Use of Quality Improvement Strategies Among Small to Medium-Size US Primary Care Practices

PURPOSE Improving primary care quality is a national priority, but little is known about the extent to which small to medium-size practices use quality improvement (QI) strategies to improve care. We examined variations in use of QI strategies among 1,181 small to medium-size primary care practices engaged in a national initiative spanning 12 US states to improve quality of care for heart health and assessed factors associated with those variations. METHODS In this cross-sectional study, practice characteristics were assessed by surveying practice leaders. Practice use of QI strategies was measured by the validated Change Process Capability Questionnaire (CPCQ) Strategies Scale (scores range from −28 to 28, with higher scores indicating more use of QI strategies). Multivariable linear regression was used to examine the association between practice characteristics and the CPCQ strategies score. RESULTS The mean CPCQ strategies score was 9.1 (SD = 12.2). Practices that participated in accountable care organizations and those that had someone in the practice to configure clinical quality reports from electronic health records (EHRs), had produced quality reports, or had discussed clinical quality data during meetings had higher CPCQ strategies scores. Health system–owned practices and those experiencing major disruptive changes, such as implementing a new EHR system or clinician turnover, had lower CPCQ strategies scores. CONCLUSION There is substantial variation in the use of QI strategies among small to medium-size primary care practices across 12 US states. Findings suggest that practices may need external support to strengthen their ability to do QI and to be prepared for new payment and delivery models

The new hypertension guideline: logical but unwise

In November 2017, the American College of Cardiology and the American Heart Association, along with nine supporting organizations, released their new Guideline for the Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Management of High Blood Pressure in Adults along with a systematic review (1,2). This guideline, intended to provide an update to the 2003 Joint National Committee guideline (JNC 7), has already generated considerable controversy (3–7). It lowered the threshold for the diagnosis of hypertension to ≥130/80 mmHg from the previous threshold of ≥140/90 mmHg, added a new category of ‘elevated blood pressure’ for those at 120–129/(previously considered normal), and lowered the target for those being treated..

Does Ownership Make a Difference in Primary Care Practice?

PURPOSE: We assessed differences in structural characteristics, quality improvement processes, and cardiovascular preventive care by ownership type among 989 small to medium primary care practices. METHODS: This cross-sectional analysis used electronic health record and survey data collected between September 2015 and April 2017 as part of an evaluation of the EvidenceNOW: Advancing Heart Health in Primary Care Initiative by the Agency for Health Care Research and Quality. We compared physician-owned practices, health system or medical group practices, and Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHC) by using 15 survey-based practice characteristic measures, 9 survey-based quality improvement process measures, and 4 electronic health record-based cardiovascular disease prevention quality measures, namely, aspirin prescription, blood pressure control, cholesterol management, and smoking cessation support (ABCS). RESULTS: Physician-owned practices were more likely to be solo (45.0% compared with 8.1%, CONCLUSIONS: Primary care practice ownership was associated with differences in quality improvement process measures, with FQHCs reporting the highest use of such quality-improvement strategies. ABCS were mostly unrelated to ownership, suggesting a complex path between quality improvement strategies and outcomes

Burnout Among Physicians, Advanced Practice Clinicians and Staff in Smaller Primary Care Practices.

BACKGROUND: Burnout among primary care physicians, advanced practice clinicians (nurse practitioners and physician assistants [APCs]), and staff is common and associated with negative consequences for patient care, but the association of burnout with characteristics of primary care practices is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To examine the association between physician-, APC- and staff-reported burnout and specific structural, organizational, and contextual characteristics of smaller primary care practices. DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis of survey data collected from 9/22/2015-6/19/2017. SETTING: Sample of smaller primary care practices in the USA participating in a national initiative focused on improving the delivery of cardiovascular preventive services. PARTICIPANTS: 10,284 physicians, APCs and staff from 1380 primary care practices. MAIN MEASURE: Burnout was assessed with a validated single-item measure. KEY RESULTS: Burnout was reported by 20.4% of respondents overall. In a multivariable analysis, burnout was slightly more common among physicians and APCs (physician vs. non-clinical staff, adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 1.26; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.05-1.49, APC vs. non-clinical staff, aOR = 1.34, 95% CI, 1.10-1.62). Other multivariable correlates of burnout included non-solo practice (2-5 physician/APCs vs. solo practice, aOR = 1.71; 95% CI, 1.35-2.16), health system affiliation (vs. physician/APC-owned practice, aOR = 1.42; 95%CI, 1.16-1.73), and Federally Qualified Health Center status (vs. physician/APC-owned practice, aOR = 1.36; 95%CI, 1.03-1.78). Neither the proportion of patients on Medicare or Medicaid, nor practice-level patient volume (patient visits per physician/APC per day) were significantly associated with burnout. In analyses stratified by professional category, practice size was not associated with burnout for APCs, and participation in an accountable care organization was associated with burnout for clinical and non-clinical staff. CONCLUSIONS: Burnout is prevalent among physicians, APCs, and staff in smaller primary care practices. Members of solo practices less commonly report burnout, while members of health system-owned practices and Federally Qualified Health Centers more commonly report burnout, suggesting that practice level autonomy may be a critical determinant of burnout

Taking Innovation To Scale In Primary Care Practices: The Functions Of Health Care Extension.

