A “Behind-the-Scenes” Look at Interprofessional Care Coordination: How Person-Centered Care in Safety-Net Health System Complex Care Clinics Produce Better Outcomes

Introduction: While the effectiveness of team-based care and wrap-around services for high utilizers is clear, how complex care clinics deliver effective, person-centered care to these vulnerable populations is not well understood. This paper describes how interactions among interprofessional team members enabled individualized, rapid responses to the complex needs of vulnerable patients at the Virginia Commonwealth University Health System’s Complex Care Clinic. Methods: Researchers attended twenty weekly care coordination meetings, audio-recorded the proceedings, and wrote brief observational field notes. Researchers also qualitatively interviewed ten clinic team members. Emergent coding based on grounded theory and a consensus process were used to identify and describe key themes. Results: Analysis resulted in three themes that evidence the structures, processes, and interactions which contributed to the ability to provide person-centred care: team-based communication strategies, interprofessional problem-solving, and personalized patient engagement efforts. Conclusion: Our study suggests that in care coordination meetings team members were able to strategize, brainstorm, and reflect on how to better care for patients. Specifically, flexible team leadership opened an inter-disciplinary communicative space to foster conversations, which revealed connections between the physical, and socio-emotional components of patients’ lives and hidden factors undermining progress, while proactive strategies prevented patient’s rapid deterioration and unnecessary use of inappropriate health services

Designing a patient-centered personal health record to promote preventive care

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Evidence-based preventive services offer profound health benefits, yet Americans receive only half of indicated care. A variety of government and specialty society policy initiatives are promoting the adoption of information technologies to engage patients in their care, such as personal health records, but current systems may not utilize the technology's full potential.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Using a previously described model to make information technology more patient-centered, we developed an interactive preventive health record (IPHR) designed to more deeply engage patients in preventive care and health promotion. We recruited 14 primary care practices to promote the IPHR to all adult patients and sought practice and patient input in designing the IPHR to ensure its usability, salience, and generalizability. The input involved patient usability tests, practice workflow observations, learning collaboratives, and patient feedback. Use of the IPHR was measured using practice appointment and IPHR databases.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The IPHR that emerged from this process generates tailored patient recommendations based on guidelines from the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force and other organizations. It extracts clinical data from the practices' electronic medical record and obtains health risk assessment information from patients. Clinical content is translated and explained in lay language. Recommendations review the benefits and uncertainties of services and possible actions for patients and clinicians. Embedded in recommendations are self management tools, risk calculators, decision aids, and community resources - selected to match patient's clinical circumstances. Within six months, practices had encouraged 14.4% of patients to use the IPHR (ranging from 1.5% to 28.3% across the 14 practices). Practices successfully incorporated the IPHR into workflow, using it to prepare patients for visits, augment health behavior counseling, explain test results, automatically issue patient reminders for overdue services, prompt clinicians about needed services, and formulate personalized prevention plans.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The IPHR demonstrates that a patient-centered personal health record that interfaces with the electronic medical record can give patients a high level of individualized guidance and be successfully adopted by busy primary care practices. Further study and refinement are necessary to make information systems even more patient-centered and to demonstrate their impact on care.</p> <p>Trial Registration</p> <p>Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: <a href="http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00589173">NCT00589173</a></p

Elements of the Patient-Centered Medical Home in Family Practices in Virginia

PURPOSE The patient-centered medical home (PCMH) is a widely accepted theory of a practice model to improve quality of care, patient satisfaction, and access to primary care services. This study explores existing elements of the PCMH and characteristics of family practices in Virginia

A String of Mistakes: The Importance of Cascade Analysis in Describing, Counting, and Preventing Medical Errors

BACKGROUND Notions about the most common errors in medicine currently rest on conjecture and weak epidemiologic evidence. We sought to determine whether cascade analysis is of value in clarifying the epidemiology and causes of errors and whether physician reports are sensitive to the impact of errors on patients. METHODS Eighteen US family physicians participating in a 6-country international study filed 75 anonymous error reports. The narratives were examined to identify the chain of events and the predominant proximal errors. We tabulated the consequences to patients, both reported by physicians and inferred by investigators. RESULTS A chain of errors was documented in 77% of incidents. Although 83% of the errors that ultimately occurred were mistakes in treatment or diagnosis, 2 of 3 were set in motion by errors in communication. Fully 80% of the errors that initiated cascades involved informational or personal miscommunication. Examples of informational miscommunication included communication breakdowns among colleagues and with patients (44%), misinformation in the medical record (21%), mishandling of patients’ requests and messages (18%), inaccessible medical records (12%), and inadequate reminder systems (5%). When asked whether the patient was harmed, physicians answered affirmatively in 43% of cases in which their narratives described harms. Psychological and emotional effects accounted for 17% of physician-reported consequences but 69% of investigator-inferred consequences. CONCLUSIONS Cascade analysis of physicians’ error reports is helpful in understanding the precipitant chain of events, but physicians provide incomplete information about how patients are affected. Miscommunication appears to play an important role in propagating diagnostic and treatment mistakes

Why do some primary care practices engage in practice improvement efforts whereas others do not?

OBJECTIVE: To understand what motivates primary care practices to engage in practice improvement, identify external and internal facilitators and barriers, and refine a conceptual framework. DATA SOURCES: In-depth interviews and structured telephone surveys with clinicians and practice staff (n = 51), observations, and document reviews. STUDY DESIGN: Comparative case study of primary care practices (n = 8) to examine aspects of the practice and environment that influence engagement in improvement activities. DATA COLLECTION METHODS: Three on-site visits, telephone interviews, and two surveys. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Pressures from multiple sources create conflicting forces on primary care practices' improvement efforts. Pressures include incentives and requirements, organizational relationships, and access to resources. Culture, leadership priorities, values set by the physician(s), and other factors influence whether primary care practices engage in improvement efforts. CONCLUSIONS: Most primary care practices are caught in a cross fire between two groups of pressures: a set of forces that push practices to remain with the status quo, the “15-minute per patient” approach, and another set of forces that press for major transformations. Our study illuminates the elements involved in the decision to stay with the status quo or to engage in practice improvement efforts needed for transformation