Developing public health clinical decision support systems (CDSS) for the outpatient community in New York City: our experience

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Developing a clinically relevant set of quality measures that can be effectively used by an electronic health record (EHR) is difficult. Whether it is achieving internal consensus on relevant priority quality measures, communicating to EHR vendors' whose programmers generally lack clinical contextual knowledge, or encouraging implementation of EHR that meaningfully impacts health outcomes, the path is challenging. However, greater transparency of population health, better accountability, and ultimately improved health outcomes is the goal and EHRs afford us a realistic chance of reaching it in a scalable way.</p> <p>Method</p> <p>In this article, we summarize our experience as a public health government agency with developing measures for a public health oriented EHR in New York City in partnership with a commercial EHR vendor.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>From our experience, there are six key lessons that we share in this article that we believe will dramatically increase the chance of success. First, define the scope and build consensus. Second, get support from executive leadership. Third, find an enthusiastic and competent software partner. Fourth, implement a transparent operational strategy. Fifth, create and test the EHR system with real life scenarios. Last, seek help when you need it.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Despite the challenges, we encourage public health agencies looking to build a similarly focused public health EHR to create one both for improved individual patient as well as the larger population health.</p

Not Perfect, but Better: Primary Care Providers’ Experiences with Electronic Referrals in a Safety Net Health System

BackgroundElectronic referrals can improve access to subspecialty care in safety net settings. In January 2007, San Francisco General Hospital (SFGH) launched an electronic referral portal that incorporated subspecialist triage, iterative communication with referring providers, and existing electronic health record data to improve access to subspecialty care.ObjectiveWe surveyed primary care providers (PCPs) to assess the impact of electronic referrals on workflow and clinical care.DesignWe administered an 18-item, web-based questionnaire to all 368 PCPs who had the option of referring to SFGH.MeasurementsWe asked participants to rate time spent submitting a referral, guidance of workup, wait times, and change in overall clinical care compared to prior referral methods using 5-point Likert scales. We used multivariate logistic regression to identify variables associated with perceived improvement in overall clinical care.ResultsTwo hundred ninety-eight PCPs (81.0%) from 24 clinics participated. Over half (55.4%) worked at hospital-based clinics, 27.9% at county-funded community clinics, and 17.1% at non-county-funded community clinics. Most (71.9%) reported that electronic referrals had improved overall clinical care. Providers from non-county-funded clinics (AOR 0.40, 95% CI 0.14-0.79) and those who spent &gt; or =6 min submitting an electronic referral (AOR 0.33, 95%CI 0.18-0.61) were significantly less likely than other participants to report that electronic referrals had improved clinical care.ConclusionsPCPs felt electronic referrals improved health-care access and quality; those who reported a negative impact on workflow were less likely to agree. While electronic referrals hold promise as a tool to improve clinical care, their impact on workflow should be considered

Evaluating Electronic Referrals for Specialty Care at a Public Hospital

Poor communication between referring clinicians and specialists may lead to inefficient use of specialist services. San Francisco General Hospital implemented an electronic referral system (eReferral) that facilitates iterative pre-visit communication between referring and specialty clinicians to improve the referral process. The purpose of the study was to determine the impact of eReferral (compared with paper-based referrals) on specialty referrals. The study was based on a visit-based questionnaire appended to new patient charts at randomly selected specialist clinic sessions before and after the implementation of eReferral. Specialty clinicians. The questionnaire focused on the self-reported difficulty in identifying referral question, referral appropriateness, need for and avoidability of follow-up visits. We collected 505 questionnaires from speciality clinicians. It was difficult to identify the reason for referral in 19.8% of medical and 38.0% of surgical visits using paper-based methods vs. 11.0% and 9.5% of those using eReferral (p-value 0.03 and &lt;0.001). Of those using eReferral, 6.4% and 9.8% of medical and surgical referrals using paper methods vs. 2.6% and 2.1% were deemed not completely appropriate (p-value 0.21 and 0.03). Follow-up was requested for 82.4% and 76.2% of medical and surgical patients with paper-based referrals vs. 90.1% and 58.1% of eReferrals (p-value 0.06 and 0.01). Follow-up was considered avoidable for 32.4% and 44.7% of medical and surgical follow-ups with paper-based methods vs. 27.5% and 13.5% with eReferral (0.41 and &lt;0.001). Use of technology to promote standardized referral processes and iterative communication between referring clinicians and specialists has the potential to improve communication between primary care providers and specialists and to increase the effectiveness of specialty referrals

