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]

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]

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]

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]

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: 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]

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]

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.

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: 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]

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]

Background: Financial burden can affect healthcare utilization. Few studies have assessed the short-term associations between material (debt, trouble paying rent) and psychological (worry or distress about affording future healthcare) financial risks, and subsequent outpatient and emergency healthcare use. Worry was defined as concerns about affording future healthcare.Objective: Examine whether worry about affording healthcare is associated with healthcare utilization when controlling for material risk and general anxiety DESIGN: Longitudinal observational study PARTICIPANTS: Kaiser Permanente members with exchange-based federally subsidized health insurance (n = 450, 45% response rate) MAIN MEASURES: Survey measures of financial risks (material difficulty paying for medical care and worry about affording healthcare) and general anxiety. Healthcare use (primary care, urgent care, emergency department, and outpatient specialty visits) in the 6 months following survey completion.Key Results: Emergency department and primary care visits were not associated with material risk, worry about affording care, or general anxiety in individual and pooled analyses (all 95% confidence intervals (CI) for relative risk (RR) included 1). Although no individual predictor was associated with urgent care use (all 95% CIs for RR included 1), worry about affording prescriptions (relative risk (RR) = 2.01; 95% CI 1.14, 3.55) and general anxiety (RR = 0.38; 95% CI 0.15, 0.95) were significant when included in the same model, suggesting the two confounded each other. Worry about affording healthcare services was associated with fewer specialty care visits (RR = 0.40; 95% CI 0.25, 0.64) even when controlling for material risk and general anxiety, although general anxiety was also associated with more specialty care visits (RR = 1.98; 95% CI, 1.23, 3.18).Conclusions: Screening for both general anxiety and financial worry may assist with specialty care utilization. Identifying these concerns may provide more opportunities to assist patients. Future research should examine interventions to reduce worry about cost of care. [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]

Background: While health-related social needs (HRSN) are known to compromise health, work to date has not clearly demonstrated the relationship between clinically acknowledged social needs, via ICD-10 Z-codes, and readmission.Objective: Assess the rate of 30-, 60-, and 90-day readmission by the level of ICD-10-identified social need. In addition, we examined the associations between demographics, social need, hospital characteristics, and comorbidities on 30-day readmission.Design: Retrospective study using the 2017 Nationwide Readmission Database PARTICIPANTS: We identified 5 domains of HRSN from ICD-10 diagnosis codes including employment, family, housing, psychosocial, and socioeconomic status (SES) and identified how many and which an individual was coded with during the year.Main Measures: The proportion of patients with 30-, 60-, and 90-day readmission stratified by the number of HRSN domains with a multivariable logistic regression to examine the relationship between the number/type of and readmission adjusting for sex, age, payer, hospital characteristics, functional limitations, and comorbidities.Key Results: From 13,217,506 patients, only 2.4% had at least one HRSN diagnosis. Among patients without HRSN, 11.5% had a 30-day readmission, compared to 27.0% of those with 1 domain, increasing to 63.5% for patients with codes in 5 domains. Similar trends were observed for 60- and 90-day readmission; 78.7% of patients with documented HRSN in all 5 domains were hospitalized again within 90 days. The adjusted odds ratio for readmission for individuals with all 5 domains was 12.55 (95% CI: 9.04, 17.43). Housing and employment emerged as two of the most commonly documented HRSN, as well as having the largest adjusted odds ratio.Conclusions: There is a dose-response relationship between the number of HRSN diagnoses and hospital readmission. This work calls attention to the need to develop interventions to reduce readmissions for those at social risk and demonstrates the significance of ICD-10 Z-codes in health outcomes studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Self-rated health is a strong predictor of mortality and morbidity. Machine learning techniques may provide insights into which of the multifaceted contributors to self-rated health are key drivers in diverse groups.Objective: We used machine learning algorithms to predict self-rated health in diverse groups in