Search

Background: The essence of humanism in medicine and health care is relationships-caring relationships between clinicians and patients. While raising concerns regarding professional-patient boundaries has positively contributed to our understanding and prevention of potentially harmful boundary violations, there is controversy about which types of relationships, caring acts, and practices are acceptable versus cross boundary lines.Objective: To examine primary care physicians' practices and attitudes regarding acts that have been questioned as potentially "inappropriate" or "unethical" crossing of professional-patient boundaries.Design: Surveys conducted via in-person polling or electronic and mailed paper submissions from April 2016 to July 2017. We calculated descriptive statistics and examined associations with practices and attitudes using logistic regression.Participants: Random sample of all US primary care physicians who treat adult patients; convenience sample of attendees at medicine grand rounds presentations.Main Measures: Outcomes were self-reported practices and attitudes related to giving patients rides home, paying for patients' medication, helping patients find jobs, employing patients, going to dinner with patients, and providing care to personal friends.Key Results: Among 1563 total respondents, 34% had given a ride home, 34% had paid for medications, 15% helped patients find a job, 7% had employed a patient, 10% had dinner with patients, and 59% provided care to personal friends. A majority disapproved of dinner with a patient (75%) but approved of or were neutral on all other scenarios (61-90%).Conclusions: The medical profession is quite divided on questions related to drawing lines about appropriate boundaries. Contrary to official and widespread proscriptions against such practices (with exception of dinner dates), many have actually engaged in such practices and the majority found them acceptable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Patients with disabilities often require healthcare accommodations in order to access high-quality, equitable healthcare services. While attention has been paid to accommodation needs in specific disability populations, limited research to date has explored healthcare accommodations that cross-cut diverse disability populations.Objective: To identify a deeper understanding regarding accommodations in healthcare settings that could apply across disability populations and promote equitable healthcare.Design: We conducted qualitative focus groups with patients with disabilities and caregivers to understand their experiences and preferences for healthcare accommodations.Participants: We recruited patients and caregivers across all major disability categories to participate in focus groups. Participants were recruited through advocacy organizations and healthcare settings in Southeastern Minnesota.Approach: A total of eight focus groups were conducted with 56 participants. Participants described their healthcare experiences and desires for healthcare accommodations. The multidisciplinary research team recorded, transcribed verbatim, and coded all focus groups. The team thematically coded transcripts using content analysis within and across focus groups to identify major themes.Key Results: Patients identified four challenges and corresponding steps healthcare team could take to promote equitable care: (1) consistent documentation of disabilities and needed accommodations in the medical record; (2) allowance for accommodations to the environment, including adapting physical space, physical structures, and scheduling and rooming processes; (3) provide accommodations for administrative tasks, such as completing paper or electronic forms; and (4) adapt communication during interactions, such as speaking slower or using terms that patients can easily understand.Conclusion: These identified themes represent specific opportunities for healthcare teams to effectively provide accessible care to patients with disabilities. Many of the accommodations require minimal financial investment, but did require behavioral changes by the healthcare team to ensure equitable healthcare. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on the plenary papers presented at the ninth bi-annual conference of Regenstrief Institute on health care research. The researchers conducted a research on the effects of relationship-centered care on processes and outcomes of care. Other papers presented focused on the following four topics: (1) outcomes associated with relationship-centered organizational processes in health care, (2) the influence of the informal or hidden curriculum on building professional relations, (3) racial and ethnic disparities in relationships, and (4) the role of emotions in relationship formation.

Background: In order to close the gap between discoveries that could improve health, and widespread impact on routine health care practice, there is a need for greater attention to the factors that influence dissemination and implementation of evidence-based practices. Evidence synthesis projects (e.g., systematic reviews) could contribute to this effort by collecting and synthesizing data relevant to dissemination and implementation. Such an advance would facilitate the spread of high-value, effective, and sustainable interventions.Objective: The objective of this paper is to evaluate the feasibility of extracting factors related to implementation during evidence synthesis in order to enhance the replicability of successes of studies of interventions in health care settings.Design: Drawing on the implementation science literature, we suggest 10 established implementation measures that should be considered when conducting evidence synthesis projects. We describe opportunities to assess these constructs in current literature and illustrate these methods through an example of a systematic review.Subjects: Twenty-nine studies of interventions aimed at improving clinician-patient communication in clinical settings.Key Results: We identified acceptability, adoption, appropriateness, feasibility, fidelity, implementation cost, intervention complexity, penetration, reach, and sustainability as factors that are feasible and appropriate to extract during an evidence synthesis project.Conclusions: To fully understand the potential value of a health care innovation, it is important to consider not only its effectiveness, but also the process, demands, and resource requirements involved in downstream implementation. While there is variation in the degree to which intervention studies currently report implementation factors, there is a growing demand for this information. Abstracting information about these factors may enhance the value of systematic reviews and other evidence synthesis efforts, improving the dissemination and adoption of interventions that are effective, feasible, and sustainable across different contexts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Although electronic prescribing (e-prescribing) holds promise for preventing prescription errors in the ambulatory setting, research on its effectiveness is inconclusive.Objective: To assess the impact of a stand-alone e-prescribing system on the rates and types of ambulatory prescribing errors.Design, Participants: Prospective, non-randomized study using pre-post design of 15 providers who adopted e-prescribing with concurrent controls of 15 paper-based providers from September 2005 through June 2007.Intervention: Use of a commercial, stand-alone e-prescribing system with clinical decision support including dosing recommendations and checks for drug-allergy interactions, drug-drug interactions, and duplicate therapies.Main Measures: Prescribing errors were identified by a standardized prescription and chart review.Key Results: We analyzed 3684 paper-based prescriptions at baseline and 3848 paper-based and electronic prescriptions at one year of follow-up. For e-prescribing adopters, error rates decreased nearly sevenfold, from 42.5 per 100 prescriptions (95% confidence interval (CI), 36.7-49.3) at baseline to 6.6 per 100 prescriptions (95% CI, 5.1-8.3) one year after adoption (p < 0.001). For non-adopters, error rates remained high at 37.3 per 100 prescriptions (95% CI, 27.6-50.2) at baseline and 38.4 per 100 prescriptions (95% CI, 27.4-53.9) at one year (p = 0.54). At one year, the error rate for e-prescribing adopters was significantly lower than for non-adopters (p < 0.001). Illegibility errors were very high at baseline and were completely eliminated by e-prescribing (87.6 per 100 prescriptions at baseline for e-prescribing adopters, 0 at one year).Conclusions: Prescribing errors may occur much more frequently in community-based practices than previously reported. Our preliminary findings suggest that stand-alone e-prescribing with clinical decision support may significantly improve ambulatory medication safety.Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, Taconic Health Information Network and Community (THINC), NCT00225563, http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00225563?term=Kaushal&rank=6 . [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Injury due to firearms is a serious health issue in the USA, leading to nearly 40,000 deaths annually and many more non-fatal injuries. Despite the significant impact on morbidity and mortality, relatively little research funding is dedicated to understanding the impact of firearm-related injury and to developing strategies to mitigate harm. In part, research has been stymied by decades-old language in federal legislation that was interpreted as prohibiting federal funding for firearm injury–related research. This paper, prepared by members of the Society of General Internal Medicine (SGIM), calls for support for research that seeks to understand the nature of firearm-related injury and resources to develop effective approaches to prevent it. We outline recommendations to develop evidence to inform policymakers and the medical and public health communities. These recommendations include (1) development of a shared national research agenda to address firearm-related injury and death; (2) allocation of federal funds specifically for research related to firearm injury; (3) support for the career development of researchers studying firearm-related injury; and (4) facilitating access to comprehensive data sources needed for developing evidence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The mission of the Veterans Health Administration's (VHA) quality enhancement research initiative (QUERI) is to enhance the quality of VHA health care by implementing clinical research findings into routine care. This paper presents lessons that QUERI investigators have learned through their initial attempts to pursue the QUERI mission. The lessons in this paper represent those that were common across multiple QUERI projects and were mutually agreed on as having substantial impact on the success of implementation. While the lessons are consistent with commonly recognized ingredients of successful implementation efforts, the examples highlight the fact that, even with a thorough knowledge of the literature and thoughtful planning, unexpected circumstances arise during implementation efforts that require flexibility and adaptability. The findings stress the importance of utilizing formative evaluation techniques to identify barriers to successful implementation and strategies to address these barriers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Delivering well-coordinated care is essential for optimizing clinical outcomes, enhancing patient care experiences, minimizing costs, and increasing provider satisfaction. The Veterans Health Administration (VA) has built a strong foundation for internally coordinating care. However, VA faces mounting internal care coordination challenges due to growth in the number of Veterans using VA care, high complexity in Veterans' care needs, the breadth and depth of VA services, and increasing use of virtual care. VA's Health Services Research and Development service with the Office of Research and Development held a conference assessing the state-of-the-art (SOTA) on care coordination. One workgroup within the SOTA focused on coordination between VA providers for high-need Veterans, including (1) Veterans with multiple chronic conditions; (2) Veterans with high-intensity, focused, specialty care needs; (3) Veterans experiencing care transitions; (4) Veterans with severe mental illness; (5) and Veterans with homelessness and/or substance use disorders. We report on this workgroup's recommendations for policy and organizational initiatives and identify questions for further research. Recommendations from a separate workgroup on coordinating VA and non-VA care are contained in a companion paper. Leaders from research, clinical services, and VA policy will need to partner closely as they develop, implement, assess, and spread effective practices if VA is to fully realize its potential for delivering highly coordinated care to every Veteran. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This perspective paper seeks to lay out an efficient approach for health care providers, researchers, and other stakeholders involved in interventions aimed at improving care coordination to partner in locating and using applicable care coordination theory. The objective is to learn from relevant theory-based literature about fit between intervention options and coordination needs, thereby bringing insights from theory to enhance intervention design, implementation, and troubleshooting. To take this idea from an abstract notion to tangible application, our workgroup on models and measures from the Veterans Health Administration (VA) State of the Art (SOTA) conference on care coordination first summarizes our distillation of care coordination theoretical frameworks (models) into three common conceptual domains-context of an intervention, locus in which an intervention is applied, and specific design features of the intervention. Then we apply these three conceptual domains to four cases of care coordination interventions ("use cases") chosen to represent various scopes and stages of interventions to improve care coordination for veterans. Taken together, these examples make theory more accessible and practical by demonstrating how it can be applied to specific cases. Drawing from theory offers one method to anticipate which intervention options match a particular coordination situation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Improving care coordination is a key priority for many healthcare systems. However, initiatives to improve care coordination are complex to implement and have produced mixed results. A better understanding of how to craft and support implementation of effective care coordination strategies is needed.Objective: To identify and understand the challenges and factors encountered by Patient-Aligned Care Team (PACT) staff in performing care coordination tasks in outpatient clinics in the Veterans Health Administration (VA).Design: Qualitative study using semi-structured formative evaluation interviews.Participants: Fourteen interviews with 18 clinical frontline managers and staff from 12 clinic sites across five VA health systems.Interventions: This paper reports on baseline data collected for the Coordination Toolkit and Coaching (CTAC) project. CTAC aims to improve patients' experience of care coordination within VA primary care and between PACT and other outpatient and community settings.Approach: We conducted pre-implementation telephone interviews with frontline managers and staff, primarily nurse managers.Key Results: PACT staff described challenges in aligning care coordination priorities across different levels of the VA system, including staff, patients, and leadership. Additionally, PACT staff noted challenges coordinating care both within and outside the VA, and identified resource barriers impeding their care coordination efforts. To address these challenges, staff made several recommendations for improvement, including (1) contingency staffing to address staff burnout; (2) additional PACT training for new staff; (3) clarification of care coordination roles and responsibilities; and (4) and care coordination initiatives that align both with centrally initiated care coordination programs and frontline needs.Conclusion: In the VA and similarly complex healthcare systems, our findings suggest the need for care coordination strategies that are buttressed by a system-level vision for care coordination, backed up by clear roles and responsibilities for information exchange between primary care staff and other settings, and multidimensional accountability metrics that encompass patient-, staff-, and system-level goals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: This study aims to assess the rate at which screening colonoscopy is performed on patients younger or older than the age range specified in national guidelines, or at shorter intervals than recommended. Such non-indicated use of the procedure is considered low-value care, or overuse. This study is the first systematic review of the rate of non-indicated completed screening colonoscopy in the USA.Methods: PubMed and Embase were queried for relevant studies on overuse of screening colonoscopy published from January 1, 2002, until January 23, 2019. English-language studies that were conducted for screening colonoscopy after 2001 for average-risk patients were included. Studies must have followed national guidelines for detecting rates of overuse. We followed methods outlined in the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and the reporting recommendations of the Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology group (MOOSE).Results: A total of 772 papers were reviewed for inclusion; 42 were reviewed in full text. Of those reviewed, six studies met eligibility criteria, including a total of 459,503 colonoscopies of which 242,756 were screening colonoscopies. The rate of overuse ranged credibly from 17 to 25.7%.Discussion: This study demonstrates that screening colonoscopy is regularly performed in the USA more often, and in populations older or younger, than recommended by national guidelines. Such overuse wastes resources and places patients at unnecessary risk of harm. Efforts to reduce non-indicated screening colonoscopy are needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Treatment decisions about menopause are predicated on a transient duration of vasomotor symptoms. However, evidence supporting a specific duration is weak.Objective: To estimate the natural progression of vasomotor symptoms during the menopause transition by systematically compiling available evidence using meta-analytic techniques.Data Sources: We searched MEDLINE, hand searched secondary references in relevant studies, book chapters, and review papers, and contacted investigators about relevant published research.Review Methods: English language, population-based studies reporting vasomotor symptom prevalence among women in menopausal transition in time intervals based on years to or from final menstrual period were included. Two reviewers independently assessed eligibility and quality of studies and extracted data for vasomotor symptom prevalence.Results: The analyses included 10 studies (2 longitudinal, 8 cross sectional) with 35,445 participants. The percentage of women experiencing symptoms increased sharply in the 2 years before final menstrual period, peaked 1 year after final menstrual period, and did not return to premenopausal levels until about 8 years after final menstrual period. Nearly 50% of all women reported vasomotor symptoms 4 years after final menstrual period, and 10% of all women reported symptoms as far as 12 years after final menstrual period. When data were examined according to symptom severity ('any' vs. 