Measuring Patient Experience During the Covid-19 Pandemic And Beyond

Traditional patient experience measures may not fully capture the changes quickly transpiring in patient care due to COVID-19. This paper presents a questionnaire that could be a helpful starting point. The questionnaire addresses topics such as telehealth and non-visit-based care; care by non-physicians; discussion about end-of-life preferences, domestic violence, social health needs; and primary care follow-up after acute carehttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/155624/1/Patient survey development_AFM submission.pdfhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/155624/2/2019 CPC+ Beneficiary Survey (English).pdfDescription of Patient survey development_AFM submission.pdf : Main ArticleDescription of 2019 CPC+ Beneficiary Survey (English).pdf : Surve

An intervention to improve care and reduce costs for high-risk patients with frequent hospital admissions: a pilot study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>A small percentage of high-risk patients accounts for a large proportion of Medicaid spending in the United States, which has become an urgent policy issue. Our objective was to pilot a novel patient-centered intervention for high-risk patients with frequent hospital admissions to determine its potential to improve care and reduce costs.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Community and hospital-based care management and coordination intervention with pre-post analysis of health care utilization. We enrolled Medicaid fee-for-service patients aged 18-64 who were admitted to an urban public hospital and identified as being at high risk for hospital readmission by a validated predictive algorithm. Enrolled patients were evaluated using qualitative and quantitative interview techniques to identify needs such as transportation to/advocacy during medical appointments, mental health/substance use treatment, and home visits. A community housing partner initiated housing applications in-hospital for homeless patients. Care managers facilitated appropriate discharge plans then worked closely with patients in the community using a harm reduction approach.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Nineteen patients were enrolled; all were male, 18/19 were substance users, and 17/19 were homeless. Patients had a total of 64 inpatient admissions in the 12 months before the intervention, versus 40 in the following 12 months, a 37.5% reduction. Most patients (73.3%) had fewer inpatient admissions in the year after the intervention compared to the prior year. Overall ED visits also decreased after study enrollment, while outpatient clinic visits increased. Yearly study hospital Medicaid reimbursements fell an average of $16,383 per patient.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>A pilot intervention for high-cost patients shows promising results for health services usage. We are currently expanding our model to serve more patients at additional hospitals to see if the pilot's success can be replicated.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: <a href="http://www.trialregister.nl/trialreg/admin/rctview.asp?TC=1292096">NCT01292096</a></p

Comparison of a one-time educational intervention to a teach-to-goal educational intervention for self-management of heart failure: design of a randomized controlled trial

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Heart failure (HF) is common, costly and associated with significant morbidity and poor quality of life, particularly for patients with low socioeconomic status. Self-management training has been shown to reduce HF related morbidity and hospitalization rates, but there is uncertainty about how best to deliver such training and what patients benefit. This study compares a single session self-management HF training program against a multiple session training intervention and examines whether their effects differ by literacy level.</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>In this randomized controlled multi-site trial, English and Spanish-speaking patients are recruited from university-affiliated General Internal Medicine and Cardiology clinics at 4 sites across the United States. Eligible patients have HF with New York Heart Association class II-IV symptoms and are prescribed a loop diuretic. Baseline data, including literacy level, are collected at enrollment and follow-up surveys are conducted at 1, 6 and 12 months</p> <p>Upon enrollment, both the control and intervention groups receive the same 40 minute, literacy-sensitive, in-person, HF education session covering the 4 key self-management components of daily self assessment and having a plan, salt avoidance, exercise, and medication adherence. All participants also receive a literacy-sensitive workbook and a digital bathroom scale. After the baseline education was completed, patients are randomly allocated to return to usual care or to receive ongoing education and training. The intervention group receives an additional 20 minutes of education on weight and symptom-based diuretic self-adjustment, as well as periodic follow-up phone calls from the educator over the course of 1 year. These phone calls are designed to reinforce the education, assess participant knowledge of the education and address barriers to success.</p> <p>The primary outcome is the combined incidence of all cause hospitalization and death. Secondary outcomes include HF-related quality of life, HF-related hospitalizations, knowledge regarding HF, self-care behavior, and self-efficacy. The effects of each intervention will be stratified by patient literacy, in order to identify any differential effects.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>Enrollment of the proposed 660 subjects will continue through the end of 2009. Outcome assessments are projected to be completed by early 2011.</p> <p>Trial Registration</p> <p>ClinicalTrials.gov <url>http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/</url> NCT00378950</p

The crossroads of evidence-based medicine and health policy: implications for urology

As healthcare spending in the United States continues to rise at an unsustainable rate, recent policy decisions introduced at the national level will rely on precepts of evidence-based medicine to promote the determination, dissemination, and delivery of “best practices” or quality care while simultaneously reducing cost. We discuss the influence of evidence-based medicine on policy and, in turn, the impact of policy on the developing clinical evidence base with an eye to the potential effects of these relationships on the practice and provision of urologic care

