Tools for Population Health Management

The association between population health management tools and clinician burnout in the United States VA primary care patient-centered medical home

BACKGROUND

Technological burden and medical complexity are significant drivers of clinician burnout. Electronic health record(EHR)-based population health management tools can be used to identify high-risk patient populations and implement prophylactic health practices. Their impact on clinician burnout, however, is not well understood. Our objective was to assess the relationship between ratings of EHR-based population health management tools and clinician burnout.

METHODS

We conducted cross-sectional analyses of 2018 national Veterans Health Administration(VA) primary care personnel survey, administered as an online survey to all VA primary care personnel (n = 4257, response rate = 17.7%), using bivariate and multivariate logistic regressions. Our analytical sample included providers (medical doctors, nurse practitioners, physicians' assistants) and nurses (registered nurses, licensed practical nurses). The outcomes included two items measuring high burnout. Primary predictors included importance ratings of 10 population health management tools (eg. VA risk prediction algorithm, recent hospitalizations and emergency department visits, etc.).

RESULTS

High ratings of 9 tools were associated with lower odds of high burnout, independent of covariates including VA tenure, team role, gender, ethnicity, staffing, and training. For example, clinicians who rated the risk prediction algorithm as important were less likely to report high burnout levels than those who did not use or did not know about the tool (OR 0.73; CI 0.61-0.87), and they were less likely to report frequent burnout (once per week or more) (OR 0.71; CI 0.60-0.84).

CONCLUSIONS

Burned-out clinicians may not consider the EHR-based tools important and may not be using them to perform care management. Tools that create additional technological burden may need adaptation to become more accessible, more intuitive, and less burdensome to use. Finding ways to improve the use of tools that streamline the work of population health management and/or result in less workload due to patients with poorly managed chronic conditions may alleviate burnout. More research is needed to understand the causal directional of the association between burnout and ratings of population health management tools.

Frontline perspectives on adoption and non-adoption of care management tools for high-risk patients in primary care

BACKGROUND

Population health management tools (PHMTs) embedded within electronic health records (EHR) could improve management of high-risk patients and reduce costs associated with potentially avoidable emergency department visits or hospitalizations. Adoption of PHMTs across the Veterans Health Administration (VA) has been variable and previous research suggests that understaffed primary care (PC) teams might not be using the tools.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective content analysis of open-text responses (n = 1804) from the VA's 2018 national primary care personnel survey to, 1) identify system-level and individual-level factors associated with why clinicians are not using the tools, and 2) to document clinicians' recommendations to improve tool adoption.

RESULTS

We found three themes pertaining to low adoption and/or tool use: 1) IT burden and administrative tasks (e.g., manually mailing letters to patients), 2) staffing shortages (e.g., nurses covering multiple teams), and 3) no training or difficulty using the tools (e.g., not knowing how to access the tools or use the data). Frontline clinician recommendations included automating some tasks, reconfiguring team roles to shift administrative work away from providers and nurses, consolidating PHMTs into a centralized, easily accessible repository, and providing training.

CONCLUSIONS

Healthcare system-level factors (staffing) and individual-level factors (lack of training) can limit adoption of PHMTs that could be useful for reducing costs and improving patient outcomes. Future research, including qualitative interviews with clinicians who use/don't use the tools, could help develop interventions to address barriers to adoption.

IMPLICATIONS

Shifting more administrative tasks to clerical staff would free up clinician time for population health management but may not be possible for understaffed PC teams. Additionally, healthcare systems may be able to increase PHMT use by making them more easily accessible through the electronic health record and providing training in their use.

Online health management continuance and the moderating effect of service type and age difference: A meta-analysis

Numerous empirical studies have been carried out to explore factors of online health management continuance. However, results were not unified. We thus conducted a meta-analysis to identify influential factors and potential moderators. A systematic literature search was performed in nine databases (PubMed, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, Ovid of JBI, CINAHL, Embase, CNKI, VIP, and CBM) published up to December 2020 in the English or Chinese language. Meta-analysis of combined effect size, heterogeneity, moderator analysis, publication bias assessment, and inter-rater reliability was conducted. Totally 41 studies and 12 pairwise relationships were identified. Confirmation, perceived usefulness, satisfaction, information quality, service quality, perceived ease of use, and trust were all critical predictors. Service type and age difference showed their moderating effects respectively. The perceived usefulness was more noteworthy in medical service than health and fitness service. The trust was more noteworthy in young adults. The results confirmed the validity and robustness of the Expectation Confirmation Model, Information Systems Success Model, and trust theory in online health management continuance. Moderators included but are not limited to age difference and service type. The elderly research in the healthcare context and other analytical methods such as qualitative comparative analysis should be applied in the future.

Novel Digital Technologies for Blood Pressure Monitoring and Hypertension Management

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Hypertension is common, impacting an estimated 108 million US adults, and deadly, responsible for the deaths of one in six adults annually. Optimal management includes frequent blood pressure monitoring and antihypertensive medication titration, but in the traditional office-based care delivery model, patients have their blood pressure measured only intermittently and in a way that is subject to misdiagnosis with white coat or masked hypertension. There is a growing opportunity to leverage our expanding repository of digital technology to reimagine hypertension care delivery. This paper reviews existing and emerging digital tools available for hypertension management, as well as behavioral economic insights that could supercharge their impact.

RECENT FINDINGS

Digitally connected blood pressure monitors offer an alternative to office-based blood pressure monitoring. A number of cuffless blood pressure monitors are in development but require further validation before they can be deployed for widespread clinical use. Patient-facing hubs and applications offer a means to transmit blood pressure data to clinicians. Though artificial intelligence could allow for curation of this data, its clinical use for hypertension remains limited to assessing risk factors at this time. Finally, text-based and telemedicine platforms are increasingly being employed to translate hypertension data into clinical outcomes with promising results.

SUMMARY

The digital management of hypertension shows potential as an avenue for increasing patient engagement and improving clinical efficiency and outcomes. It is important for clinicians to understand the benefits, limitations, and future directions of digital health to optimize management of hypertension.