Physician versus Practice-Level Primary Care Continuity and Association with Outcomes in Medicare Beneficiaries

Measuring continuity in primary care: how it is done and why it matters

Continuity of care (COC) is a foundational element of primary care and is associated with improved patient satisfaction and health outcomes and decreased total cost of care. The patient-physician relationship is highly valued by both parties and is often the reason providers choose to specialize in primary care. In some settings, such as outpatient residency clinics, however, patients may only see their primary care provider (PCP) 50% or less of the time. Considering the many benefits of COC for patients and providers, there is a clear need for us in primary care to understand how to compare different COC measures across studies and how to choose the best COC measure when conducting quality improvement efforts. However, at least 32 different measures have been used to evaluate COC. The manifold variations for measuring COC arise from data source restrictions, purpose (research or clinical use), perspective (patient or provider), and patient visit frequency/type. Key factors distinguishing common COC formulas are data source (e.g. claims data or electronic medical records), and whether a PCP is identifiable. There is no "right" formula, so understanding the nuances of COC measurement is essential for primary care research and clinical quality improvement. While the full complexity of COC cannot be captured by formulas and indices, they provide an important measure of how consistently patients are interacting with the same provider.

The Value of Using a Quality Assurance Follow-Up Team to Address Incidental Findings After Emergency Department or Urgent Care Discharge: A Cost Analysis

BACKGROUND

Incidental finding (IF) follow-up is of critical importance for patient safety and is a source of malpractice risk. Laboratory, imaging, or other types of IFs are often uncovered incidentally and are missed, not addressed, or only result after hospital discharge. Despite a growing IF notification literature, a need remains to study cost-effective non-electronic health record (EHR)-specific solutions that can be used across different types of IFs and EHRs.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to evaluate the utility and cost-effectiveness of an EHR-independent emergency medicine-based quality assurance (QA) follow-up program in which an experienced nurse reviewed laboratory and imaging studies and ensured appropriate follow-up of results.

METHODS

A QA nurse reviewed preceding-day abnormal studies from a tertiary care hospital, a community hospital, and an urgent care center. Laboratory values outside preset parameters or radiology over-reads resulting in clinically actionable changes triggered contact with an on-call emergency physician to determine an appropriate intervention and its implementation.

RESULTS

Of 104,125 visits with 1,351,212 laboratory studies and 95,000 imaging studies, 6530 visits had IFs, including 2659 laboratory and 4004 imaging results. The most common intervention was contacting a primary care physician (5783 cases [88.6%]). Twenty-one cases resulted in a patient returning to the ED, at an average cost of $28,000 per potential life-/limb-saving intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

Although abnormalities in laboratory results and imaging are often incidental to patient care, a dedicated emergency department QA follow-up program resulted in the identification and communication of numerous laboratory and imaging abnormalities and may result in changes to patients' subsequent clinical course, potentially increasing patient safety.

The Queensland Virtual Integrated Practice (VIP) partnership program pilot study: an Australian-first model of care to support rural general practice

BACKGROUND

There is a critical lack of medical workforce internationally, and this is particularly notable in rural and remote Australia where strategies to address workforce shortages are urgently required. This pilot study aimed to implement and evaluate a Virtual Integrated Practice (VIP) Program in the Australian rural primary care setting.

METHODS

The VIP model was developed using co-creation methodology and involves an urban GP joining a rural general practice team to provide ongoing care to patients remotely via secure telehealth. The pilot study was conducted in two western Queensland general practices, commencing in October 2021 with one rural practice and extending to an additional rural practice from November 2022. Evaluation included a retrospective review of service, billing and cost data, and an online survey for patients. Ethical approval was obtained from the University of Queensland Human Research Ethics Committee (Project number: 2021/HE002434).

RESULTS

There were 1468 services provided through to December 2022, including general consults (n = 1197), therapeutic procedures (n = 68), mental health treatment plans (n = 68) and chronic disease management plans (n = 59). Patients were predominantly female (73.1%) and did not have their appointment at the practice (57.8%). Among 1282 occasions of service, less than 20% of consultations (n = 224) required support from staff (e.g., a nurse), and more than half were repeat patient encounters (53.0%). Survey respondents (n = 45) indicated that they were satisfied (9.3%) or highly satisfied (90.7%) with the care provided, and importantly, 95.5% of respondents reported that the service improved their access to the GP. More than 20% of respondents indicated that they would attend the Emergency Department if virtual care was not available.

CONCLUSIONS

Data from this pilot study has informed translation to an additional 20 vulnerable rural general practices in three further rural regions in Queensland in 2023 and evaluation is ongoing. This pilot study demonstrates the feasibility and acceptability of an innovative, digitally supported community-focussed, healthcare initiative to arrest the decline in rural general practice workforce, improve patient care access and support rural practice viability.

Estimating the Primary Care Workforce for Medicare Beneficiaries Using an Activity-Based Approach

BACKGROUND

The enumeration of the primary care workforce relies on potentially inaccurate specialty designations sourced from licensure registries and clinician surveys.

OBJECTIVE

To use an activity-based measure of primary care to estimate the number of physicians, nurse practitioners (NPs), and physician assistants (PAs) providing primary care to Medicare beneficiaries.

DESIGN

Observational study using Medicare fee-for-service (FFS) claims data.

SUBJECTS

All clinicians in the US billing Medicare in 2019 and their fee-for-service Medicare patients.

MAIN MEASURES

We construct three measures that together distinguish primary care from specialty clinicians: (1) presence of evaluation and management (E&M) services in a setting consistent with primary care, (2) the dispersion of clinical care across International Classification of Diseases-10 (ICD-10) chapters, and (3) the extent of provided services that are atypical of primary care (e.g., surgical procedure). We apply parameters to the measures to identify the clinicians likely providing primary care and compare the resulting classifications across provider type.

KEY RESULTS

Of physicians with at least 50 Medicare beneficiaries, 19-22% provide primary care. Of medical generalists (i.e., family medicine, internal medicine) with at least 50 beneficiaries, 61-68% provide primary care. We estimate that 40-45% of NPs and 27-30% of PAs meeting the panel size threshold are primary care providers in FFS Medicare.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that based on a primary care practice style, the number of primary care physicians in FFS Medicare is likely smaller than conventional estimates. However, compared to prior estimates, the number of primary care NPs is larger and the number of PAs is similar.

What Humans Need

Family medicine is a champion of human-focused health care in the context of lasting relationships. What do humans need-those who seek care and those who offer it? Respect, understanding, and kindness. Without it, more money, more ancillary personnel, more time-saving technology cannot lift us from the profession's doldrums. The author believes that the deep desire to be of help to others can be rekindled in an office culture where the humanity in all of us is honored.