the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS), to understand how machine learning algorithms might be used explicitly to examine drivers of self-rated health in diverse populations.Design: We applied three common machine learning algorithms to predict self-rated health in the 2017 BRFSS survey, stratified by age, race/ethnicity, and sex. We replicated our process in the 2016 BRFSS survey.Participants: We analyzed data from 449,492 adult participants of the 2017 BRFSS survey.Main Measures: We examined area under the curve (AUC) statistics to examine model fit within each group. We used traditional logistic regression to predict self-rated health associated with features identified by machine learning models.Key Results: Each algorithm, regularized logistic regression (AUC: 0.81), random forest (AUC: 0.80), and support vector machine (AUC: 0.81), provided good model fit in the BRFSS. Predictors of self-rated health were similar by sex and race/ethnicity but differed by age. Socioeconomic features were prominent predictors of self-rated health in mid-life age groups. Income [OR: 1.70 (95% CI: 1.62-1.80)], education [OR: 2.02 (95% CI: 1.89, 2.16)], physical activity [OR: 1.52 (95% CI: 1.46-1.58)], depression [OR: 0.66 (95% CI: 0.63-0.68)], difficulty concentrating [OR: 0.62 (95% CI: 0.58-0.66)], and hypertension [OR: 0.59 (95% CI: 0.57-0.61)] all predicted the odds of excellent or very good self-rated health.Conclusions: Our analysis of BRFSS data show social determinants of health are prominent predictors of self-rated health in mid-life. Our work may demonstrate promising practices for using machine learning to advance health equity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Patients who undergo the complex series of transitions from the hospital to a skilled nursing facility (SNF) back to home represent a unique patient population with multiple comorbidities and impaired functional abilities. The needs and outcomes of patients who are discharged from the hospital to SNF before returning home are understudied in care transitions scholarship.Objective: To study the patient and caregiver challenges and perspectives on transitions from the hospital to the SNF and back to home.Design: Between 48 h and 1 week after discharge from the SNF, semi-structured interviews were performed with a convenience sample of patients and caregivers in their homes. Within 1 to 2 weeks after the baseline interview, follow-up interviews were performed over the phone.Participants: A total of 39 interviewees comprised older adults undergoing the series of transitions from hospital to skilled nursing facility to home and their informal caregivers.Main Measures: A constructionist, grounded-theory approach was used to code the interviews, identify major themes and subthemes, and develop a theoretical model explaining the outcomes of the SNF to home transition.Key Results: The mean age of the patients was 76.6 years and 64.8 years for the caregivers. Four major themes were identified: comforts of home, information needs, post-SNF care, and independence. Patients noted an extended time away from home and were motivated to return to and remain in the home. Information needs were variably met and affected post-SNF care, including medication management, appointments, and therapy gains and setbacks. Interviewees identified independent function at home as the most important outcome of the transition home.Conclusions: Post-SNF in home support is needed rapidly after discharge from the SNF to prevent adverse outcomes. In-home support needs to be highly individualized based on a patient's and caregiver's unique situation and needs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Innovations and improvements in care delivery are often not spread across all settings that would benefit from their uptake. Scale-up and spread efforts are deliberate efforts to increase the impact of innovations successfully tested in pilot projects so as to benefit more people. The final stages of scale-up and spread initiatives must contend with reaching hard-to-engage sites.Objective: To describe the process of scale-up and spread initiatives, with a focus on hard-to-engage sites and strategies to approach them.Design: Qualitative content analysis of systematically identified literature and key informant interviews.Participants: Leads from large magnitude scale-up and spread projects.Approach: We conducted a systematic literature search on large magnitude scale-up and spread and interviews with eight project leads, who shared their perspectives on strategies to scale-up and spread clinical and administrative practices across healthcare systems, focusing on hard-to-engage sites. We synthesized these data using content analysis.Key Results: Searches identified 1919 titles, of which 52 articles were included. Thirty-four discussed general scale-up and spread strategies, 11 described hard-to-engage sites, and 7 discussed strategies for hard-to-engage sites. These included publications were combined with interview findings to describe a fourth phase of the national scale-up and spread process, common challenges for spreading to hard-to-engage sites, and potential benefits of working with