Adherence to Cardiovascular Disease Medications: Does Patient-Provider Race/Ethnicity and Language Concordance Matter?

BACKGROUND: Patient–physician race/ethnicity and language concordance may improve medication adherence and reduce disparities in cardiovascular disease (CVD) by fostering trust and improved patient–physician communication. OBJECTIVE: To examine the association of patient race/ethnicity and language and patient–physician race/ethnicity and language concordance on medication adherence rates for a large cohort of diabetes patients in an integrated delivery system. DESIGN: We studied 131,277 adult diabetes patients in Kaiser Permanente Northern California in 2005. Probit models assessed the effect of patient and physician race/ethnicity and language on adherence to CVD medications, after controlling for patient and physician characteristics. RESULTS: Ten percent of African American, 11 % of Hispanic, 63% of Asian, and 47% of white patients had same race/ethnicity physicians.24% of Spanish-speaking patients were linguistically concordant with their physicians. African American (46%), Hispanic (49%) and Asian (52%) patients were significantly less likely than white patients (58%) to be in good adherence to all of their CVD medications (p<0.001). Spanish-speaking patients were less likely than English speaking patients to be in good adherence (51%versus 57%, p<0.001). Race concordance for African American patients was associated with adherence to all their CVD medications (53% vs. 50%, p<0.05). Language concordance was associated with medication adherence for Spanish-speaking patients (51% vs. 45%, p<0.05). CONCLUSION: Increasing opportunities for patient– physician race/ethnicity and language concordance may improve medication adherence for African American and Spanish-speaking patients, though a similar effect was not observed for Asian patients or Englishproficient Hispanic patients

Improving Treatment Intensification to Reduce Cardiovascular Disease Risk: A Cluster Randomized Trial

Background: Blood pressure, lipid, and glycemic control are essential for reducing cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk. Many health care systems have successfully shifted aspects of chronic disease management, including population-based outreach programs designed to address CVD risk factor control, to non-physicians. The purpose of this study is to evaluate provision of new information to non-physician outreach teams on need for treatment intensification in patients with increased CVD risk. Methods Cluster randomized trial (July 1-December 31, 2008) in Kaiser Permanente Northern California registry of members with diabetes mellitus, prior CVD diagnoses and/or chronic kidney disease who were high-priority for treatment intensification: blood pressure ≥ 140 mmHg systolic, LDL-cholesterol ≥ 130 mg/dl, or hemoglobin A1c ≥ 9%; adherent to current medications; no recent treatment intensification). Randomization units were medical center-based outreach teams (4 intervention; 4 control). For intervention teams, priority flags for intensification were added monthly to the registry database with recommended next pharmacotherapeutic steps for each eligible patient. Control teams used the same database without this information. Outcomes included 3-month rates of treatment intensification and risk factor levels during follow-up. Results: Baseline risk factor control rates were high (82-90%). In eligible patients, the intervention was associated with significantly greater 3-month intensification rates for blood pressure (34.1 vs. 30.6%) and LDL-cholesterol (28.0 vs 22.7%), but not A1c. No effects on risk factors were observed at 3 months or 12 months follow-up. Intervention teams initiated outreach for only 45-47% of high-priority patients, but also for 27-30% of lower-priority patients. Teams reported difficulties adapting prior outreach strategies to incorporate the new information. Conclusions: Information enhancement did not improve risk factor control compared to existing outreach strategies at control centers. Familiarity with prior, relatively successful strategies likely reduced uptake of the innovation and its potential for success at intervention centers. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT0051768

Improving treatment intensification to reduce cardiovascular disease risk: a cluster randomized trial

Abstract Background Blood pressure, lipid, and glycemic control are essential for reducing cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk. Many health care systems have successfully shifted aspects of chronic disease management, including population-based outreach programs designed to address CVD risk factor control, to non-physicians. The purpose of this study is to evaluate provision of new information to non-physician outreach teams on need for treatment intensification in patients with increased CVD risk. Methods Cluster randomized trial (July 1-December 31, 2008) in Kaiser Permanente Northern California registry of members with diabetes mellitus, prior CVD diagnoses and/or chronic kidney disease who were high-priority for treatment intensification: blood pressure ≥ 140 mmHg systolic, LDL-cholesterol ≥ 130 mg/dl, or hemoglobin A1c ≥ 9%; adherent to current medications; no recent treatment intensification). Randomization units were medical center-based outreach teams (4 intervention; 4 control). For intervention teams, priority flags for intensification were added monthly to the registry database with recommended next pharmacotherapeutic steps for each eligible patient. Control teams used the same database without this information. Outcomes included 3-month rates of treatment intensification and risk factor levels during follow-up. Results Baseline risk factor control rates were high (82-90%). In eligible patients, the intervention was associated with significantly greater 3-month intensification rates for blood pressure (34.1 vs. 30.6%) and LDL-cholesterol (28.0 vs 22.7%), but not A1c. No effects on risk factors were observed at 3 months or 12 months follow-up. Intervention teams initiated outreach for only 45-47% of high-priority patients, but also for 27-30% of lower-priority patients. Teams reported difficulties adapting prior outreach strategies to incorporate the new information. Conclusions Information enhancement did not improve risk factor control compared to existing outreach strategies at control centers. Familiarity with prior, relatively successful strategies likely reduced uptake of the innovation and its potential for success at intervention centers. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT00517686http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/112310/1/12913_2012_Article_2076.pd

Differences in reproductive risk factors for breast cancer in middle-aged women in Marin County, California and a sociodemographically similar area of Northern California

