Medical Practice Variation Among Primary Care Physicians: 1 Decade, 14 Health Services, and 3,238,498 Patient-Years

Unveiling spatial disparities in basic medical and health services: insights from China's provincial analysis

Based on the panel data of 31 provinces (municipalities and autonomous regions) in China from 2012 to 2019, this paper constructs the evaluation index system of basic medical and health services in China from seven dimensions: medical and health facilities, health expenditure, medical services, traditional Chinese medicine hospital services, maternal and child health care, people's health and medical security, disease control and public health. The entropy method was used to measure the level of basic medical and health services in China, and its spatial differences and convergence characteristics were further investigated. In this study, we employ the entropy weight method, σ convergence, and β convergence as our primary methodologies. The entropy weight method is used to evaluate the variability of each indicator, determine the weights of indicators, and quantify the information content of the data. σ convergence illustrates the process by which the variance of a sample decreases over time. β convergence refers to the gradual approach of variables within an economic system towards their long-term equilibrium level over time. The results show that: (1) The scores of basic medical and health services in China's four major regions (including Northeast, East, Central and West) remain in a relatively stable state, with small fluctuations and great room for improvement; (2) There are significant regional differences in the level of basic medical and health services in China, and the intra-regional differences are much greater than the inter-regional differences; (3) There is no significant σ convergence observed in China and its four major regions; however, there is a notable presence of β convergence.

Unravelling the determinants of medical practice variation in referrals among primary care physicians: insights from a retrospective cohort study in Southern Israel

OBJECTIVES

Reducing medical practice variation (MPV) is a central theme of system improvement because it is associated with poor health outcomes, increased costs and disparities in care. This study aimed to estimate the extent to which each determinant (patient, physician, clinic) explains MPV among primary care physicians and to identify the characteristics of health services with a greater explained variance.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study of primary care physicians practising in non-private clinics of Clalit Health Services in Southern Israel, for longer than a year between 2011 and 2017 and with more than 100 adult patients per practice. We assessed the variation in referral rates among 17 health services and the proportion explained by each domain (patient, physician and clinic). We used generalised linear negative binomial mixed models and the Nakagawa's R2, computing the marginal r2.

RESULTS

The study included 243 physicians working in 295 practices and 139 clinics. The mean-explained variance was 28.5%±10.0%, where physician characteristics explained 4.5% of the variation. The intrapractice variation (within a single physician between the years) was explained better than the interphysician (between physicians). Health services with high explained variation were blood tests characterised by both low intrapractice variation (Rs=-0.65, p value=0.005) and high referral rates (Rs=0.46, p value=0.06).

CONCLUSION

Over 70% of MPV is not explained by the patient, clinic and physician demographic and professional characteristics. Future research should focus on the fraction of MPV that is explained by the physicians' psychological characteristics, and thus potentially identify psychological targets for behavioural modifications aimed at reducing MPV.

SARS-CoV-2 infection among patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases; comparison between the Delta and Omicron waves in Israel

OBJECTIVE

The Omicron variant of the coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) had milder clinical impacts than prior variants. This study aimed to describe the impact of COVID-19 on Autoimmune Rheumatic Disease (ARD) patients during the Delta and Omicron variants waves.

METHODS

We used data from Clalit Health Services (CHS), the largest health service in Israel. ARD patients diagnosed with COVID-19 between July 1, 2021, to December 1, 2021, were included in the Delta group. Patients diagnosed between December 2, 2021, to March 31, 2022, were included in the Omicron group based on the predominance of COVID-19 in Israel. The study outcomes were COVID-19-related hospitalization or death.

RESULTS

The final study cohort included 8443 actively treated ARD patients diagnosed with COVID-19. 1204 patients were positive during the predefined Delta variant period, and 7249 were positive during the predefined Omicron variant period). Compared to the Delta group, the Omicron group showed a lower rate of COVID-19-related hospitalization (3.9% vs. 1.3% for the Delta Vs. Omicron accordingly, p<0.001) and COVID-19-related death (3.2% vs. 1.1% for the Delta Vs. Omicron accordingly, p<0.001). After applying multivariable regression models, the Omicron group showed a lower risk for COVID-19-related hospitalization (Relative risk 0.4, 95% CI 0.27-0.59) and COVID-19-related mortality (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.31-0.75).

CONCLUSION

ARD patients infected with the COVID-19 Omicron variant had a lower risk of developing COVID-19-related adverse outcomes compared to the Delta variant.