"That never would have occurred to me": a qualitative study of medical students' views of a cultural competence curriculum

BACKGROUND: The evidence is mixed regarding the efficacy of cultural competence curricula in developing learners' knowledge, attitudes and skills. More research is needed to better understand both the strengths and shortcomings of existing curricula from the perspective of learners in order to improve training. METHODS: We conducted three focus groups with medical students in their first year of clinical training to assess their perceptions of the cultural competence curriculum at a public university school of medicine. RESULTS: Students evaluated the informal curriculum as a more important source of learning about cultural competence than the formal curriculum. In terms of bias in both self and others, the cultural competence curriculum increased awareness, but was less effective in teaching specific interventional skills. Students also noted that the cultural competence curriculum did not always sufficiently help them find a balance between group-specific knowledge and respect for individual differences. Despite some concerns as to whether political correctness characterized the cultural competence curriculum, it was also seen as a way to rehumanize the medical education experience. CONCLUSION: Future research needs to pay attention to issues such as perceived relevance, stereotyping, and political correctness in developing cross-cultural training programs

Impact of electronic medical record on physician practice in office settings: a systematic review

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Increased investments are being made for electronic medical records (EMRs) in Canada. There is a need to learn from earlier EMR studies on their impact on physician practice in office settings. To address this need, we conducted a systematic review to examine the impact of EMRs in the physician office, factors that influenced their success, and the lessons learned.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>For this review we included publications cited in Medline and CINAHL between 2000 and 2009 on physician office EMRs. Studies were included if they evaluated the impact of EMR on physician practice in office settings. The Clinical Adoption Framework provided a conceptual scheme to make sense of the findings and allow for future comparison/alignment to other Canadian eHealth initiatives.</p> <p>In the final selection, we included 27 controlled and 16 descriptive studies. We examined six areas: prescribing support, disease management, clinical documentation, work practice, preventive care, and patient-physician interaction. Overall, 22/43 studies (51.2%) and 50/109 individual measures (45.9%) showed positive impacts, 18.6% studies and 18.3% measures had negative impacts, while the remaining had no effect. Forty-eight distinct factors were identified that influenced EMR success. Several lessons learned were repeated across studies: (a) having robust EMR features that support clinical use; (b) redesigning EMR-supported work practices for optimal fit; (c) demonstrating value for money; (d) having realistic expectations on implementation; and (e) engaging patients in the process.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Currently there is limited positive EMR impact in the physician office. To improve EMR success one needs to draw on the lessons from previous studies such as those in this review.</p

Immunolocalisation of P2Y receptors in the rat eye

Nucleotides present an important role in ocular physiology which has been demonstrated by recent works that indicate their involvement in many ocular processes. P2Y are important among P2 receptors since they can control tear production, corneal wound healing, aqueous humour dynamics and retinal physiology. Commercial antibodies have allowed us to investigate the distribution of P2Y receptors in the cornea, anterior and posterior chamber of the eye and retina. The P2Y1 receptor was present mainly in cornea, ciliary processes, and trabecular meshwork. The P2Y2 receptors were present in cornea, ciliary processes and retinal pigmented epithelium. P2Y4 was present in cornea, ciliary processes, photoreceptors, outer plexiform layer and ganglion cell layer. The P2Y6 presented almost an identical distribution as the P2Y4 receptor. The P2Y11 was also detectable in the retinal pigmented epithelium. The detailed distribution of the receptors clearly supports the recent findings indicating the relevant role of nucleotides in the ocular function

Assessing Quality of Care of Elderly Patients Using the ACOVE Quality Indicator Set: A Systematic Review

