domains showed acceptable and good internal consistency (α = 0.838 to α = 0.936 for the MHCCS-D-P and α = 0.680 to α = 0.819 for the MHCCS-D-H). As 77% of patients (n = 232) and 63% of health care team members denied to have or make written care plans, items regarding the "plan of care" of the original MHCCS have been removed from the MHCCS-D.

CONCLUSIONS

The German versions of the Medical Home Care Coordination Survey for patients and healthcare team members are reliable instruments in measuring the care coordination in German primary care practices. Practicability is high since the total number of items is low (9 for patients and 27 for team members).

What Do Patient-Centered Medical Home (PCMH) Teams Need to Improve Care for Primary Care Patients with Complex Needs?

BACKGROUND

Intensive primary care (IPC) programs for patients with complex needs do not generate cost savings in most settings. Strengthening existing patient-centered medical homes (PCMH) to address the needs of these patients in primary care is a potential high-value alternative.

OBJECTIVES

Explore PCMH team functioning and characteristics that may impact their ability to perform IPC tasks; identify the IPC components that could be incorporated into PCMH teams' workflow; and identify additional resources, trainings, and staff needed to better manage patients with complex needs in primary care.

METHODS

We interviewed 44 primary care leaders, PCMH team members (providers, nurses, social workers), and IPC program leaders at 5 VA IPC sites and analyzed a priori themes using a matrix analysis approach.

RESULTS

Higher-functioning PCMH teams were described as already performing most IPC tasks, including panel management and care coordination. All sites reported that PCMH teams had the knowledge and skills to perform IPC tasks, but not with the same intensity as specialized IPC teams. Home visits/assessments and co-attending appointments were perceived as not feasible to perform. Key stakeholders identified 6 categories of supports and capabilities that PCMH teams would need to better manage complex patients, with care coordination/management and fully staffed teams as the most frequently mentioned. Many thought that PCMH teams could make better use of existing VA and non-VA resources, but might need training in identifying and using those resources.

CONCLUSIONS

PCMH teams can potentially offer certain clinic-based services associated with IPC programs, but tasks that are time intensive or require physical absence from clinic might require collaboration with community service providers and better use of internal and external healthcare system resources. Future studies should explore the feasibility of PCMH adoption of IPC tasks and the impact on patient outcomes.

Oncology Medical Home: ASCO and COA Standards

PURPOSE

To provide Standards on the basis of evidence and expert consensus for a pilot of the Oncology Medical Home (OMH) certification program. The OMH model is a system of care delivery that features coordinated, efficient, accessible, and evidence-based care and includes a process for measurement of outcomes to facilitate continuous quality improvement. The OMH pilot is intended to inform further refinement of Standards for OMH model implementation.

METHODS

An Expert Panel was formed, and a systematic review of the literature on the topics of OMH, clinical pathways, and survivorship care plans was performed using PubMed and Google Scholar. Using this evidence base and an informal consensus process, the Expert Panel developed a set of OMH Standards. Public comments were solicited and considered in preparation of the final manuscript.

RESULTS

Three comparative peer-reviewed studies of OMH met the inclusion criteria. In addition, the results from 16 studies of clinical pathways and one systematic review of survivorship care plans informed the evidence review. Limitations of the evidence base included the small number of studies of OMH and lack of longer-term outcomes data. More data were available to inform the specific Standards for pathways and survivorship care; however, outcomes were mixed for the latter intervention. The Expert Panel concluded that in the future, practices should be encouraged to publish the results of OMH interventions in peer-reviewed journals to improve the evidence base.

STANDARDS

Standards are provided for OMH in the areas of patient engagement, availability and access to care, evidence-based medicine, equitable and comprehensive team-based care, quality improvement, goals of care, palliative and end-of-life care discussions, and chemotherapy safety. Additional information, including a Standards implementation manual, is available at www.asco.org/standards.

Effects of a Specialized Primary Care Facility on Preventive Service Use Among Autistic Adults: a Retrospective Claims Study

BACKGROUND

While in some studies, the patient-centered medical home has been linked with increased receipt of preventive services among other populations, there is a paucity of literature testing the effectiveness of medical homes in serving the healthcare needs of autistic adults.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the receipt of preventive services by patients at a patient-centered medical home specifically designed for autistic adults (called the Center for Autism Services and Transition "CAST") to US national samples of autistic adults with private insurance or Medicare.

DESIGN

Retrospective study of medical billing data.

SAMPLE

The study sample included CAST patients (N = 490) who were propensity score matched to Medicare-enrolled autistic adults (N = 980) and privately insured autistic adults (N = 980) using demographic characteristics. The median age of subjects was 21 years old, 79% were male, and the median duration of observation was 2.2 years.

MAIN MEASURES

The primary outcome measure was the receipt of any preventive service, as defined by the Medicare Learning Network and AAPC (formerly the American Academy of Professional Coders). Secondary outcome measures included receipt of specific preventive service types (i.e., general health and wellness services, screenings, counseling and therapies, vaccinations, and sexual/reproductive health services).

KEY RESULTS

CAST patients had significantly greater odds of receiving any preventive service than Medicare-enrolled (OR = 10.3; 95% CI = 7.6-13.9) and privately insured (OR = 3.1; 95% CI = 2.3-4.2) autistic adults. CAST patients were also significantly more likely to receive screenings and vaccinations than either Medicare beneficiaries (screenings OR = 20.3; 95% CI = 14.7-28.0; vaccinations OR = 5.5; 95% CI = 4.3-7.0) or privately insured beneficiaries (screenings OR = 2.0; 95% CI = 1.6-2.5; vaccinations OR = 3.3; 95% CI = 2.6-4.1).

