Team-Based Primary Care Practice Transformation Initiative and Changes in Patient Experience and Recommended Cancer Screening Rates

The Impact of Pandemic-Driven Care Redesign on Hospital Efficiency

Purpose

This study aims to identify medical care transformations during the COVID-19 pandemic and to assess the economic efficiency of these care transformations.

Methods

A systematic review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviewing and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. The databases used in the search protocol included PubMed, RSCI, and Google Scholar.

Results

Ten eligible studies in English and one publication in Russian were identified. In general, the following changes in organization of health care processes since 2020 are observed: hospital at home, telemedicine (physician-to-patient), and the adoption of new information communication technologies within physician-to-physician and physician-to-nurse communication. Earlier trends, such as (a) wider use of electronic devices, (b) adoption of Lean techniques, (c) the incorporation of patient and other customer experience feedback, and (d) the implementation of clinical decision support systems and automation of workflow, tend to be preserved.

Conclusion

The most common changes in hospital care organization and the respective impacts of workflow changes (ie, workflow interventions, redesign, and transformations) on the efficiency of hospital care were summarized and avenues for future research and policy implications were discussed. The pandemic demonstrated a need for building more resilient and adaptive healthcare systems, enhancing crisis preparedness along with rapid and effective responses.

Social determinants of health and US cancer screening interventions: A systematic review

There remains a need to synthesize linkages between social determinants of health (SDOH) and cancer screening to reduce persistent inequities contributing to the US cancer burden. The authors conducted a systematic review of US-based breast, cervical, colorectal, and lung cancer screening intervention studies to summarize how SDOH have been considered in interventions and relationships between SDOH and screening. Five databases were searched for peer-reviewed research articles published in English between 2010 and 2021. The Covidence software platform was used to screen articles and extract data using a standardized template. Data items included study and intervention characteristics, SDOH intervention components and measures, and screening outcomes. The findings were summarized using descriptive statistics and narratives. The review included 144 studies among diverse population groups. SDOH interventions increased screening rates overall by a median of 8.4 percentage points (interquartile interval, 1.8-18.8 percentage points). The objective of most interventions was to increase community demand (90.3%) and access (84.0%) to screening. SDOH interventions related to health care access and quality were most prevalent (227 unique intervention components). Other SDOH, including educational, social/community, environmental, and economic factors, were less common (90, 52, 21, and zero intervention components, respectively). Studies that included analyses of health policy, access to care, and lower costs yielded the largest proportions of favorable associations with screening outcomes. SDOH were predominantly measured at the individual level. This review describes how SDOH have been considered in the design and evaluation of cancer screening interventions and effect sizes for SDOH interventions. Findings may guide future intervention and implementation research aiming to reduce US screening inequities.

Organizational Factors Associated with Guideline Concordance of Chronic Disease Care and Management Practices

BACKGROUND

Guidelines for managing and preventing chronic disease tend to be well-known. Yet, translation of this evidence into practice is inconsistent. We identify a combination of factors that are connected to guideline concordant delivery of evidence-informed chronic disease care in primary care.

METHODS

Cross-sectional observational study; purposively selected 22 practices to vary on size, ownership and geographic location, using National Quality Forum metrics to ensure practices had a ≥ 70% quality level for at least 2 of the following: aspirin use in high-risk individuals, blood pressure control, cholesterol and diabetes management. Interviewed 2 professionals (eg, medical director, practice manager) per practice (n = 44) to understand staffing and clinical operations. Analyzed data using an iterative and inductive approach.

RESULTS

Community Health Centers (CHCs) employed interdisciplinary clinical teams that included a variety of professionals as compared with hospital-health systems (HHS) and clinician-owned practices. Despite this difference, practice members consistently reported a number of functions that may be connected to clinical chronic care quality, including: having engaged leadership; a culture of teamwork; engaging in team-based care; using data to inform quality improvement; empaneling patients; and managing the care of patient panels, with a focus on continuity and comprehensiveness, as well as having a commitment to the community.

CONCLUSIONS

There are mutable organizational attributes connected-guideline concordant chronic disease care in primary care. Research and policy reform are needed to promote and study how to achieve widespread adoption of these functions and organizational attributes that may be central to achieving equity and improving chronic disease prevention.