hard-to-engage sites, as well as useful strategies for working with hard-to-engage sites.Conclusions: We identified scant published evidence that describes strategies for reaching hard-to-engage sites. The sparse data we identified aligned with key informant accounts. Future work could focus on better documentation of the later stages of spread efforts, including specific tailoring of approaches and strategies used with hard-to-engage sites. Spread efforts should include a "flexible, tailored approach" for this highly variable group, especially as implementation science is looking to expand its impact in routine care settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Accurately describing treatment effects using plain language and narrative statements is a critical step in communicating research findings to end users. However, the process of developing these narratives has not been historically guided by a specific framework. The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Evidence-based Practice Center Program developed guidance for narrative summaries of treatment effects that identifies five constructs. We explicitly identify these constructs to facilitate developing narrative statements: (1) direction of effect, (2) size of effect, (3) clinical importance, (4) statistical significance, and (5) strength or certainty of evidence. These constructs clearly overlap. It may not always be feasible to address all five constructs. Based on context and intended audience, investigators can determine which constructs will be most important to address in narrative statements. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Embedded research is an innovative means to improve performance in the learning healthcare system (LHS). However, few descriptions of successful embedded research programs have been published. In this perspective, we describe the Care Improvement Research Team, a mature partnership between researchers and clinicians at Kaiser Permanente Southern California. The program supports a core team of researchers and staff with dedicated resources to partner with health system leaders and practicing clinicians, using diverse methods to identify and rectify gaps in clinical practice. For example, recent projects helped clinicians to provide better care by reducing prescribing of unnecessary antibiotics for acute sinusitis and by preventing readmissions among the elderly. Embedded in operational workgroups, the team helps formulate research questions and enhances the rigor and relevance of data collection and analysis. A recent business-case analysis cited savings to the organization of over $10 million. We conclude that embedded research programs can play a key role in fulfilling the promise of the LHS. Program success depends on dedicated funding, robust data systems, and strong relationships between researchers and clinical stakeholders. Embedded researchers must be responsive to health system priorities and timelines, while clinicians should embrace researchers as partners in problem solving. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) could devote resources to collate and assess quality improvement studies to support learning health systems (LHS) but there is no reliable data on the consistency of data extraction for important criteria.Methods: We identified quality improvement studies and evaluated the consistency of data extraction from two experienced independent reviewers at three time points: baseline, first revision (where explicit instructions for each criterion were created), and final revision (where the instructions were revised). Six investigators looked at the data extracted by the two systematic reviewers and determined the extent of similarity on a scale of 0 to 10 (where 0 represented no similarity and 10 perfect similarity). There were 42 assessments for baseline, 42 assessments for the first revision, and 42 assessments for the final revision. We asked two LHS participants to assess the relative value of our criteria.Results: The consistency of extraction improved from 1.17 ± 1.85 at baseline to 6.07 ± 2.76 after revision 1 (P < 0.001) and to 6.81 ± 1.94 out of 10 for the final revision (P < 0.001). However, the final revision was not significantly improved over the first revision (P = 0.14). One key informant rated the difficulty in finding and using quality improvement studies a 6 (moderately difficult) while the other a 4 (moderately difficult). When asked how valuable it would be if AHRQ found and collated the demographic information about the health systems and the interventions used in published quality improvement studies, they rated it a 9 (highly valuable) and a 6 (moderately valuable).Conclusion: Creating explicit instructions for extracting data for quality improvement studies helps enhance the consistency of data extraction. This is important because it is difficult for LHS to vet these quality improvement studies on their own and they would value AHRQ's support in that regard. