Defining and Rating the Effectiveness of Enabling Services Using a Multi-stakeholder Expert Panel Approach

Enabling Services Improve Access To Care, Preventive Services, And Satisfaction Among Health Center Patients

Enabling services address a combination of social determinants of health and barriers to access to primary care and are intended to reduce health disparities. They include care coordination; health education; transportation; and assistance with obtaining food, shelter, and benefits. Empirical evidence of enabling services' potential contribution to health outcomes is limited, which impedes their widespread dissemination. We examined how the receipt of enabling services influenced patient health care outcomes based on a nationally representative survey of patients served in 2014 at health centers funded by the Health Resources and Services Administration. We compared enabling services users and nonusers and found that enabling services were associated with 1.92 more health center visits, an 11.78-percentage-point higher probability of getting a routine checkup, a 16.34-percentage-point higher likelihood of having had a flu shot, and a 7.63-percentage-point higher probability of patient satisfaction. Our results confirm the value of systematic delivery of enabling services in reducing access barriers and improving patient satisfaction.

A Modified Communication and Optimal Resolution Program for Intersystem Medical Error Discovery: Protocol for an Implementation Study

Background

Preventable medical errors represent a major public health problem. To prevent future errors, improve disclosure, and mitigate malpractice risks, organizations have adopted strategies for transparent communication and emphasized quality improvement through peer review. These principles are incorporated into the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) Communication and Optimal Resolution (CANDOR) Toolkit, which facilitates (1) transparent communication, (2) error prevention, and (3) achieving optimal resolution with patients and families; however, how medical errors should be addressed when they are discovered between systems—intersystem medical error discovery (IMED)—remains unclear. Without mechanisms for disclosure and feedback on the part of the discovering provider, uncertainty remains as to the extent to which IMED is communicated with patients or responsible providers. Furthermore, known barriers to disclosure and reporting one’s own error may not be relevant or may be replaced by other unknown barriers when considering scenarios of IMED.

Objective

This study aims to develop and test implementation of a modified CANDOR process for application to IMED scenarios.

Methods

We plan a series of studies following an implementation framework. First, we plan a participatory, consensus-building stakeholder panel process to develop the modified CANDOR process. We will then conduct a robust preimplementation analysis to identify determinants of implementation of the modified process. Using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research as a theoretical framework, we will assess organizational readiness by key informant interviews and individual-level behaviors by a survey. Findings from this analysis will inform the implementation toolkit that will be developed and pilot-tested at 2 cancer centers, sites where IMED is hypothesized to occur more frequently than other settings. We will measure 5 implementation outcomes (acceptability, appropriateness, reach, adoption, and feasibility) using a combination of key informant interviews and surveys over the pre- and postimplementation phases.

Results

This protocol was funded in August 2018 with support from the AHRQ. The University of Michigan Medical School Institutional Review Board has reviewed and approved the scope of activities described. As of April 2019, step 1 of aim 1 is underway, and aim 1 is projected to be completed by April 2020. Data collection is projected to begin in January 2020 for aim 2 and in August 2020 for aim 3.

Conclusions

Providing a communication and resolution strategy applicable to IMED scenarios will help address the current blind spot in the patient safety movement. This work will provide important insights into the potential utility of an implementation toolkit to improve transparent communication and optimal resolution of IMED scenarios. The natural progression of this work will be to test the toolkit more broadly, understand the feasibility and barriers of implementation on a broader scale, and pilot the implementation in new organizations.

International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)

PRR1-10.2196/13396

Patient-Centered Medical Home Recognition and Diabetes Control Among Health Centers: Exploring the Role of Enabling Services

The patient-centered medical home (PCMH) model has been considered a promising approach to improve chronic care delivery, particularly among patients with diabetes. There is theoretical support to suggest that certain nonmedical services, such as enabling services (eg, case management, social work, transportation), embedded within PCMH could be contributing to successful model implementation. It remains unclear whether PCMH recognition or enabling services are related to diabetes control. Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs) are an important setting in which to study this relationship given the considerable effort required to implement the PCMH model and the ubiquity of enabling services in these safety net settings. This cross-sectional, population-based study used 2012 data from the Health Resources and Services Administration's Uniform Data System and PCMH Recognition Initiative Dataset to determine whether PCMH recognition status was associated with diabetes control rates among FQHCs, while controlling for covariates including enabling services. The study linear regression model estimated that PCMH recognition was associated with a 1.5% increase in the proportion of patients with controlled diabetes (B = 0.015; 95% CI 0.002, 0.027). Clinic region, patient age, and race/ethnicity groups also were related to diabetes control; however, enabling services were not. These findings suggest there is a positive association between PCMH recognition and diabetes control rates among FQHCs. Future research, using data that accurately reflect the provision and utilization of PCMH primary care functions and related enabling services, is needed to fully understand the relationship between the PCMH model and population health measures such as diabetes control.

Disruptive Models in Primary Care: Caring for High-Needs, High-Cost Populations

Starfield and colleagues have suggested four overarching attributes of good primary care: "first-contact access for each need; long-term person- (not disease) focused care; comprehensive care for most health needs; and coordinated care when it must be sought elsewhere." As this series on reinventing primary care highlights, there is a compelling need for new care delivery models that would advance these objectives. This need is particularly urgent for high-needs, high-cost (HNHC) populations. By definition, HNHC patients require extensive attention and consume a disproportionate share of resources, and as a result they strain traditional office-based primary care practices. In this essay, we offer a clinical vignette highlighting the challenges of caring for HNHC populations. We then describe two categories of primary care-based approaches for managing HNHC populations: complex case management, and specialized clinics focused on HNHC patients. Although complex case management programs can be incorporated into or superimposed on the traditional primary care system, such efforts often fail to engage primary care clinicians and HNHC patients, and proven benefits have been modest to date. In contrast, specialized clinics for HNHC populations are more disruptive, as care for HNHC patients must be transferred to a multidisciplinary team that can offer enhanced care coordination and other support. Such specialized clinics may produce more substantial benefits, though rigorous evaluation of these programs is needed. We conclude by suggesting policy reforms to improve care for HNHC populations.

Testing an Adapted Modified Delphi Method

Background. The Affordable Care Act incentivizes health systems for better meeting patient needs, but often guidance about patient preferences for particular health services is limited. All too often vulnerable patient populations are excluded from these decision-making settings. A community-based participatory approach harnesses the in-depth knowledge of those experiencing barriers to health care. Method. We made three modifications to the RAND-UCLA appropriateness method, a modified Delphi approach, involving patients, adding an advisory council group to characterize existing knowledge in this little studied area, and using effectiveness rather than “appropriateness” as the basis for rating. As a proof of concept, we tested this method by examining the broadly delivered but understudied nonmedical services that community health centers provide. Results. This method created discrete, new knowledge about these services by defining 6 categories and 112 unique services and by prioritizing among these services based on effectiveness using a 9-point scale. Consistent with the appropriateness method, we found statistical convergence of ratings among the panelists. Discussion. Challenges include time commitment and adherence to a clear definition of effectiveness of services. This diverse stakeholder engagement method efficiently addresses gaps in knowledge about the effectiveness of health care services to inform population health management.