'bothersome'), bothersome symptoms peaked about 1 year earlier and declined more rapidly than symptoms of any severity level.Conclusions: Our findings suggest a median symptom duration of about 4 years among symptomatic women. A longer symptom duration may affect treatment decisions and clinical guidelines. Further prospective, longitudinal studies of menopausal symptoms should be conducted to confirm these results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To determine whether the integration of an automated electronic clinical portfolio into clinical clerkships can improve the quality of feedback given to students on their patient write-ups and the quality of students' write-ups.Design: The authors conducted a single-blinded, randomized controlled study of an electronic clinical portfolio that automatically collects all students' clinical notes and notifies their teachers (attending and resident physicians) via e-mail. Third-year medical students were randomized to use the electronic portfolio or traditional paper means. Teachers in the portfolio group provided feedback directly on the student's write-up using a web-based application. Teachers in the control group provided feedback directly on the student's write-up by writing in the margins of the paper. Outcomes were teacher and student assessment of the frequency and quality of feedback on write-ups, expert assessment of the quality of student write-ups at the end of the clerkship, and participant assessment of the value of the electronic portfolio system.Results: Teachers reported giving more frequent and detailed feedback using the portfolio system (p = 0.01). Seventy percent of students who used the portfolio system, versus 39% of students in the control group (p = 0.001), reported receiving feedback on more than half of their write-ups. Write-ups of portfolio students were rated of similar quality to write-ups of control students. Teachers and students agreed that the system was a valuable teaching tool and easy to use.Conclusions: An electronic clinical portfolio that automatically collects students' clinical notes is associated with improved teacher feedback on write-ups and similar quality of write-ups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Racial-ethnic minorities receive lower quality and intensity of health care compared with whites across a wide range of preventive, diagnostic, and therapeutic services and disease entities. These disparities in health care contribute to continuing racial-ethnic disparities in the burden of illness and death. Several national medical organizations and the Institute of Medicine have issued position papers and recommendations for the elimination of health care disparities. However, physicians in practice are often at a loss for how to translate these principles and recommendations into specific interventions in their own clinical practices. This paper serves as a blueprint for translating principles for the elimination of racial-ethnic disparities in health care into specific actions that are relevant for individual clinical practices. We describe what is known about reducing racial-ethnic disparities in clinical practice and make recommendations for how clinician leaders can apply this evidence to transform their own practices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Patient complexity is often operationalized by counting multiple chronic conditions (MCC) without considering contextual factors that can affect patient risk for adverse outcomes.Objective: Our objective was to develop a conceptual model of complexity addressing gaps identified in a review of published conceptual models.Data Sources: We searched for English-language MEDLINE papers published between 1 January 2004 and 16 January 2014. Two reviewers independently evaluated abstracts and all authors contributed to the development of the conceptual model in an iterative process.Results: From 1606 identified abstracts, six conceptual models were selected. One additional model was identified through reference review. Each model had strengths, but several constructs were not fully considered: 1) contextual factors; 2) dynamics of complexity; 3) patients' preferences; 4) acute health shocks; and 5) resilience. Our Cycle of Complexity model illustrates relationships between acute shocks and medical events, healthcare access and utilization, workload and capacity, and patient preferences in the context of interpersonal, organizational, and community factors.Conclusions/implications: This model may inform studies on the etiology of and changes in complexity, the relationship between complexity and patient outcomes, and intervention development to improve modifiable elements of complex patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Substance use frequently goes undetected in primary care. Though barriers to implementing systematic screening for alcohol and drug use have been examined in urban settings, less is known about screening in rural primary care.Objective: To identify current screening practices, barriers, facilitators, and recommendations for the implementation of substance use screening in rural federally qualified health centers (FQHCs).Design: As part of a multi-phase study implementing electronic health record-integrated screening, focus groups (n = 60: all stakeholder groups) and individual interviews (n = 10 primary care providers (PCPs)) were conducted.Participants: Three stakeholder groups (PCPs, medical assistants (MAs), and patients) at three rural FQHCs in Maine.Approach: Focus groups and interviews were recorded, transcribed, and content analyzed. Themes surrounding current substance use screening practices, barriers to screening, and recommendations for implementation were identified and organized by the Knowledge to Action (KTA) Framework.Key Results: Identifying the problem: Stakeholders unanimously agreed that screening is important, and that universal screening is preferred to targeted approaches. Adapting to the local context: PCPs and MAs agreed that screening should be done annually. Views were mixed regarding the delivery of screening; patients preferred self-administered, tablet-based screening, while MAs and PCPs were divided between self-administered and face-to-face approaches. Assessing barriers: For patients, barriers to screening centered around a perceived lack of rapport with providers, which contributed to concerns about trust, judgment, and privacy. For PCPs and MAs, barriers included lack of comfort, training, and preparedness to address screening results and offer treatment.Conclusions: Though stakeholders agree on the importance of implementing universal screening, concerns about the patient-provider relationship, the consequences of disclosure, and privacy appear heightened by the rural context. Findings highlight that strong relationships with providers are critical for patients, while in-clinic resources and training are needed to increase provider comfort and preparedness to address substance use. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As the United States ages, the patient population in acute care hospitals is increasingly older and more medically complex. Despite evidence of a high burden of disease, high costs, and often poor outcomes of care, there is limited understanding of the presentation, diagnostic strategies, and management of acute illness in older adults. In this paper, we present a strategy for the development of a research agenda at the intersection of hospital and geriatric medicine. This approach is informed by the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) framework for identification and prioritization of research areas, emphasizing input from patients and caregivers. The framework's four components are: 1) Topic generation, 2) Gap Analysis in Systematic Review, 3) Value of information (VOI) analysis, and 4) Peer Review. An inclusive process for topic generation requiring the systematic engagement of multiple stakeholders, especially patients, is emphasized. In subsequent steps, researchers and stakeholders prioritize research topics in order to identify areas that optimize patient-centeredness, population impact, impact on clinical decision making, ease of implementation, and durability. Finally, next steps for dissemination of the research agenda and evaluation of the impact of the patient-centered research prioritization process are described. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses studies on chronic pain selected by the members of the Society of General Internal Medicine. It says that the papers were chosen for their potential to change generalist care of patients with chronic pain. The articles include one on the assessment of pain intensity and interference, a randomized trial on optimized antidepressant therapy and pain self-management to improve pain and depression outcomes, and one on the trends in opioid use in patients with non-cancer pain.