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Little is known about how physicians spend their work time.Objective: To determine how physicians in outpatient care spend their time at work, using an innovative method: ecological momentary assessment (EMA).Design: Physician activity was measured via EMA, using a smartphone app.Participants: Twenty-eight practices across 16 US states. Sixty-one physicians: general internal medicine, family medicine, non-interventional cardiology, orthopedics.Main Measures: Proportions of time spent on 14 activities within 6 broad categories of work: direct patient care (including both face-to-face care and other patient care-related activities), electronic health record (EHR) input, administration, teaching/supervising, personal time, and other.Key Results: After excluding personal time, physicians spent 66.5% of their time on direct patient care (23.6% multitasking with use of the EHR and 42.9% without the EHR), 20.7% on EHR input alone, 7.7% on administrative activities, and 5.0% on other activities (0.6% using the EHR). In total, physicians spent 44.9% of their time on the EHR.Limitations: Unable to measure time spent at home on the EHR or other work tasks; participating physicians were not a random sample of US physicians.Conclusions: The efficiency of highly trained professionals spending only two-thirds of their time on direct patient care may be questioned. EHR use continues to account for a large proportion of physician time. Further attempts should be made to redesign both EHRs and physician work processes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Narrow definitions of long-term opioid (LTO) use result in limited knowledge of the full range of LTO prescribing patterns and the rates of these patterns.Objective: To investigate a model of new LTO prescribing typologies using latent class analysis.Design: National administrative data from the VA Corporate Data Warehouse were accessed using the VA Informatics and Computing Infrastructure. Characterization of the typology of initial LTO prescribing was explored using latent class analysis.Participants: Veterans initiating LTO during 2016 through the Veteran's Administration Healthcare System (N = 42,230).Main Measures: Opioid receipt as determined by VA prescription data, using the cabinet supply methodology.Key Results: Over one-quarter (27.7%) of the sample fell into the fragmented new long-term prescribing category, 39.8% were characterized by uniform daily new LTO, and the remaining 32.7% were characterized by uniform episodic LTO. Each of these three broad sub-groups also included two additional sub-groups (6 classes total in the model), characterized by the presence or absence of prior opioid prescriptions.Conclusions: New LTO prescribing in the VA includes uniform daily prescribing, uniform episodic prescribing, and fragmented prescribing. Future work is needed to elucidate the safety and efficacy of these prescribing patterns. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Ineffective transitions of care continue to be a source of risk for patients. Although there has been widespread implementation of electronic medical record (EMR) systems, little is currently known about hospitalists' and primary care providers' (PCPs) direct communication preferences at discharge using messaging capabilities in a shared EMR system.Objective: We examined how hospitalists and PCPs with a shared EMR prefer to directly communicate at the time of hospital discharge by identifying preferred modes, information prioritization, challenges, facilitators, and proposed solutions.Design: A sequential, explanatory mixed methods study with surveys and semi-structured interviews.Participants: Thirty-eight academic hospitalists and 63 PCPs working in outpatient clinics in a single safety net hospital system with a shared EMR.Main Approach: Descriptive statistics were used to analyze survey responses. Interviews were analyzed using immersion/crystallization and a mixture of inductive and deductive thematic analysis.Key Results: PCPs preferred direct communication at discharge through a message within the EMR while hospitalists preferred a message within the EMR and email. Qualitative results identified key themes related to patient care and direct communication: value of direct communication, safety, social determinants of health, and clinical judgment. Both groups prioritized direct communication for high-risk medications, pending and follow-up studies, and high-risk patients that hospitalists were concerned about. Overall, both hospitalists and PCPs reported that ensuring patient safety, flagging patients with social challenges, and expressing concerns about patients based on clinical judgment were key communication priorities.Conclusions: Hospitalists and primary care providers report considerable overlap in preferences for direct communication at the time of hospital discharge through a shared EMR. Specifically, both groups reported similar concerns regarding patient safety and continuity during transitions. Direct messaging within the EMR could enable "closed loop" communication that helps ensure safe transitions of care for high-risk patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Health care operations managers need to balance scheduling frequent follow-ups for patients with chronic conditions and fitting in patients requiring care for new