Background: Care of the elderly is recognized as an increasingly important segment of health care. The Assessing Care Of Vulnerable Elderly (ACOVE) quality indicators (QIs) were developed to assess and improve the care of elderly patients. Objectives: The purpose of this review is to summarize studies that assess the quality of care using QIs from or based on ACOVE, in order to evaluate the state of quality of care for the reported conditions. Methods: We systematically searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL for English-language studies indexed by February 2010. Articles were included if they used any ACOVE QIs, or adaptations thereof, for assessing the quality of care. Included studies were analyzed and relevant information was extracted. We summarized the results of these studies, and when possible generated an overall conclusion about the quality of care as measured by ACOVE for each condition, in various settings, and for each QI. Results: Seventeen studies were included with 278 QIs (original, adapted or newly developed). The quality scores showed large variation between and within conditions. Only a few conditions showed a stable pass rate range over multiple studies. Overall, pass rates for dementia (interquartile range (IQR): 11%-35%), depression (IQR: 27%-41%), osteoporosis (IQR: 34%-43%) and osteoarthritis (IQR: 29-41%) were notably low. Medication management and use (range: 81%-90%), hearing loss (77%-79%) and continuity of care (76%-80%) scored higher than other conditions. Out of the 278 QIs, 141 (50%) had mean pass rates below 50% and 121 QIs (44%) had pass rates above 50%. Twenty-three percent of the QIs scored above 75%, and 16% scored below 25%. Conclusions: Quality of care per condition varies markedly across studies. Although there has been much effort in improving the care for elderly patients in the last years, the reported quality of care according to the ACOVE indicators is still relatively lo

Reconstruction of the Core and Extended Regulons of Global Transcription Factors

The processes underlying the evolution of regulatory networks are unclear. To address this question, we used a comparative genomics approach that takes advantage of the large number of sequenced bacterial genomes to predict conserved and variable members of transcriptional regulatory networks across phylogenetically related organisms. Specifically, we developed a computational method to predict the conserved regulons of transcription factors across α-proteobacteria. We focused on the CRP/FNR super-family of transcription factors because it contains several well-characterized members, such as FNR, FixK, and DNR. While FNR, FixK, and DNR are each proposed to regulate different aspects of anaerobic metabolism, they are predicted to recognize very similar DNA target sequences, and they occur in various combinations among individual α-proteobacterial species. In this study, the composition of the respective FNR, FixK, or DNR conserved regulons across 87 α-proteobacterial species was predicted by comparing the phylogenetic profiles of the regulators with the profiles of putative target genes. The utility of our predictions was evaluated by experimentally characterizing the FnrL regulon (a FNR-type regulator) in the α-proteobacterium Rhodobacter sphaeroides. Our results show that this approach correctly predicted many regulon members, provided new insights into the biological functions of the respective regulons for these regulators, and suggested models for the evolution of the corresponding transcriptional networks. Our findings also predict that, at least for the FNR-type regulators, there is a core set of target genes conserved across many species. In addition, the members of the so-called extended regulons for the FNR-type regulators vary even among closely related species, possibly reflecting species-specific adaptation to environmental and other factors. The comparative genomics approach we developed is readily applicable to other regulatory networks

The equity dimension in evaluations of the quality and outcomes framework: A systematic review

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Pay-for-performance systems raise concerns regarding inequity in health care because providers might select patients for whom targets can easily be reached. This paper aims to describe the evolution of pre-existing (in)equity in health care in the period after the introduction of the Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) in the UK and to describe (in)equities in exception reporting. In this evaluation, a theory-based framework conceptualising equity in terms of equal access, equal treatment and equal treatment outcomes for people in equal need is used to guide the work.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A systematic MEDLINE and Econlit search identified 317 studies. Of these, 290 were excluded because they were not related to the evaluation of QOF, they lacked an equity dimension in the evaluation, their qualitative research focused on experiences or on the nature of the consultation, or unsuitable methodology was used to pronounce upon equity after the introduction of QOF.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>None of the publications (n = 27) assessed equity in access to health care. Concerning equity in treatment and (intermediate) treatment outcomes, overall quality scores generally improved. For the majority of the observed indicators, all citizens benefit from this improvement, yet the extent to which different patient groups benefit tends to vary and to be highly dependent on the type and complexity of the indicator(s) under study, the observed patient group(s) and the characteristics of the study. In general, the introduction of QOF was favourable for the aged and for males. Total QOF scores did not seem to vary according to ethnicity. For deprivation, small but significant residual differences were observed after the introduction of QOF favouring less deprived groups. These differences are mainly due to differences at the practice level. The variance in exception reporting according to gender and socio-economic position is low.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Although QOF seems not to be socially selective at first glance, this does not mean QOF does not contribute to the inverse care law. Introducing different targets for specific patient groups and including appropriate, non-disease specific and patient-centred indicators that grasp the complexity of primary care might refine the equity dimension of the evaluation of QOF. Also, information on the actual uptake of care, information at the patient level and monitoring of individuals' health care utilisation tracks could make large contributions to an in-depth evaluation. Finally, evaluating pay-for-quality initiatives in a broader health systems impact assessment strategy with equity as a full assessment criterion is of utmost importance.</p