Measuring and Improving Evidence-Based Patient Care Using a Web-Based Gamified Approach in Primary Care (QualityIQ): Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Unwarranted variability in clinical practice is a challenging problem in practice today, leading to poor outcomes for patients and low-value care for providers, payers, and patients.

OBJECTIVE

In this study, we introduced a novel tool, QualityIQ, and determined the extent to which it helps primary care physicians to align care decisions with the latest best practices included in the Merit-Based Incentive Payment System (MIPS).

METHODS

We developed the fully automated QualityIQ patient simulation platform with real-time evidence-based feedback and gamified peer benchmarking. Each case included workup, diagnosis, and management questions with explicit evidence-based scoring criteria. We recruited practicing primary care physicians across the United States into the study via the web and conducted a cross-sectional study of clinical decisions among a national sample of primary care physicians, randomized to continuing medical education (CME) and non-CME study arms. Physicians "cared" for 8 weekly cases that covered typical primary care scenarios. We measured participation rates, changes in quality scores (including MIPS scores), self-reported practice change, and physician satisfaction with the tool. The primary outcomes for this study were evidence-based care scores within each case, adherence to MIPS measures, and variation in clinical decision-making among the primary care providers caring for the same patient.

RESULTS

We found strong, scalable engagement with the tool, with 75% of participants (61 non-CME and 59 CME) completing at least 6 of 8 total cases. We saw significant improvement in evidence-based clinical decisions across multiple conditions, such as diabetes (+8.3%, P<.001) and osteoarthritis (+7.6%, P=.003) and with MIPS-related quality measures, such as diabetes eye examinations (+22%, P<.001), depression screening (+11%, P<.001), and asthma medications (+33%, P<.001). Although the CME availability did not increase enrollment in the study, participants who were offered CME credits were more likely to complete at least 6 of the 8 cases.

CONCLUSIONS

Although CME availability did not prove to be important, the short, clinically detailed case simulations with real-time feedback and gamified peer benchmarking did lead to significant improvements in evidence-based care decisions among all practicing physicians.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03800901; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03800901.

Development and pilot of Case Manager: a virtual-patient experience for veterinary students

There is an increasing demand in veterinary education to engage students, teach and reinforce clinical reasoning, and provide access anytime/anywhere to quality learning opportunities. In addition, accrediting bodies are asking for more concrete documentation of essential clinical-skills outcomes. Unfortunately, during the clinical year in a referral hospital setting, students are at the mercy of chance regarding the types of cases they will encounter and the opportunities they will have to participate. Patient- and case-simulation technology is becoming more popular as a way to achieve these objectives in human and veterinary medical education. Many of the current options available to the veterinary medical education community to develop virtual-patient cases are too time-consuming, cost prohibitive, or difficult for the instructor or learner to use. In response, we developed a learning tool, Case Manager, which is low-cost and user-friendly. Case Manager was designed to meet the demands of veterinary education by providing students with an opportunity to cultivate clinical reasoning skills and allowing for real-time student feedback. We launched a pilot test with 37 senior veterinary medical students as part of their Small Animal Internal Medicine clinical rotation. Students reported that Case Manager increased their engagement with the material, improved diagnostic and problem-solving skills, and broadened their exposure to a variety of cases. In addition, students felt that Case Manager was superior to a more traditional, less interactive case presentation format.

Imposter Phenomenon in Pediatric Residency: An Empirical Simulation-Based Educational Study

The imposter phenomenon (IP) may have a negative impact on the ability of healthcare providers to make difficult and accurate decisions. This study presents an empirical approach, segregating the real imposters based on a simulation, and aims to investigate the prevalence and severity of IP and evaluate the attitude in the decision-making process of pediatric residents with impostorism. A simulation-based case study with the 113 pediatric residents was performed with the Clance Imposter Phenomenon Scale to identify IP scores and appropriate management skills for the case. The collected data were divided and combined into different categories based on the IP scale scores and the success of case management to further detect how real imposters were affected. Our study revealed that 24 (21.2%) of residents have moderate, 33 (25.7%) of residents have frequent, and 29 (29.2%) of residents have intense impostorism feelings. The imposter scores were found to be higher among female participants (P = .006). However, when considering the prevalence of significant impostorism (defined as both frequent and intense), there was no statistically significant difference between females and males (P = .088). The data indicated that an increase in IP scores was associated with a higher likelihood of delayed pressing the help button for both the overall and post-exclusion groups (P < .001). The analysis also revealed a significant correlation and a monotonic-linear trend between IP scores and the decision-making process, even after excluding the unsuccessful participants (P < .001). This is the first study to demonstrate the prevalence of IP among pediatric residents, potentially leading to challenges in patient care and resulting in delayed decisionmaking and self-doubt with feelings of inadequacy. The findings support the claim that higher imposter scores are associated with a greater tendency to seek help from more experienced individuals, even when fully capable of managing cases independently. This emphasizes the importance of awareness about the IP, as these factors can directly impact both the well-being of trainees and patient care outcomes.