complaints.Objective: We quantify how frequency of follow-up visits corresponds with access to care for patients receiving care from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA).Design: We use patient data collected between October 2013 and June 2016 by the Survey of Healthcare Experiences of Patients (SHEP). Our sample is comprised of 94,496 patients. We estimate logistic models with 1-month lagged facility-level predictors.Main Measures: We calculate monthly measures characterizing facility-level service provision, including the average time between successive primary care visits, the average primary care visit length, the percentage of primary care appointments that are overbooked, the percent of visits that are unscheduled (i.e., walk-ins), and the ratio of patients to providers. We control for economic factors that are associated with health care supply and demand, including median household income, veteran priority status, the Zillow Housing Price Index, and veteran unemployment rates. We also control for patient demographics.Patients: We restrict the data to patients with at least one in-person primary care visit who have provided information on their ability to access urgent and routine care.Key Results: We find that shorter average follow-up times are associated with better access for patients needing urgent or routine care. A 1-month increase in the average time between successive primary care visits is associated with 10% (p < 0.001) lower odds of reporting being able to access urgent care within 1 day and 13% (p < 0.001) lower odds of reporting usually or always being able to access routine care when needed.Conclusion: Facilities with higher average follow-up times are more likely to have patients report that they are unable to quickly access urgent or routine primary care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: On July 1, 2018, the Veterans Health Administration (VA) National Center for Ethics in Health Care implemented the Life-Sustaining Treatment Decisions Initiative (LSTDI). Its goal is to identify, document, and honor LST decisions of seriously ill veterans. Providers document veterans' goals and decisions using a standardized LST template and order set.Objective: Evaluate the first 7 months of LSTDI implementation and identify predictors of LST template completion.Design: Retrospective observational study of clinical and administrative data. We identified all completed LST templates, defined as completion of four required template fields. Templates also include four non-required fields. Results were stratified by risk of hospitalization or death as estimated by the Care Assessment Need (CAN) score.Subjects: All veterans with VA utilization between July 1, 2018, and January 31, 2019.Main Measures: Completed LST templates, goals and LST preferences, and predictors of documentation.Results: LST templates were documented for 108,145 veterans, and 85% had one or more of the non-required fields completed in addition to the required fields. Approximately half documented a preference for cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Among those who documented specific goals, half wanted to improve or maintain function, independence, and quality of life while 28% had a goal of life prolongation irrespective of risk of hospitalization/death and 45% expressed a goal of comfort. Only 7% expressed a goal of being cured. Predictors of documentation included VA nursing home residence, older age, frailty, and comorbidity, while non-Caucasian race, rural residence, and receipt of care in a lower complexity medical center were predictive of no documentation.Conclusions: LST decisions were documented for veterans at high risk of hospitalization or death. While few expressed a preference for cure, half desire, cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Predictors of documentation were generally consistent with existing literature. Opportunities to reduce observed disparities exist by leveraging available VA resources and programs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Readmission rates are high among heart failure (HF) patients who require home health care (HHC) after hospitalization. Although HF patients who require HHC are often sicker than those who do not, HHC delivery itself may also be suboptimal.Objective: We aimed to describe the workflow of HHC among adults discharged home after a HF hospitalization, including the roles of various stakeholders, and to determine where along these workflow challenges and opportunities for improvement exist.Design and Participants: In this qualitative study, we used purposeful sampling to approach and recruit a variety of key stakeholders including home health aides, nurses, HF patients, family caregivers, physicians, social workers, home care agency leaders, and policy experts. The study took place in New York, NY, from March to October 2018.Approach: Using a semi-structured topic guide, we elicited participants' experiences with HHC in HF through a combination of one-on-one interviews and focus groups. Data were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed thematically. We also asked selected participants to depict in a drawing their understanding of HHC workflow after hospitalization for HF patients. We synthesized the drawings into a final image.Key Results: Study participants (N = 80) described HHC for HF patients occurring in 6 steps, with home health aides playing a main role: (1) transitioning from hospital to home; (2) recognizing clinical changes; (3) making decisions; (4) managing symptoms; (5) asking for help; and (6) calling 911. Participants identified challenges and opportunities for improvement for each step.Conclusions: Our findings suggest that HHC for HF patients occurs in discrete steps, each with different challenges. Rather than a one-size-fits-all approach, various interventions may be required to optimize HHC delivery for HF patients in the post-discharge period. