Antipsychotic Prescribing Pathways, Polypharmacy, and Clozapine Use in Treatment of Schizophrenia

Objective To ensure optimal care for patients with schizophrenia, antipsychotic medications must be appropriately prescribed and used. Therefore, the primary objectives of this study were to identify and describe pathways for antipsychotic prescribing, assess the consistency of observed pathways with treatment guidelines, and describe variability across facilities. Methods Data from Veterans Affairs administrative data sets from fiscal year (FY) 2003 to FY 2007 were gathered for analysis in this retrospective cohort study of antipsychotic prescribing pathways among 13 facilities across two regional networks. Patients with a new episode of care for schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder in FY 2005 were identified, and antipsychotic prescribing history was obtained for two years before and after the index diagnosis. Demographic characteristics and distribution of comorbidities were assessed. Median medical center rates of polypharmacy were calculated and compared with Fisher’s exact test. Results Of 1,923 patients with a new episode of schizophrenia care, 1,003 (52%) had complete data on prescribing pathways. A majority (74%) of patients were prescribed antipsychotic monotherapy, and 19% received antipsychotic polypharmacy. Of patients receiving antipsychotic polypharmacy, 65% began polypharmacy within 90 days of starting any antipsychotic treatment. There was a fourfold difference in polypharmacy across facilities. Antipsychotic polypharmacy was not associated with geographic location or medical center patient volume. Clozapine utilization was low (0%–2%). Conclusions Retrospective examination of longitudinal prescribing patterns identified multiple antipsychotic prescribing pathways. Although most patients received guideline-concordant care, antipsychotic polypharmacy was commonly used as initial treatment, and there was substantial variability among facilities. Study findings suggest the utility of secondary data to assess treatment adaptation or switching for practical clinical trials

Assessing an organizational culture instrument based on the Competing Values Framework: Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses

BACKGROUND: The Competing Values Framework (CVF) has been widely used in health services research to assess organizational culture as a predictor of quality improvement implementation, employee and patient satisfaction, and team functioning, among other outcomes. CVF instruments generally are presented as well-validated with reliable aggregated subscales. However, only one study in the health sector has been conducted for the express purpose of validation, and that study population was limited to hospital managers from a single geographic locale. METHODS: We used exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses to examine the underlying structure of data from a CVF instrument. We analyzed cross-sectional data from a work environment survey conducted in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA). The study population comprised all staff in non-supervisory positions. The survey included 14 items adapted from a popular CVF instrument, which measures organizational culture according to four subscales: hierarchical, entrepreneurial, team, and rational. RESULTS: Data from 71,776 non-supervisory employees (approximate response rate 51%) from 168 VHA facilities were used in this analysis. Internal consistency of the subscales was moderate to strong (α = 0.68 to 0.85). However, the entrepreneurial, team, and rational subscales had higher correlations across subscales than within, indicating poor divergent properties. Exploratory factor analysis revealed two factors, comprising the ten items from the entrepreneurial, team, and rational subscales loading on the first factor, and two items from the hierarchical subscale loading on the second factor, along with one item from the rational subscale that cross-loaded on both factors. Results from confirmatory factor analysis suggested that the two-subscale solution provides a more parsimonious fit to the data as compared to the original four-subscale model. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that there may be problems applying conventional CVF subscales to non-supervisors, and underscores the importance of assessing psychometric properties of instruments in each new context and population to which they are applied. It also further highlights the challenges management scholars face in assessing organizational culture in a reliable and comparable way. More research is needed to determine if the emergent two-subscale solution is a valid or meaningful alternative and whether these findings generalize beyond VHA

Predicting healthcare employees' participation in an office redesign program: Attitudes, norms and behavioral control

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The study examined the extent to which components based on a modified version of the theory of planned behavior explained employee participation in a new clinical office program designed to reduce patient waiting times in primary care clinics.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We regressed extent of employee participation on attitudes about the program, group norms, and perceived behavioral control along with individual and clinic characteristics using a hierarchical linear mixed model.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Perceived group norms were one of the best predictors of employee participation. Attitudes about the program were also significant, but to a lesser degree. Behavioral control, however, was not a significant predictor. Respondents with at least one year of clinic tenure, or who were team leaders, first line supervisor, or managers had greater participation rates. Analysis at the clinic level indicated clinics with scores in the highest quartile clinic scores on group norms, attitudes, and behavioral control scores were significantly higher on levels of overall participation than clinics in the lowest quartile.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Findings suggest that establishing strong norms and values may influence employee participation in a change program in a group setting. Supervisory level was also significant with greater responsibility being associated with greater participation.</p

Factors affecting the use of patient survey data for quality improvement in the Veterans Health Administration