CONCLUSIONS

Autistic adults receiving care through CAST were significantly more likely to recieve preventive care services than national samples of autistic adults. Future comparative effectiveness trials are needed to rigorously assess the impact of primary care-based initiatives to improve care for autistic adults.

The Patient-centered Medical Home as an Intervention Strategy for Diabetes Mellitus: A Systematic Review of the Literature

BACKGROUND

Poorly managed diabetes mellitus increases health care expenditures and negatively impacts health outcomes. There are 34 million people living with diabetes in the United States with a direct annual medical cost of $237 billion. The patient-centered medical home (PCMH) was introduced to transform primary care by offering team-based care that is accessible, coordinated, and comprehensive. Although the PCMH is believed to address multiple gaps in delivering care to people living with chronic diseases, the research has not yet reported clear benefits for managing diabetes.

OBJECTIVE

The study reviews the scientific literature about diabetes mellitus outcomes reported by PCMHs, and understands the impact of team-based care, interdisciplinary communication, and care coordination strategies on the clinical, financial, and health-related outcomes.

METHODS

The systematic review was performed according to the Cochrane method and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. Eight databases were systematically searched for articles. The Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine Levels of evidence and the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme systematic review checklist were used to evaluate the studies.

RESULTS

The search resulted in 596 articles, of which 24 met all the inclusion criteria. Care management resulted in more screenings and better preventive care. Pharmacy-led interventions and technology were associated with positive clinical outcomes, decreased utilization, and cost savings. Most studies reported decreased emergency room visits and less inpatient admissions.

CONCLUSION

The quality and strength of the outcomes were largely inconclusive about the overall effectiveness of the PCMH. Defining and comparing concepts across studies was difficult as universal definitions specific to the PCMH were not often applied. More research is needed to unpack the care model of the PCMH to further understand how the individual key components, such as care bundles, contribute to improved outcomes. Further evaluations are needed for team-based care, communication, and care coordination with comparisons to patient, clinical, health, and financial outcomes.

Understanding how health systems facilitate primary care redesign

OBJECTIVE

To understand how health systems are facilitating primary care redesign (PCR), examine the PCR initiatives taking place within systems, and identify barriers to this work.

STUDY SETTING

A purposive sample of 24 health systems in 4 states.

STUDY DESIGN

Data were systematically reviewed to identify how system leaders define and implement initiatives to redesign primary care delivery and identify challenges. Researchers applied codes which were based on the theoretical PCR literature and created new codes to capture emerging themes. Investigators analyzed coded data then produced and applied a thematic analysis to examine how health systems facilitate PCR.

DATA COLLECTION

Semi-structured telephone interviews with 162 system executives and physician organization leaders from 24 systems.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

Leaders at all 24 health systems described initiatives to redesign the delivery of primary care, but many were in the early stages. Respondents described the use of centralized health system resources to facilitate PCR initiatives, such as regionalized care coordinators, and integrated electronic health records. Team-based care, population management, and care coordination were the most commonly described initiatives to transform primary care delivery. Respondents most often cited improving efficiency and enhancing clinician job satisfaction, as motivating factors for team-based care. Changes in payment and risk assumption as well as community needs were commonly cited motivators for population health management and care coordination. Return on investment and the slower than anticipated rate in moving from fee-for-service to value-based payment were noted by multiple respondents as challenges health systems face in redesigning primary care.

CONCLUSIONS

Given their expanding role in health care and the potential to leverage resources, health systems are promising entities to promote the advancement of PCR. Systems demonstrate interest and engagement in this work but face significant challenges in getting to scale until payment models are in alignment with these efforts.

The Effectiveness of Patient-Centred Medical Home-Based Models of Care versus Standard Primary Care in Chronic Disease Management: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomised and Non-Randomised Controlled Trials

Patient-centred care by a coordinated primary care team may be more effective than standard care in chronic disease management. We synthesised evidence to determine whether patient-centred medical home (PCMH)-based care models are more effective than standard general practitioner (GP) care in improving biomedical, hospital, and economic outcomes. MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Scopus were searched to identify randomised (RCTs) and non-randomised controlled trials that evaluated two or more principles of PCMH among primary care patients with chronic diseases. Study selection, data extraction, quality assessment using Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) appraisal tools, and grading of evidence using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach were conducted independently. A quantitative synthesis, where possible, was pooled using random effects models and the effect size estimates of standardised mean differences (SMDs) and odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals were reported. Of the 13,820 citations, we identified 78 eligible RCTs and 7 quasi trials which included 60,617 patients. The findings suggested that PCMH-based care was associated with significant improvements in depression episodes (SMD -0.24; 95% CI -0.35, -0.14; I2 = 76%) and increased odds of remission (OR 1.79; 95% CI 1.46, 2.21; I2 = 0%). There were significant improvements in the health-related quality of life (SMD 0.10; 95% CI 0.04, 0.15; I2 = 51%), self-management outcomes (SMD 0.24; 95% CI 0.03, 0.44; I2 = 83%), and hospital admissions (OR 0.83; 95% CI 0.70, 0.98; I2 = 0%). In terms of biomedical outcomes, with exception to total cholesterol, PCMH-based care led to significant improvements in blood pressure, glycated haemoglobin, and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol outcomes. The incremental cost of PCMH care was identified to be small and significantly higher than standard care (SMD 0.17; 95% CI 0.08, 0.26; I2 = 82%). The quality of individual studies ranged from "fair" to "good" by meeting at least 60% of items on the quality appraisal checklist. Additionally, moderate to high heterogeneity across studies in outcomes resulted in downgrading the included studies as moderate or low grade of evidence. PCMH-based care has been found to be superior to standard GP care in chronic disease management. Results of the review have important implications that may inform patient, practice, and policy-level changes.