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Clinical video telehealth (CVT) offers the opportunity to improve access to healthcare providers in medically underserved areas. However, because CVT encounters are mediated through technology, they may result in unintended consequences related to the patient-provider interaction.Methods: Twenty-seven patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus enrolled in Veteran Affairs Health Care and at least one previous telehealth visit experience were interviewed regarding their perspectives on facilitators and barriers to communication with their provider during their CVT visit. The semi-structured telephone interviews were approximately 30 min and were audio-recorded and transcribed. We conducted a thematic content analysis of the interview transcripts. Codes from the transcripts were grouped into thematic categories using the constant comparison method and each theme is represented with illustrative quotes.Results: We identified several themes related to patients' perspectives on CVT. In general, patients expressed satisfaction with CVT visits including better access to appointments, shorter travel time, and less time in the waiting room. Yet, patients also identified several challenges and concerns about CVT visits compared with in-person visits, including concerns about errors in their care because of perceived difficulty completing the physical exam, perceptions that providers paid less attention to them, barriers to speaking up and asking questions, and difficulty establishing a provider-patient relationship. Patients reported feeling less involved during the visit, difficulty finding opportunities to speak, and feeling rushed by the provider.Conclusions: Patients believed that CVT can improve their access to care, but could hinder communication with their provider, and some were concerned about the completeness and accuracy of the physical exam. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Although previous research has demonstrated high rates of inappropriate diagnostic imaging, the potential influence of several physician-level characteristics is not well established.Objective: To examine the influence of three types of physician characteristics on inappropriate imaging: experience, specialty training, and self-referral.Design: A retrospective analysis of over 70,000 MRI claims submitted for commercially insured individuals. Physician characteristics were identified through a combination of administrative records and primary data collection. Multi-level modeling was used to assess relationships between physician characteristics and inappropriate MRIs.Setting: Massachusetts PARTICIPANTS: Commercially insured individuals who received an MRI between 2010 and 2013 for one of three conditions: low back pain, knee pain, and shoulder pain.Measurements: Guidelines from the American College of Radiology were used to classify MRI referrals as appropriate/inappropriate. Experience was measured from the date of medical school graduation. Specialty training comprised three principal groups: general internal medicine, family medicine, and orthopedics. Two forms of self-referral were examined: (a) the same physician who ordered the procedure also performed it, and (b) the physicians who ordered and performed the procedure were members of the same group practice and the procedure was performed outside the hospital setting.Results: Approximately 23% of claims were classified as inappropriate. Physicians with 10 or less years of experience had significantly higher odds of ordering inappropriate MRIs. Primary care physicians were almost twice as likely to order an inappropriate MRI as orthopedists. Self-referral was not associated with higher rates of inappropriate MRIs.Limitations: Classification of MRIs was conducted with claims data. Not all self-referred MRIs could be detected.Conclusions: Inappropriate imaging continues to be a driver of wasteful health care spending. Both physician experience and specialty training were highly associated with inappropriate imaging. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Health care systems struggle to identify risk factors for suicide. Adverse social determinants of health (SDH) are strong predictors of suicide risk, but most electronic health records (EHR) do not include SDH data.Objective: To determine the prevalence of SDH documentation in the EHR and how SDH are associated with suicide ideation and attempt.Design: This cross-sectional analysis included EHR data spanning October 1, 2015-September 30, 2016, from the Veterans Integrated Service Network Region 4.Participants: The study included all patients with at least one inpatient or outpatient visit (n = 293,872).Main Measurements: Adverse SDH, operationalized using Veterans Health Administration (VHA) coding for services and International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD)-10 codes, encompassed seven types (violence, housing instability, financial/employment problems, legal problems, familial/social problems, lack of access to care/transportation, and nonspecific psychosocial needs). We defined suicide morbidity by ICD-10 codes and data from the VHA's Suicide Prevention Applications Network. Logistic regression assessed associations of SDH with suicide morbidity, adjusting for socio-demographics and mental health diagnoses (e.g., major depression). Statistical significance was assessed with p < .01.Key Results: Overall, 16.4% of patients had at least one adverse SDH indicator. Adverse SDH exhibited dose-response-like associations with suicidal ideation and suicide attempt: each additional adverse SDH increased odds of suicidal ideation by 67% (AOR = 1.67, 99%CI = 1.60-1.75; p < .01) and suicide attempt by 49% (AOR = 1.49, 99%CI = 1.33-1.68; p < .01). Independently, each adverse SDH had strong effect sizes, ranging from 1.86 (99%CI = 1.58-2.19; p < .01) for legal issues to 3.10 (99%CI = 2.74-3.50; p < .01) for non-specific psychosocial needs in models assessing suicidal ideation and from 1.58 (99%CI = 1.10-2.27; p < .01) for employment/financial problems to 2.90 (99%CI = 2.30-4.16; p < .01) for violence in models assessing suicide attempt.Conclusions: SDH were strongly associated with suicidal ideation and suicide attempt even after adjusting for mental health diagnoses. Integration of SDH data in EHR could improve suicide prevention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Social determinants of health (SDoH) are the conditions in which people live and work that shape access to essential social and economic resources. Calls for healthcare systems to intervene on unmet social needs have stimulated several large-scale initiatives across the country. Yet, such activities are underway in the absence of a unifying conceptual framework outlining the potential mechanisms by which healthcare-based unmet social need interventions can improve health outcomes. Drawing on theoretical foundations and empirical evidence about the relationship between unmet social needs and health, the authors developed the OASIS (Outcomes from Addressing SDoH in Systems) conceptual framework to map the known and hypothesized pathways by which unmet social need screening and referral interventions may impact outcomes. The OASIS framework may help guide policy makers, healthcare system leaders, clinicians, and researchers to utilize a more unified approach in their efforts to implement and evaluate unmet social need interventions and thus foster the development of an evidence base to inform healthcare systems to more effectively mitigate the consequences of unmet social needs. Adopting an overarching conceptual framework for addressing unmet social needs by healthcare systems holds promise for better achieving health equity and promoting health at the individual and population levels. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Heterogeneity of existing physician burnout studies impairs analyses of longitudinal trends, geographic distribution, and organizational factors impacting physician burnout. The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) is one of the largest integrated healthcare systems in the USA, offering a unique opportunity to study burnout across VA sites and time.Objective: To characterize longitudinal burnout trends of VA physicians and assess organizational characteristics and geographic distribution associated with physician burnout.Design: Longitudinal study of the VA All Employee Survey during 2013-2017.Participants: Self-identified physicians practicing in one of nine clinical service areas at 140 VA sites nationwide.Main Measures: We identified burnout using a validated definition adapted from the Maslach Burnout Inventory and characterized burnout trends for physicians in different clinical service areas. We used clustering analysis to categorize sites based on their burnout rates over time, and compared organizational characteristics and geographic distribution of high, medium, and low burnout categories.Key Results: We identified 40,382 physician responses from 140 VA sites. Mean burnout rates across all physicians ranged from 34.3% in 2013 to a high of 39.0% in 2014. Primary care physicians had the highest burnout. High burnout sites were more likely to be rural and non-teaching, have lower complexity (i.e., offer fewer advanced clinical services), and have fewer unique patients per site.Conclusions: VA physician burnout was lower than previously described in many non-VA studies and was relatively stable over time. These findings may be due to unique characteristics of the VA practice environment. Nonetheless, with over a third