Patient Experience in Health Center Medical Homes

The Human Resource and Services Administration, Bureau of Primary Health Care Health Center program was developed to provide comprehensive, community-based quality primary care services, with an emphasis on meeting the needs of medically underserved populations. Health Centers have been leaders in adopting innovative approaches to improve quality care delivery, including the patient centered medical home (PCMH) model. Engaging patients through patient experience assessment is an important component of PCMH evaluation and a vital activity that can help drive patient-centered quality improvement initiatives. A total of 488 patients from five Health Center PCMHs in south Florida were surveyed in order to improve understanding of patient experience in Health Center PCMHs and to identify quality improvement opportunities. Overall patients reported very positive experience with patient-centeredness including being treated with courtesy and respect (85 % responded always ) and communication with their provider in a way that was easy to understand (87.7 % responded always ). Opportunities for improvement included patient goal setting, referrals for patients with health conditions to workshops or educational programs, contact with the Health Center via phone and appointment availability. After adjusting for patient characteristics, results suggest that some patient experience components may be modified by educational attainment, years of care and race/ethnicity of patients. Findings are useful for informing quality improvement initiatives that, in conjunction with other patient engagement strategies, support Health Centers\u27 ongoing transformation as PCMHs

The importance of organizational characteristics for improving outcomes in patients with chronic disease: a systematic review of congestive heart failure

Luci K. Leykum, Jacqueline Pugh, Valerie Lawrence, and Polly H. Noel are with the South Texas Veterans Health Care System and Department of Medicine, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio TX, 78229, USA -- Michael Parchman is with the South Texas Veterans Health Care System and Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio TX, 78229, USA -- Reuben R. McDaniel Jr. is with the McComb's School of Business, University of Texas at Austin, Austin TX, USABackground: Despite applications of models of care and organizational or system-level interventions to improve patient outcomes for chronic disease, consistent improvements have not been achieved. This may reflect a mismatch between the interventions and the nature of the settings in which they are attempted. The application of complex adaptive systems (CAS) framework to understand clinical systems and inform efforts to improve them may lead to more successful interventions. We performed a systematic review of interventions to improve outcomes of patients with congestive heart failure (CHF) to examine whether interventions consistent with CAS are more likely to be effective. We then examine differences between interventions that are most effective for improving outcomes for patients with CHF versus previously published data for type 2 diabetes to explore the potential impact of the nature of the disease on the types of interventions that are more likely to be effective. Methods: We conducted a systematic review of the literature between 1998 and 2008 of organizational interventions to improve care of patients with CHF. Two independent reviewers independently assessed studies that met inclusion criteria to determine whether each reported intervention reflected one or more CAS characteristics. The effectiveness of interventions was rated as either 0 (no effect), 0.5 (mixed effect), or 1.0 (effective) based on the type, number, and significance of reported outcomes. Fisher's exact test was used to examine the association between CAS characteristics and intervention effectiveness. Specific CAS characteristics associated with intervention effectiveness for CHF were contrasted with previously published data for type 2 diabetes. Results and discussion: Forty-four studies describing 46 interventions met eligibility criteria. All interventions utilized at least one CAS characteristic, and 85% were either 'mixed effect' or 'effective' in terms of outcomes. The number of CAS characteristics present in each intervention was associated with effectiveness (p < 0.001), supporting the idea that interventions consistent with CAS are more likely to be effective. The individual CAS characteristics associated with CHF intervention effectiveness were learning, self-organization, and co-evolution, a finding different from our previously published analysis of interventions for diabetes. We suggest this difference may be related to the degree of uncertainty involved in caring for patients with diabetes versus CHF. Conclusion: These results suggest that for interventions to be effective, they must be consistent with the CAS nature of clinical systems. The difference in specific CAS characteristics associated with intervention effectiveness for CHF and diabetes suggests that interventions must also take into account attributes of the disease.McCombs School of [email protected]

The effects of integrated care: a systematic review of UK and international evidence

BACKGROUND: Healthcare systems around the world have been responding to the demand for better integrated models of service delivery. However, there is a need for further clarity regarding the effects of these new models of integration, and exploration regarding whether models introduced in other care systems may achieve similar outcomes in a UK national health service context. METHODS: The study aimed to carry out a systematic review of the effects of integration or co-ordination between healthcare services, or between health and social care on service delivery outcomes including effectiveness, efficiency and quality of care. Electronic databases including MEDLINE; Embase; PsycINFO; CINAHL; Science and Social Science Citation Indices; and the Cochrane Library were searched for relevant literature published between 2006 to March 2017. Online sources were searched for UK grey literature, and citation searching, and manual reference list screening were also carried out. Quantitative primary studies and systematic reviews, reporting actual or perceived effects on service delivery following the introduction of models of integration or co-ordination, in healthcare or health and social care settings in developed countries were eligible for inclusion. Strength of evidence for each outcome reported was analysed and synthesised using a four point comparative rating system of stronger, weaker, inconsistent or limited evidence. RESULTS: One hundred sixty seven studies were eligible for inclusion. Analysis indicated evidence of perceived improved quality of care, evidence of increased patient satisfaction, and evidence of improved access to care. Evidence was rated as either inconsistent or limited regarding all other outcomes reported, including system-wide impacts on primary care, secondary care, and health care costs. There were limited differences between outcomes reported by UK and international studies, and overall the literature had a limited consideration of effects on service users. CONCLUSIONS: Models of integrated care may enhance patient satisfaction, increase perceived quality of care, and enable access to services, although the evidence for other outcomes including service costs remains unclear. Indications of improved access may have important implications for services struggling to cope with increasing demand. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Prospero registration number: 42016037725