Methodology paper for the General Medicine Inpatient Initiative Medical Education Database (GEMINI MedED): a retrospective cohort study of internal medicine resident case-mix, clinical care and patient outcomes

INTRODUCTION

Unwarranted variation in patient care among physicians is associated with negative patient outcomes and increased healthcare costs. Care variation likely also exists for resident physicians. Despite the global movement towards outcomes-based and competency-based medical education, current assessment strategies in residency do not routinely incorporate clinical outcomes. The widespread use of electronic health records (EHRs) may enable the implementation of in-training assessments that incorporate clinical care and patient outcomes.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The General Medicine Inpatient Initiative Medical Education Database (GEMINI MedED) is a retrospective cohort study of senior residents (postgraduate year 2/3) enrolled in the University of Toronto Internal Medicine (IM) programme between 1 April 2010 and 31 December 2020. This study focuses on senior IM residents and patients they admit overnight to four academic hospitals. Senior IM residents are responsible for overseeing all overnight admissions; thus, care processes and outcomes for these clinical encounters can be at least partially attributed to the care they provide. Call schedules from each hospital, which list the date, location and senior resident on-call, will be used to link senior residents to EHR data of patients admitted during their on-call shifts. Patient data will be derived from the GEMINI database, which contains administrative (eg, demographic and disposition) and clinical data (eg, laboratory and radiological investigation results) for patients admitted to IM at the four academic hospitals. Overall, this study will examine three domains of resident practice: (1) case-mix variation across residents, hospitals and academic year, (2) resident-sensitive quality measures (EHR-derived metrics that are partially attributable to resident care) and (3) variations in patient outcomes across residents and factors that contribute to such variation.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

GEMINI MedED was approved by the University of Toronto Ethics Board (RIS#39339). Results from this study will be presented in academic conferences and peer-reviewed journals.

BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine and booster in patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases: a national cohort study

INTRODUCTION

Emerging evidence supports the immunogenic response to mRNA COVID-19 vaccine in patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases (ARD). However, large-scale data about the association between vaccination, and COVID-19 outcomes in patients with ARD is limited.

METHODS

We used data from Clalit Health Services, which covers more than half of the population in Israel. Patients with ARD older than 18 were included between 20 December 2020 and 30 September 2021, when the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine, and later a third booster dose, were available. The primary outcome was a documented positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR test. We used a Cox regression models with vaccination status as time-dependent covariate and calculated the HR for the study outcome.

RESULTS

We included 127 928 patients with ARD, of whom, by the end of the study follow-up, there were 27 350 (21.3%) unvaccinated patients, 31 407 (24.5%) vaccinated patients and 69 171 (54.1%) patients who also received a third booster-dose. We identified 8470 (6.6%) patients with a positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR test during the study period. The HR for SARS-CoV-2 infection among the vaccination group was 0.143 (0.095 to 0.214, p<0.001), and among the booster group was 0.017 (0.009 to 0.035, p<0.001). Similar results were found regardless of the type of ARD group or antirheumatic therapy.

CONCLUSION

Our results indicate that both the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine and the booster are associated with better COVID-19 outcomes in patients with ARD.

Clinician Attitudes and Beliefs Associated with More Aggressive Diagnostic Testing

BACKGROUND

Variation in clinicians' diagnostic test utilization is incompletely explained by demographics and likely relates to cognitive characteristics. We explored clinician factors associated with diagnostic test utilization.

METHODS

We used a self-administered survey of attitudes, cognitive characteristics, and reported likelihood of test ordering in common scenarios; frequency of lipid and liver testing in patients on statin therapy. Participants were 552 primary care physicians, nurse practitioners, and physician assistants from practices in 8 US states across 3 regions, from June 1, 2018 to November 26, 2019. We measured Testing Likelihood Score: the mean of 4 responses to testing frequency and self-reported testing frequency in patients on statins.

RESULTS

Respondents were 52.4% residents, 36.6% attendings, and 11.0% nurse practitioners/physician assistants; most were white (53.6%) or Asian (25.5%). Median age was 32 years; 53.1% were female. Participants reported ordering tests for a median of 20% (stress tests) to 90% (mammograms) of patients; Testing Likelihood Scores varied widely (median 54%, interquartile range 43%-69%). Higher scores were associated with geography, training type, low numeracy, high malpractice fear, high medical maximizer score, high stress from uncertainty, high concern about bad outcomes, and low acknowledgment of medical uncertainty. More frequent testing of lipids and liver tests was associated with low numeracy, high medical maximizer score, high malpractice fear, and low acknowledgment of uncertainty.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinician variation in testing was common, with more aggressive testing consistently associated with low numeracy, being a medical maximizer, and low acknowledgment of uncertainty. Efforts to reduce undue variations in testing should consider clinician cognitive drivers.