Personal autonomy is widely valued. Recognition of its vulnerability in health care contexts led to the inclusion of respect for autonomy as a key concern in biomedical ethics. The principle of respect for autonomy is usually associated with allowing or enabling patients to make their own decisions about which health care interventions they will or will not receive. In this paper, we suggest that a strong focus on decision situations is problematic, especially when combined with a tendency to stress the importance of patients' independence in choosing. It distracts attention from other important aspects of and challenges to autonomy in health care. Relational understandings of autonomy attempt to explain both the positive and negative implications of social relationships for individuals' autonomy. They suggest that many health care practices can affect autonomy by virtue of their effects not only on patients' treatment preferences and choices, but also on their self-identities, self-evaluations and capabilities for autonomy. Relational understandings de-emphasise independence and facilitate well-nuanced distinctions between forms of clinical communication that support and that undermine patients' autonomy. These understandings support recognition of the value of good patient-professional relationships and can enrich the specification of the principle of respect for autonomy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Latino immigrants face a higher burden of colorectal cancer (CRC) and screening rates are low.Objective: To assess the effectiveness of a multilevel intervention in increasing the rate of CRC screening among Latino immigrants.Design: A randomized controlled trial, with randomization at the physician level.Participants: Pairs of 65 primary care physicians and 65 Latino immigrant patients participated, 31 in the intervention and 34 in the control group.Intervention: CRC educational video in Spanish on a portable personal digital video display device accompanied by a brochure with key information for the patient, and a patient-delivered paper-based reminder for their physician.Measurements: Completed CRC screening, physician recommendation for CRC screening, and patient adherence to physician recommended CRC screening.Results: The overall rate of completed screening for CRC was 55% for the intervention and 18% for the control group (p = 0.002). Physicians recommended CRC screening for 61% of patients in the intervention group versus 41% in the control group (p = 0.08). Of those that received a recommendation, 90% in the intervention group adhered to it versus 26% in the control group (p = 0.007).Conclusions: The intervention was successful in increasing rates of completed CRC screening primarily through increasing adherence after screening was recommended. Additional efforts should focus on developing new strategies to increase physician recommendation for CRC screening, while employing effective patient adherence interventions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Patients' experience of stereotype threat in clinical settings and encounters may be one contributor to health care disparities. Stereotype threat occurs when cues in the environment make negative stereotypes associated with an individual's group status salient, triggering physiological and psychological processes that have detrimental consequences for behavior. By recognizing and understanding the factors that can trigger stereotype threat and understanding its consequences in medical settings, providers can prevent it from occurring or ameliorate its consequences for patient behavior and outcomes. In this paper, we discuss the implications of stereotype threat for medical education and trainee performance and offer practical suggestions for how future providers might reduce stereotype threat in their exam rooms and clinics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Failed referrals for specialty care are common and often represent medical errors. Technological structures and processes account for many failures. Scheduling appointments for subspecialty evaluation is a first step in outpatient referral and consultation.Objective: We determined whether moving from paper-based referrals to a Web-based system with automated tracking features was associated with greater scheduling of appointments among referred patients.Design: Staggered implementation of a quality-improvement project, with comparison of intervention and control groups.Participants: Patients 21 or more years of age referred from any of 11 primary-care clinics to any of 25 specialty clinics.Interventions: Faxed referrals were replaced by a Web-based application shared by generalists and specialists, with enhanced communications and automated notification to the specialty office.Measurements: We compared scheduling before and after implementation and time from referral to appointment. A logistic regression analysis adjusted for demographics.Main Results: Among 40,487 referrals, 54% led to scheduled specialty visits before intervention, compared to 83% with intervention. The median time to appointment was 168 days without intervention and 78 days with intervention. Scheduling increased more when duplicate referrals were not generated (54% for single orders, 24% for multiple orders). After adjustment, referrals with the intervention were more than twice as likely to have scheduled visits.Conclusions: With a new Web-based referrals system, referrals were more than twice as likely to lead to a scheduled visit. This system improves access to specialty medical services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Chart review represents a critical cornerstone for practice-based learning and improvement in our internal medicine residency program.Objective: To document residents' performance monitoring and improvement skills in their continuity clinics, their satisfaction with practice-based learning and improvement, and their ability to self-reflect on their performance.Design: Retrospective longitudinal design with repeated measures.Participants: Eighty Internal Medicine residents abstracted data for 3 consecutive years from the medical records of their 4,390 patients in the University of Wisconsin-Madison (UW) Hospital and Clinics and William S. Middleton Veterans Administration (VA) outpatient clinics.Measurement: Logistic modeling was used to determine the effect of postgraduate year, resident sex, graduation cohort, and clinic setting on residents' "compliance rate" on 17 nationally recognized health screening and chronic disease management parameters from 2003 to 2007.Results: Residents' adherence to national preventive and chronic disease standards increased significantly from intern to subsequent years for administering immunizations, screening for diabetes, cholesterol, cancer, and behavioral risks, and for management of diabetes. Of the residents, 92% found the chart review exercise beneficial, with 63% reporting gains in understanding about their medical practices, 26% reflecting on specific gaps in their practices, and 8% taking critical action to improve their patient outcomes.Conclusions: This paper provides support for the feasibility and practicality of this limited-cost method of chart review. It also directs our residency program's attention in the continuity clinic to a key area important to internal medicine training programs by highlighting the potential benefit of enhancing residents' self-reflection skills. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Overuse of antibiotics in the treatment of acute respiratory tract infection (ARI) contributes to the growing problem of antibiotic-resistant infections.Objective: To identify factors that influence community practitioners to prescribe antibiotics and examine how they differ from the recommendations of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guideline for treatment of ARI.Design: Paper case vignette study using a fractional factorial design.Participants: One hundred one community practitioners and eight faculty members.Main Measurements: We asked community practitioners to estimate how likely they would be to prescribe antibiotics in each of 20 cases of ARI and then used multiple regression to infer the importance weights of each of nine clinical findings. We then compared practitioners' weights with those of a panel of eight faculty physicians who evaluated the cases following the CDC guidelines rather than their own judgments.Main Results: Practitioners prescribed antibiotics in 44.5% of cases, over twice the percentage treated by the panel using the CDC guidelines (20%). In deciding to prescribe antibiotic treatment, practitioners gave little or no weight to patient factors such as whether the patients wanted antibiotics. Although weighting patterns differed among practitioners, the majority (72%) gave the greatest weight to duration of illness. When illness duration was short, the rate of prescribing (20.1%) was the same as the rate of the faculty panel (20%).Conclusions: Based on hypothetical cases of ARI, community practitioners prescribed antibiotics at twice the rate of faculty following CDC practice guidelines. Practitioners were most strongly influenced by duration of illness. The effect of duration was strongest when accompanied by fever or productive cough, suggesting that these situations would be important areas for practitioner education and further clinical studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A Complex Chronic Disease (CCD) is a condition involving multiple morbidities that requires the attention of multiple health care providers or facilities and possibly community (home)-based care. A patient with CCD presents to the health care system with unique needs, disabilities, or functional limitations. The literature on how to best support self-management efforts in those with CCD is lacking. With this paper, the authors present the case of an individual with diabetes and end-stage renal disease who is having difficulty with self-management. The case is discussed in terms of intervention effectiveness in the areas of prevention, addiction, and self-management of single diseases. Implications for research are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In a highly publicized joint report, the National Academy of Engineering and the Institute of Medicine recently recommended the systematic application of systems engineering approaches for reforming our health care delivery system. For this to happen, medical professionals and managers need to understand and appreciate