Health care extension is an approach to providing external support to primary care practices with the aim of diffusing innovation. EvidenceNOW was launched to rapidly disseminate and implement evidence-based guidelines for cardiovascular preventive care in the primary care setting. Seven regional grantee cooperatives provided the foundational elements of health care extension-technological and quality improvement support, practice capacity building, and linking with community resources-to more than two hundred primary care practices in each region. This article describes how the cooperatives varied in their approaches to extension and provides early empirical evidence that health care extension is a feasible and potentially useful approach for providing quality improvement support to primary care practices. With investment, health care extension may be an effective platform for federal and state quality improvement efforts to create economies of scale and provide practices with more robust and coordinated support services

A Practice Change Model for Quality Improvement in Primary Care Practice.

Faced with a rapidly changing healthcare environment, primary care practices often have to change how they practice medicine. Yet change is difficult, and the process by which practice improvement can be understood and facilitated has not been well elucidated. Therefore, we developed a model of practice change using data from a quality improvement intervention that was successful in creating a sustainable practice improvement. A multidisciplinary team evaluated data from the Study To Enhance Prevention by Understanding Practice (STEP-UP), a randomized clinical trial conducted to improve the delivery of evidence-based preventive services in 79 northeastern Ohio practices. The team conducted comparative case-study analyses of high- and low-improvement practices to identify variables that are critical to the change process and to create a conceptual model for the change. The model depicts the critical elements for understanding and guiding practice change and emphasizes the importance of these elements\u27 evolving interrelationships. These elements are (1) motivation of key stakeholders to achieve the target for change; (2) instrumental, personal, and interactive resources for change; (3) motivators outside the practice, including the larger healthcare environment and community; and (4) opportunities for change--that is, how key stakeholders understand the change options. Change is influenced by the complex interaction of factors inside and outside the practice. Interventions that are based on understanding the four key elements and their interrelationships can yield sustainable quality improvements in primary care practice

A national evaluation of a dissemination and implementation initiative to enhance primary care practice capacity and improve cardiovascular disease care: the ESCALATES study protocol.

BACKGROUND: The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) launched the EvidenceNOW Initiative to rapidly disseminate and implement evidence-based cardiovascular disease (CVD) preventive care in smaller primary care practices. AHRQ funded eight grantees (seven regional Cooperatives and one independent national evaluation) to participate in EvidenceNOW. The national evaluation examines quality improvement efforts and outcomes for more than 1500 small primary care practices (restricted to those with fewer than ten physicians per clinic). Examples of external support include practice facilitation, expert consultation, performance feedback, and educational materials and activities. This paper describes the study protocol for the EvidenceNOW national evaluation, which is called Evaluating System Change to Advance Learning and Take Evidence to Scale (ESCALATES). METHODS: This prospective observational study will examine the portfolio of EvidenceNOW Cooperatives using both qualitative and quantitative data. Qualitative data include: online implementation diaries, observation and interviews at Cooperatives and practices, and systematic assessment of context from the perspective of Cooperative team members. Quantitative data include: practice-level performance on clinical quality measures (aspirin prescribing, blood pressure and cholesterol control, and smoking cessation; ABCS) collected by Cooperatives from electronic health records (EHRs); practice and practice member surveys to assess practice capacity and other organizational and structural characteristics; and systematic tracking of intervention delivery. Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods analyses will be conducted to examine how Cooperatives organize to provide external support to practices, to compare effectiveness of the dissemination and implementation approaches they implement, and to examine how regional variations and other organization and contextual factors influence implementation and effectiveness. DISCUSSION: ESCALATES is a national evaluation of an ambitious large-scale dissemination and implementation effort focused on transforming smaller primary care practices. Insights will help to inform the design of national health care practice extension systems aimed at supporting practice transformation efforts in the USA. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02560428 (09/21/15)

Factors Associated With Use of Quality Improvement Strategies Among Small-to Medium Size Primary Care Practices in the United States.

Context: Improving health care quality in small-to-medium-size primary care practices, where the majority of Americans receive care, is a national priority, but little is known about these practices\u27 ability to use quality improvement (QI) strategies to deliver high quality care. Objective: To examine variations in the use of QI strategies across small-to-medium primary care practices and to assess practice-level factors associated with variations. Design: Cross-sectional study. Multivariable linear regression was used to examine the independent relationship between practice characteristics and the use of QI strategies as measured by the strategies scale of the Change Process Capability Questionnaire (CPCQ), a validated instrument designed to measure practice use of QI strategies. Setting: Data from 1,091 small-to-medium-size practices (≤10 clinicians) in 12 US states engaged in a national initiative to improve quality of care for heart health. Participants: Survey of practice leaders to assess practices characteristics and use of improvement strategies. Results: Of the practices surveyed, 84% had 10 or fewer clinicians, 21% had experienced multiple disruptive changes in the prior year, and most had meaningful use-certified electronic health records. Mean CPCQ strategies score was 8.6 (range -28 to +28, SD=12.2). Mean CPCQ scores were higher for practices that were part of accountable care organizations (+2.06, p=0.006) or had participated in demonstration projects (+1.59, p=0.04). Also, practices that discussed clinical quality data during meetings, that had someone in practice to configure EHR quality reports, and that had produced quality reports at least once in the prior six months had higher CPCQ strategies scores. Practices experiencing major disruptive changes had lower mean CPCQ scores (-3.0, p=0.001). Conclusion: Use of QI strategies varied greatly among small-to-medium-size primary care practices. Findings suggest that strengthening organizational makeup, increasing practice EHR capabilities and reducing organizational disruption could enhance the quality of care delivered by small-to-medium-size practic