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Little is known about how to use patient feedback to improve experiences of health care. The Veterans Health Administration (VA) conducts regular patient surveys that have indicated improved care experiences over the past decade. The goal of this study was to assess factors that were barriers to, or promoters of, efforts to improve care experiences in VA facilities.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We conducted case studies at two VA facilities, one with stable high scores on inpatient reports of emotional support between 2002 and 2006, and one with stable low scores over the same period. A semi-structured interview was used to gather information from staff who worked with patient survey data at the study facilities. Data were analyzed using a previously developed qualitative framework describing organizational, professional and data-related barriers and promoters to data use.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Respondents reported more promoters than barriers to using survey data, and particularly support for improvement efforts. Themes included developing patient-centered cultures, quality improvement structures such as regular data review, and training staff in patient-centered behaviors. The influence of incentives, the role of nursing leadership, and triangulating survey data with other data on patients' views also emerged as important. It was easier to collect data on current organization and practice than those in the past and this made it difficult to deduce which factors might influence differing facility performance.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Interviews with VA staff provided promising examples of how systematic processes for using survey data can be implemented as part of wider quality improvement efforts. However, prospective studies are needed to identify the most effective strategies for using patient feedback to improve specific aspects of patient-centered care.</p

The Reinforcing Therapist Performance (RTP) experiment: Study protocol for a cluster randomized trial

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Rewarding provider performance has been recommended by the Institute of Medicine as an approach to improve the quality of treatment, yet little empirical research currently exists that has examined the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of such approaches. The aim of this study is to test the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of providing monetary incentives directly to therapists as a method to improve substance abuse treatment service delivery and subsequent client treatment outcomes.</p> <p>Design</p> <p>Using a cluster randomized design, substance abuse treatment therapists from across 29 sites were assigned by site to either an implementation as usual (IAU) or pay-for-performance (P4P) condition.</p> <p>Participants</p> <p>Substance abuse treatment therapists participating in a large dissemination and implementation initiative funded by the Center for Substance Abuse Treatment.</p> <p>Intervention</p> <p>Therapists in both conditions received comprehensive training and ongoing monitoring, coaching, and feedback. However, those in the P4P condition also were given the opportunity to earn monetary incentives for achieving two sets of measurable behaviors related to quality implementation of the treatment.</p> <p>Outcomes</p> <p>Effectiveness outcomes will focus on the impact of the monetary incentives to increase the proportion of adolescents who receive a targeted threshold level of treatment, months that therapists demonstrate monthly competency, and adolescents who are in recovery following treatment. Similarly, cost-effectiveness outcomes will focus on cost per adolescent receiving targeted threshold level of treatment, cost per month of demonstrated competence, and cost per adolescent in recovery.</p> <p>Trial Registration</p> <p>Trial Registration Number: NCT01016704</p

Prevalence of dual sensory impairment and its association with traumatic brain injury and blast exposure in OEF/OIF Veterans

Background: Many service members deployed to the Afghanistan and Iraq theatre of operations are returning with multiple injuries, including traumatic brain injury (TBI) and sensory impairment. Studies of sensory impairment among patients with TBI have focused either on the auditory or visual modality. However, their co-prevalence, termed dual sensory impairment (DSI), is not well-documented. We examined self-reported rates of auditory and visual impairment in Afghanistan and Iraq war Veterans receiving TBI evaluations

Physicians' perceptions of autonomy support during transition to value-based reimbursement: A multi-center psychometric evaluation of six-item and three-item measures.

BackgroundSuccessive health system reforms have steadily eroded physician autonomy. Escalating accountability demands placed on physicians concurrent with diminishing autonomy plus widespread "cost cutting" endanger clinical work-life quality and, in turn, threaten patient-care quality, safety, and continuity. This has engendered a renewed emphasis on bettering physician work-life to safeguard patient care. Research indicates that autonomy support could be an effective intervention point in this dynamic, and that improving healthcare practitioners' experience of autonomy can promote better patient outcomes. New measures of autonomy support towards physicians during systemic/organizational transformation are thus needed.ObjectiveWe investigated the validity and reliability of two versions of a brief measure of physicians' perceptions of autonomy support.DesignPsychometric evaluation of practitioners' responses to a theory-based, pilot-tested, multi-center, cross-sectional survey-questionnaire.ParticipantsPhysicians serving in California, Massachusetts, or upstate New York clinical practices implementing pay-for-performance incentives were eligible. We obtained responses from 1,534 (35.14%) of 4,365 physicians surveyed.AnalysisWe randomly partitioned the study sample equitably into derivation and validation subsamples. We conducted parallel analysis, inter-item/point-biserial correlations, and item-response-theory-based graded response modeling on six autonomy support items. Three items with the highest (a) point-biserial correlations, (b) item-level discrimination and (c) information capture were used to construct a short-form (3-item) version of the full (6-item) autonomy scale. We utilized exploratory structural equation modeling and confirmatory factor analysis to establish the factor structure and construct validity of the full-length and short-form scales before comparing their factor invariance, reliability and interrater agreement across physician subgroups.FindingsAll six autonomy support items loaded highly onto one factor accounting for the majority of variance and demonstrating good data fit. The three most discriminating and informative items loaded equally well onto a single factor with similar goodness-of-fit to the data. The three-item scale correlated highly with its six-item parent, showing equally high sensitivity and specificity in discriminating high autonomy support. Variability in scores nested predominantly at within- rather than between-subgroup levels.Conclusions and implicationsOur data supported the factor structure, construct validity, internal consistency, and reliability of six- and three-item autonomy support scales. These brief tools are easily incorporated into multi-dimensional questionnaires at relatively low cost