the power that systems engineering concepts and tools can bring to redesigning and improving health care environments and practices.Objective: To present and discuss fundamental concepts and tools of systems engineering and important parallels between systems engineering, health services, and implementation research as it pertains to the care of complex patients.Design: An exploratory, qualitative review of systems engineering concepts and overview of ongoing applications of these concepts in the areas of hemodialysis, radiation therapy, and patient flow modeling.Results: In this paper, we describe systems engineering as the process of identifying the system of interest, choosing appropriate performance measures, selecting the best modeling tool, studying model properties and behavior under a variety of scenarios, and making design and operational decisions for implementation.Conclusions: We discuss challenges and opportunities for bringing people with systems engineering skills into health care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Performance measurement has been widely advocated as a means to improve health care delivery and, ultimately, clinical outcomes. However, the evidence supporting the value of using the same quality measures designed for patients with a single clinical condition in patients with multiple conditions is weak. If clinically complex patients, defined here as patients with multiple clinical conditions, present greater challenges to achieving quality goals, providers may shun them or ignore important, but unmeasured, clinical issues. This paper summarizes the proceedings of a conference addressing the challenge of measuring quality of care in the patient with multiple clinical conditions with the goal of informing the implementation of quality measurement systems and future research programs on this topic. The conference had three main areas of discussion. First, the potential problems caused by applying current quality standards to patients with multiple conditions were examined. Second, the advantages and disadvantages of three strategies to improve quality measurement in clinically complex patients were evaluated: excluding certain clinically complex patients from a given standard, relaxing the performance target, and assigning a greater weight to some measures based on the expected clinical benefit or difficulty of reaching the performance target. Third, the strengths and weaknesses of potential novel measures such change in functional status were considered. The group concurred that, because clinically complex patients present a threat to the implementation of quality measures, high priority must be assigned to a research agenda on this topic. This research should evaluate the impact of quality measurement on these patients and expand the range of quality measures relevant to the care of clinically complex patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The expansion of women in the military is reshaping the veteran population, with women now constituting the fastest growing segment of eligible VA health care users. In recognition of the changing demographics and special health care needs of women, the VA Office of Research & Development recently sponsored the first national VA Women's Health Research Agenda-setting conference to map research priorities to the needs of women veterans and position VA as a national leader in Women's Health Research. This paper summarizes the process and outcomes of this effort, outlining VA's research priorities for biomedical, clinical, rehabilitation, and health services research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The U.S. health care system is one of the world's most advanced systems. Yet, the health care system suffers from unexplained practice variations, major gaps between evidence and practice, and suboptimal quality. Although information processing, communication, and management are key to health care delivery and considerable evidence links information/communication technology (IT) to improvements in patient safety and quality of care, the health care system has a longstanding gap in its investment. In the Crossing the Quality Chasm and Building a Better Delivery System reports, The Institute of Medicine and National Academy of Engineering identified IT integration as critical to improving health care delivery systems. This paper reviews the state of IT use in the U.S. health care system, its role in facilitating evidence-based practices, and identifies key attributes of an ideal IT infrastructure and issues surrounding IT implementation. We also examine structural, financial, policy-related, cultural, and organizational barriers to IT implementation for evidence-based practice and strategies to overcome them. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Significant efforts have been invested in improving our understanding of how to accelerate and magnify the impact of research on clinical practice. While approaches to fostering translation of research into practice are numerous, none appears to be superior and the evidence for their effectiveness is mixed. Lessons learned from formative evaluation have given us a greater appreciation of the contribution of context to successful implementation of quality improvement interventions. While formative evaluation is a powerful tool for addressing context effects during implementation, lessons learned from the social sciences (including management and operations research, sociology, and public health) show us that there are also powerful preimplementation tools available to us. This paper discusses how we might integrate these tools into implementation research. We provide a theoretical framework for our need to understand organizational contexts and how organizational characteristics can alert us to situations where preimplementation tools will prove most valuable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

While great strides have been made recently in improving end-of-life care in the United States, people with dementia often die with inadequate pain control, with feeding tubes in place, and without the benefits of hospice care. In this paper, we discuss the most important and persistent challenges to providing excellent end-of-life care for patients with dementia, including dementia not being viewed as a terminal illness; the nature of the course and treatment decisions in advanced dementia; assessment and management of symptoms; the caregiver experience and bereavement; and health systems issues. We suggest approaches for overcoming these barriers in the domains of education, clinical practice, and public policy. As the population ages, general internists increasingly will be called upon to provide primary care for a growing number of patients dying with dementia. There are great opportunities to improve end-of-life care for this vulnerable and underserved population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVE: Little is known about the impact of fellowship training in primary care on subsequent research productivity. Our goal was to identify characteristics of research fellows and their training associated with subsequent publications and research funding. DESIGN: Mail survey in 1998. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: 1988–1997 graduates of 25 National Research Service Award primary care research fellowships in the United States. OUTCOME MEASURES: 1) Publishing 1 or more papers per year since the beginning of fellowship, or 2) serving as principal investigator (PI) on a federal or non-federal grant. RESULTS: One hundred forty-six of two hundred fifteen program graduates (68%) completed the survey. The median age was 38 years, and 51% were male. Thirty-two percent had published 1 or more papers per year, and 44% were PIs. Male gender (odds ratio [OR], 3.6; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.4 to 9.2), self-reported allocation of 40% or more of fellowship time to research (OR, 4.4; 95% CI, 1.8 to 11.2), and having an influential mentor during fellowship (OR, 5.0; 95% CI, 1.5 to 17.2) were independently associated with publishing 1 or more papers per year. Fellows with funding as a PI were also more likely to have an influential mentor (OR, 3.0; 95% CI, 1.3 to 7.2). CONCLUSION: Primary care fellows who had influential mentors were more productive in research early after fellowship. Awareness of the indicators of early research success can inform the policies of agencies that fund research training and the curricula of training programs themselves. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Prior presentations: None INTRODUCTION The epidemic of burnout among clinicians is well documented[1]. We examined burnout among all team members using data from a project on impact of payment reform on safety net health care clinicians, staff, and patients. Burnout: 1 = not burned out, 5 = very burned out * I p i <.05 DISCUSSION Among staff and clinicians in three safety net clinics, we found a wide range of burnout, from 12.5 to 87.5%. [Extracted from the article]

This paper presents data on the characteristics, work activities, job-related stress, work satisfaction, and career aspirations of 150 faculty and 595 housestaff physicians who regularly provide continuous primary care in 15 teaching hospital-based group practices. The faculty were young, board-certified generalists; they had been recruited from local training programs and spent the majority of their time seeing patients and supervising housestaff. Job satisfaction among faculty and housestaff was generally high. Dissatisfaction occurred most often with aspects of work over which physicians had little control. Although work-related stress was common, it was not related to job satisfaction. Compared with housestaff in traditional residency programs, housestaff enrolled in special Primary Care Training Programs reported significantly greater job satisfaction. For all housestaff, satisfaction with work in the group practice was consistently associated with decreased interest in subspecialty training. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article offers information on improving care coordination for Veterans Within Veterans' Health Administration (VA) and healthcare system. It mentions coordinating care is essential for improving patients' clinical outcomes, enhancing patients' experiences of care, increasing provider satisfaction, and decreasing costs; and also mentions in the patient-centered medical home (PCMH) model, primary care is the locus for coordinating care.