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The Northern California county of Marin (MC) has historically had high breast cancer incidence rates. Because of MC's high socioeconomic status (SES) and racial homogeneity (non-Hispanic White), it has been difficult to assess whether these elevated rates result from a combination of established risk factors or other behavioral or environmental factors. This survey was designed to compare potential breast cancer risks and incidence rates for a sample of middle-aged MC women with those of a demographically similar population.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A random sample of 1500 middle-aged female members of a large Northern California health plan, half from Marin County (MC) and half from a comparison area in East/Central Contra Costa County (ECCC), were mailed a survey covering family history, reproductive history, use of oral contraceptives (OC) and hormone replacement therapy (HRT), behavioral health risks, recency of breast screening, and demographic characteristics. Weighted data were used to compare prevalence of individual breast cancer risk factors and Gail scores. Age-adjusted cumulative breast cancer incidence rates (2000–2004) were also calculated for female health plan members aged 40–64 residing in the two geographic areas.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Survey response was 57.1% (n = 427) and 47.9% (n = 359) for MC and ECCC samples, respectively. Women in the two areas were similar in SES, race, obesity, exercise frequency, current smoking, ever use of OCs and HRT, age at onset of menarche, high mammography rates, family history of breast cancer, and Gail scores. However, MC women were significantly more likely than ECCC women to be former smokers (43.6% vs. 31.2%), have Ashkenazi Jewish heritage (12.8% vs. 7.1%), have no live births before age 30 (52.7% vs. 40.8%), and be nulliparous (29.2% vs. 15.4%), and less likely to never or rarely consume alcohol (34.4% vs. 41.9%). MC and ECCC women had comparable 2000–2004 invasive breast cancer incidence rates.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The effects of reproductive risks factors, Ashkenazi Jewish heritage, smoking history, and alcohol consumption with regard to breast cancer risk in Marin County should be further evaluated. When possible, future comparisons of breast cancer incidence rates between regions should adjust for differences in income and education in addition to age and race/ethnicity, preferably by using a sociodemographically similar comparison group.</p

Which Complex Patients Should Be Referred for Intensive Care Management? A Mixed-Methods Analysis

BACKGROUND:A large and increasing proportion of health care costs are spent caring for a small segment of medically and socially complex patients. To date, it has been difficult to identify which patients are best served by intensive care management. OBJECTIVE:To characterize factors that best identify which complex patients are most suited for intensive care management. DESIGN:We conducted a mixed-methods study involving 35 care managers (CMs; 10 licensed social workers and 25 registered nurses) working in intensive care management programs within Kaiser Permanente Northern California (KPNC) outpatient medical centers. We asked CMs to review a randomly selected list of up to 50 patients referred to them in the prior year and to categorize each patient as either (1) "good candidates" for care management, (2) "not needing" intensive care management, or (3) "needing more" than traditional care management could provide. We then conducted semi-structured interviews to understand how CMs separated patients into these three groups. RESULTS:CMs assigned 1178 patients into the 3 referral categories. Less than two thirds (62%, n = 736) of referred patients were considered good candidates, with 18% (n = 216) categorized as not needing care management and 19% (n = 226) as needing more. Compared to the other two categories, good candidates were older (76.2&nbsp;years vs. 73.2 for not needing and 69.8 for needing more, p &lt; 0.001), prescribed more medications (p = 0.02) and had more prior year outpatient visits (p = 0.04), while the number of prior year hospital and emergency room admissions were greater than not needing but less than needing more (p &lt; 0.001). A logistic regression model using available electronic record data predicted good candidate designation with a c statistic of 0.75. Several qualitative themes emerged that helped define appropriateness for referral, including availability of social support, patient motivation, non-medical transitions, recent trajectory of medical condition, and psychiatric or substance use issues. CONCLUSION:Many apparently complex patients are not good candidates for intensive care management. Current electronic medical records do not capture several of the most salient characteristics that determine appropriateness for care management. Our findings suggest that systematic collection of social support, patient motivation, and recent non-medically related life change information may help identify which complex patients are most likely to benefit from care management

The predictors of patient-physician race and ethnic concordance: a medical facility fixed-effects approach.

ObjectiveTo examine the predictors of patient-physician race/ethnicity concordance among diabetes patients in an integrated delivery system.Data sourceKaiser Permanente's Northern California Diabetes Registry of 2005.Study designLogistic regression predicted concordance for each racial/ethnic group. Availability of a concordant physician, whether a patient chose their physician, and patient language were main explanatory variables.Data collection/extraction methodsThe study population consisted of 109,745 patients and 1,750 physicians.Principal findingsPatients who chose their physicians were more likely to have a same race/ethnicity physician with OR of 2.2 (95 percent CI 1.74-2.82) for African American patients, 1.71 (95 percent CI 1.44-2.04) for Hispanic patients, 1.11 (95 percent CI 1.04-1.18) for white patients, and 1.38 (95 percent CI 1.23, 1.55) for Asian patients. Availability of a same race/ethnicity physician was also a predictor of concordance for African American patients (OR 2.7; 95 percent CI 2.45-2.98) and marginally significant for Hispanic patients (OR 1.02; 95 percent CI 1.01-1.02), white patients (OR 1.02; 95 percent CI 1.00-1.04), and Asian patients (OR 1.05; 95 percent CI 1.03, 1.07). Limited English language was a strong predictor of concordance for Hispanic patients (OR 4.81; 95 percent CI 4.2-5.51) and Asian patients (OR 9.8; 95 percent CI 7.7, 12.6).ConclusionPatient language, preferences, and the racial composition of the physician workforce predict race/ethnicity concordance