The article discusses the study on problems posed by language barriers. The authors of this paper turn to a series of papers testing innovative solutions. A pair of interpreters in a hospital ward service has been embedded. A study also compares the use of interpreters to language concordant interactions.

Background: Health information exchange (HIE) notifications when patients experience cross-system acute care encounters offer an opportunity to provide timely transitions interventions to improve care across systems.Objective: To compare HIE notification followed by a post-hospital care transitions intervention (CTI) with HIE notification alone.Design: Cluster-randomized controlled trial with group assignment by primary care team.Patients: Veterans 65 or older who received primary care at 2 VA facilities who consented to HIE and had a non-VA hospital admission or emergency department visit between 2016 and 2019.Interventions: For all subjects, real-time HIE notification of the non-VA acute care encounter was sent to the VA primary care provider. Subjects assigned to HIE plus CTI received home visits and telephone calls from a VA social worker for 30 days after arrival home, focused on patient activation, medication and condition knowledge, patient-centered record-keeping, and follow-up.Measures: Primary outcome: 90-day hospital admission or readmission.Secondary Outcomes: emergency department visits, timely VA primary care team telephone and in-person follow-up, patients' understanding of their condition(s) and medication(s) using the Care Transitions Measure, and high-risk medication discrepancies.Key Results: A total of 347 non-VA acute care encounters were included and assigned: 159 to HIE plus CTI and 188 to HIE alone. Veterans were 76.9 years old on average, 98.5% male, 67.8% White, 17.1% Black, and 15.1% other (including Hispanic). There was no difference in 90-day hospital admission or readmission between the HIE-plus-CTI and HIE-alone groups (25.8% vs. 20.2%, respectively; risk diff 5.6%; 95% CI - 3.3 to 14.5%, p = .25). There was also no difference in secondary outcomes.Conclusions: A care transitions intervention did not improve outcomes for veterans after a non-VA acute care encounter, as compared with HIE notification alone. Additional research is warranted to identify transitions services across systems that are implementable and could improve outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Black patients in the USA are disproportionately affected by chronic pain, yet there are few interventions that address these disparities.Objective: To determine whether a walking-focused, proactive coaching intervention aimed at addressing contributors to racial disparities in pain would improve chronic pain outcomes among Black patients compared to usual care.Design: Randomized controlled trial with masked outcome assessment ( Clinicaltrials.gov : NCT01983228).Participants: Three hundred eighty Black patients at the Atlanta VA Health Care System with moderate to severe chronic back, hip, or knee pain.Intervention: Six telephone coaching sessions over 8-14 weeks, proactively delivered, using action planning and motivational interviewing to increase walking, or usual care.Main Measures: Primary outcome was a 30% improvement in pain-related physical functioning (Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire [RMDQ]) over 6 months among Black patients, using intention-to-treat. Secondary outcomes were improvements in pain intensity and interference, depression, anxiety, global impression of change in pain, and average daily steps.Key Results: The intervention did not produce statistically significant effects on the primary outcome (at 6 months, 32.4% of intervention participants had 30% improvement on the RMDQ vs. 24.7% of patients in usual care; aOR=1.61, 95% CI, 0.94 to 2.77), nor on other secondary outcomes assessed at 6 months, with the exception that intervention participants reported more favorable changes in pain relative to usual care (mean difference=-0.54, 95% CI, -0.85 to -0.23). Intervention participants also experienced a significant reduction in pain intensity and pain interference over 3 months (mean difference=-0.55, 95% CI, -0.88 to -0.22).Conclusions: A novel intervention to improve chronic pain among Black patients did not produce statistically significant improvements on the primary outcome relative to usual care. More intensive efforts are likely required among this population, many of whom were economically disadvantaged and had mental health comorbidities and physical limitations.Trial Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01983228. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Telepsychiatry Collaborative Care (TCC) and Telepsychiatry/Telepsychology Enhanced Referral (TER) expand the reach of specialty mental health services to underserved populations.Objective: Assess clinical predictors of treatment engagement for complex psychiatric conditions in TCC-in which remote specialists consult with primary care teams via an onsite care manager who also provides brief psychotherapy-and TER, in which remote specialists provide direct telehealth treatment.Design: A randomized pragmatic trial from twenty-four primary care clinics without onsite psychiatrists or psychologists.Participants: A total of 1,004 adult patients screened positive for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD)and/or bipolar disorder were randomized to receive TCC or TER for 1 year.Main Measures: Psychotherapy engagement was measured by the number of sessions completed, and pharmacotherapy engagement by the medication adherence item from the Schizophrenia Care and Assessment Program Health Questionnaire (SCAP-HQ).Key Results: Engagement in TCC psychotherapy visits was greater compared to TER. There was no association between the PTSD symptom severity and treatment engagement. The internal state scale (ISS) activation subscale, an indicator of mania, was associated with reduced odds of initiating psychotherapy (odds ratio [OR] = 0.70; 95% CI, 0.59 to 0.84) but not the number of sessions attended once psychotherapy started. The Drug Abuse Screening Test-10(DAST-10) score was associated with receipt of fewer psychotherapy sessions (incidence ratio rate [IRR] = 0.88; 95% CI, 0.81 to 0.95). The number of physical health comorbidities was associated with greater engagement in psychotherapy (IRR = 1.11, 95% CI, 1.03 to 1.19) and pharmacotherapy (OR = 1.54; 95% CI, 1.27 to 1.87). None of the findings varied by intervention group.Conclusions: Both teleintegrated and telereferral care offer an opportunity to treat patients with complex psychiatric conditions. While there was no difference in clinical characteristics predicting engagement, onsite care managers engaged patients in more psychotherapy sessions than remote therapists.Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02738944. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Many older adults in the U.S. do not receive appropriate colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. Although primary care physicians' recommendations to their patients are central to the screening process, little information is available about their recommendations in relation to guidelines for the menu of CRC screening modalities, including fecal occult blood testing (FOBT), flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS), colonoscopy, and double contrast barium enema (DCBE). The objective of this study was to explore potentially modifiable physician and practice factors associated with guideline-consistent recommendations for the menu of CRC screening modalities.Methods: We examined data from a nationally representative sample of 1266 physicians in the U.S. surveyed in 2007. The survey included questions about physician and practice characteristics, perceptions about screening, and recommendations for age of initiation and screening interval for FOBT, FS, colonoscopy and DCBE in average risk adults. Physicians' screening recommendations were classified as guideline consistent for all, some, or none of the CRC screening modalities recommended. Analyses used descriptive statistics and polytomous logit regression models.Results: Few (19.1%; 95% CI:16.9%, 21.5%) physicians made guideline-consistent recommendations across all CRC screening modalities that they recommended. In multivariate analysis, younger physician age, board certification, north central geographic region, single specialty or multi-specialty practice type, fewer patients per week, higher number of recommended modalities, use of electronic medical records, greater influence of patient preferences for screening, and published clinical evidence were associated with guideline-consistent screening recommendations (p < 0.05).Conclusions: Physicians' CRC screening recommendations reflect both overuse and underuse, and few made guideline-consistent CRC screening recommendations across all modalities they recommended. Interventions that focus on potentially modifiable physician and practice factors that influence overuse and underuse and address the menu of recommended screening modalities will be important for improving screening practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Electronic 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.Objective: We surveyed primary care providers (PCPs) to assess the impact of electronic referrals on workflow and clinical care.Design: We administered an 18-item, web-based questionnaire to all 368 PCPs who had the option of referring to SFGH.Measurements: We 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.Results: Two 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 > 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.Conclusions: PCPs 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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: As the U.S. population ages, primary care clinicians (PCCs) will encounter more patients with geriatric syndromes, such as urinary incontinence (UI) and falls. Yet, current evidence suggests that care of these conditions does not meet expected standards and that PCCs would benefit from tools to improve care of these conditions. Little is known about the role of computerized condition-specific templates for improving care of geriatric syndromes.Aim: We sought to develop and assess the usefulness of condition-specific computerized templates in a primary care setting.Setting: A large academic Veterans Affairs medical center.Program Description: We developed and tested the usefulness of 2 condition-specific computerized templates (UI and falls) that could be added on to an existing electronic health record system.Program Evaluation: Semistructured interviews were used to identify barriers to use of computerized templates. Usefulness and usability were assessed through a randomized-controlled trial involving standardized patients.Discussion: Use of condition-specific templates resulted in improved history and physical exam assessment for both UI and falls (P < .05). Our computerized, condition-specific templates are a promising method for improving care of geriatric conditions in a primary care setting, but require improvement in usability before widespread implementation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To comply with pain management standards, Bellevue Hospital in New York City implemented a mandatory computerized pain assessment screen (PAS) in its electronic medical record (EMR) system for every outpatient encounter. We assessed provider acceptance of the instrument and examined whether the intervention led to increased documentation of pain-related diagnoses or inquiries.Design: Cross-sectional survey; a pre- and posthistorically controlled observational study.Subjects and Measurements: The utility of the computerized tool to medicine housestaff and attendings was assessed by an anonymous survey. We conducted an electronic chart review comparing all adult primary care patient encounters over a 2-day period 6 months prior to implementation of the PAS and on 2 days 6 months after its implementation.Results: Forty-seven percent of survey respondents felt that the computerized assessment tool was "somewhat difficult" or "very difficult" to use. The majority of respondents (79%) felt the tool did not change their pain assessment practice. Of 265 preintervention patients and 364 postintervention patients seen in the clinic, 42% and 37% had pain-related diagnoses, respectively (P=.29). Pain inquiry by the physician was noted for 49% of preintervention patients and 44% of the postintervention patients (P=.26). In 55% of postintervention encounters, there was discordance between the pain documentation using the PAS tool and the free text section of the medical note.Conclusion: A mandatory computerized pain assessment tool did not lead to an increase in pain-related diagnoses and may have hindered the documentation of pain assessment because of the perceived burden of using the application. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Concerns exist about the ability of safety net health care organizations to participate in US health care reform. Primary care practices are key to several efforts, but little is known about how capabilities of primary care practices serving a high share of disadvantaged patients compare to other practices.Objective: To assess capabilities around access to and quality of care among primary care practices serving a high share of Medicaid and uninsured patients compared to practices serving a low share of these patients.Design: We analyzed data from the National Survey of Healthcare Organizations and Systems (response rate 46.8%), conducted 2017-2018.Participants: A total of 2190 medical practices with at least three adult primary care physicians.Main Measures: Our key exposures are payer mix and federally qualified health center (FQHC) designation. We classified practices as safety net if they reported a combined total of at least 25% of annual revenue from uninsured or Medicaid patients; we then further classified safety net practices into those that identified as an FQHC and those that did not.Key Results: FQHCs were more likely than other safety net practices and non-safety net practices to offer early or late appointments (79%, 55%, 62%; p=0.001) and weekend appointments (56%, 39%, 42%; p=0.03). FQHCs more often provided medication-assisted treatment for opioid use disorders (43%, 27%, 25%; p=0.004) and behavioral health services (82%, 50%, 36%; p<0.001). FQHCs were more likely to screen patients for social and financial needs. However, FQHCs and other safety net providers had more limited electronic health record (EHR) capabilities (61%, 71%, 80%; p<0.001).Conclusion: FQHCs were more likely than other types of primary care practices (both safety net practices and other practices) to possess capabilities related to access and quality. However, safety net practices were less likely than non-safety net practices to possess health information technology capabilities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Physicians can play a key role in smoking cessation but often fail to advise smokers effectively, mainly because they lack counseling skills. We need effective training programs starting during residency to improve physicians' smoking cessation interventions and smokers' quit rates. To achieve this goal, we developed a curriculum using active learning methods and the stages-of-change model. A randomized trial demonstrated that this program increased the quality of physician's counseling and smokers' quit rates at 1 year. This paper describes the educational content and methods of this program. Participants learn to assess smokers' stage of change, to use counseling strategies matching the smoker's stage, and to prescribe pharmacological therapy. This 2 half-day training program includes observation of video-clips, interactive workshops, role plays, practice with standardized patients, and written material for physicians and patients. Participants reached learning objectives and appreciated the content and active methods of the program. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper, we identify 8 methods used to measure errors and adverse events in health care and discuss their strengths and weaknesses. We focus on the reliability and validity of each, as well as the ability to detect latent errors (or system errors) versus active errors and adverse events. We propose a general framework to help health care providers, researchers, and administrators choose the most appropriate methods to meet their patient safety measurement goals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Coronary artery disease (CAD) risk prediction tools are useful decision supports. Their clinical impact has not been evaluated amongst Asians in primary care.Objective: We aimed to develop and validate a diagnostic prediction model for CAD in Southeast Asians by comparing it against three existing tools.Design: We prospectively recruited patients presenting to primary care for chest pain between July 2013 and December 2016. CAD was diagnosed at tertiary institution and adjudicated. A logistic regression model was built, with validation by resampling. We validated the Duke Clinical Score (DCS), CAD Consortium Score (CCS), and Marburg Heart Score (MHS).Main Measures: Discrimination and calibration quantify model performance, while net reclassification improvement and net benefit provide clinical insights.Key Results: CAD prevalence was 9.5% (158 of 1658 patients). Our model included age, gender, type 2 diabetes mellitus, hypertension, smoking, chest pain type, neck radiation, Q waves, and ST-T changes. The C-statistic was 0.808 (95% CI 0.776-0.840) and 0.815 (95% CI 0.782-0.847), for model without and with ECG respectively. C-statistics for DCS, CCS-basic, CCS-clinical, and MHS were 0.795 (95% CI 0.759-0.831), 0.756 (95% CI 0.717-0.794), 0.787 (95% CI 0.752-0.823), and 0.661 (95% CI 0.621-0.701). Our model (with ECG) correctly reclassified 100% of patients when compared with DCS and CCS-clinical respectively. At 5% threshold probability, the net benefit for our model (with ECG) was 0.063. The net benefit for DCS, CCS-basic, and CCS-clinical was 0.056, 0.060, and 0.065.Conclusions: PRECISE (Predictive Risk scorE for CAD In Southeast Asians with chEst pain) performs well and demonstrates utility as a clinical decision support for diagnosing CAD among Southeast Asians. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Workplace discrimination negatively affects physicians of color personally and professionally. Although the occurrence of discrimination from patients has been visible in social media, popular press, and personal essays, scant research exists on patients as a source of discrimination directed at physicians of color.Objective: To explore practicing general internists' experiences observing or interacting with patients exhibiting discriminatory behavior directed at physicians of color.Design: A qualitative study with in-depth, semi-structured, one-on-one telephone interviews conducted and recorded between May and September 2019.Participants: A purposive sample of 24 general internists practicing at 12 academic health centers in the USA: 14 self-identified as White and 10 as a physician of color, which included Asian, Black, Native American, and self-identified other race.Approach: Four coders analyzed the transcribed and verified interview text; thematic analysis was used to inductively identify cohesive themes and subthemes.Key Results: Analyses revealed four major themes: (1) assumption that a legitimate doctor is White, male, and able-bodied; (2) legacy of the Black experience; (3) working through the struggle of discrimination; and (4) ethical dilemma of providing care to discriminatory patients. In addition to discrimination from patients based on a physician's race or ethnicity, participants described experiencing or observing discrimination based on a physician's gender and disability status. Participants generally expressed a need for greater support from colleagues and more guidance from institutional policies.Conclusions: General internists practicing in academic settings reported observing or experiencing discrimination from patients based on the physician's race, ethnicity, gender (or their intersection), and disability status and the ethical dilemma of providing care to such patients. These results contribute to growing evidence of the need for institutions to better support an increasingly diverse physician workforce with policies and specific guidance to help physicians respond to discrimination from patients while still providing quality care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Implementation science (IS) and quality improvement (QI) inhabit distinct areas of scholarly literature, but are often blended in practice. Because practice-based research networks (PBRNs) draw from both traditions, their experience could inform opportunities for strategic IS-QI alignment.Objective: To systematically examine IS, QI, and IS/QI projects conducted within a PBRN over time to identify similarities, differences, and synergies.Design: Longitudinal, comparative case study of projects conducted in the Oregon Rural Practice-based Research Network (ORPRN) from January 2007 to January 2019.Approach: We reviewed documents and conducted staff interviews. We classified projects as IS, QI, IS/QI, or other using established criteria. We abstracted project details (e.g., objective, setting, theoretical framework) and used qualitative synthesis to compare projects by classification and to identify the contributions of IS and QI within the same project.Key Results: Almost 30% (26/99) of ORPRN's projects included IS or QI elements; 54% (14/26) were classified as IS/QI. All 26 projects used an evidence-based intervention and shared many similarities in relation to objective and setting. Over half of the IS and IS/QI projects used randomized designs and theoretical frameworks, while no QI projects did. Projects displayed an upward trend in complexity over time. Project used a similar number of practice change strategies; however, projects classified as IS predominantly employed education/training while all IS/QI and most QI projects used practice facilitation. Projects including IS/QI elements demonstrated the following contributions: QI provides the mechanism by which the principles of IS are operationalized in order to support local practice change and IS in turn provides theories to inform implementation and evaluation to produce generalizable knowledge.Conclusions: Our review of projects conducted over a 12-year period in one PBRN demonstrates key synergies for IS and QI. Strategic alignment of IS/QI within projects may help improve care quality and bridge the research-practice gap. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Text Box 1 The RAND/PPMDPatient-Centeredness Method[7], [18]-[21] Graph ONLINE DELPHI PROCESSES AS A CONTINUOUS PATIENT ENGAGEMENT METHOD ACROSS CPG STAGES At the beginning of the CPG development process, patients can help I nominate and prioritize topics i that they find important. For example, patients and patient advocacy groups can endorse guidelines to improve their legitimacy and trustworthiness to patient communities, as well as patient adherence to guideline recommendations. Guideline development groups can then engage patients in recommendation development to ensure that recommendations facilitate patient-centered care. For example, patients can define and prioritize significant changes in views from the patient community since a CPG has been developed, such as outcomes and interventions that should be included in a CPG update. [Extracted from the article]