of VA physicians reporting burnout, organizational interventions are needed. Primary care physicians and those practicing at small, rural sites have higher rates of burnout and may warrant more focused attention. Our results can guide targeted interventions to promote VA physician well-being and inform efforts to address burnout in diverse clinical settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Short-term health care costs following completion of health risk assessments and coaching programs in the VA have not been assessed.Objective: To compare VA health care expenditures among veterans who participated in a behavioral intervention trial that randomized patients to complete a HRA followed by health coaching (HRA + coaching) or to complete the HRA without coaching (HRA-alone).Design: Four-hundred seventeen veterans at three Veterans Affairs (VA) Medical Centers or Clinics were randomized to HRA + coaching or HRA-alone. Veterans randomized to HRA-alone (n = 209) were encouraged to discuss HRA results with their primary care team, while veterans randomized to HRA + coaching (n = 208) received two brief telephone-delivered health coaching calls.Participants: We included 411 veterans with available cost data.Main Measures: Total VA health expenditures 6 months following trial enrollment were estimated using a generalized linear model with a gamma distribution and log link function. In exploratory analysis, model-based recursive partitioning was used to determine whether the intervention effect on short-term costs differed among any patient subgroups.Key Results: Most participants were male (85%); mean age was 56, and mean body mass index was 34. From the generalized linear model, 6-month estimated mean total VA expenditures were similar ($8665 for HRA + coaching vs $9900 for HRA-alone, p = 0.25). In exploratory subgroup analysis, among unemployed veterans with good sleep and fair or poor perceived health, mean observed expenditures in the HRA + coaching group were higher than in the HRA-alone group ($12,814 vs $7971). Among unemployed veterans with good sleep and good general health, mean observed expenditures in the HRA + coaching group were lower than in the HRA-alone group ($5082 vs $11,612).Conclusions: Compared to completing and receiving HRA results, working with health coaches to set actionable health behavior change goals following HRA completion did not reduce short-term health expenditures.Trial Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT01828567. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Despite the importance of professionalism, little is known about how burnout relates to professionalism among practicing physicians.Objective: To evaluate the relationship between burnout and professional behaviors and cost-conscious attitudes.Design and Participants: Cross-sectional study in a national sample of physicians of whom a fourth received a sub-survey with items exploring professional behaviors and cost-conscious attitudes. Responders who were not in practice or in select specialties were excluded.Measures: Maslach Burnout Inventory and items on professional behaviors and cost-conscious attitudes.Key Results: Among those who received the sub-survey 1008/1224 (82.3%) responded, and 801 were eligible for inclusion. Up to one third of participants reported engaging in unprofessional behaviors related to administrative aspects of patient care in the last year, such as documenting something they did not do to close an encounter in the medical record (243/759, 32.0%). Fewer physicians reported other dishonest behavior (e.g., claiming unearned continuing medical education credit; 40/815, 4.9%). Most physicians endorsed cost-conscious attitudes with over 75% (618/821) agreeing physicians have a responsibility to try to control health-care costs and 62.9% (512/814) agreeing that cost to society is important in their care decisions regarding use of an intervention. On multivariable analysis adjusting for personal and professional characteristics, burnout was independently associated with reporting 1 or more unprofessional behaviors (OR 2.01, 95%CI 1.47-2.73, p < 0.0001) and having less favorable cost-conscious attitudes (difference on 6-24 scale - 0.90, 95%CI - 1.44 to - 0.35, p = 0.001).Conclusions: Professional burnout is associated with self-reported unprofessional behaviors and less favorable cost-conscious attitudes among physicians. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is common in the primary care setting. Early interventions may prevent progression of renal disease and reduce risk for cardiovascular complications, yet quality gaps have been documented. Successful approaches to improve identification and management of CKD in primary care are needed.Objective: To assess whether implementation of a primary care improvement model results in improved identification and management of CKD DESIGN: 18-month group-randomized study PARTICIPANTS: 21 primary care practices in 13 US states caring for 107,094 patients INTERVENTIONS: To promote implementation of CKD improvement strategies, intervention practices received clinical quality measure (CQM) reports at least quarterly, hosted an on-site visit and 2 webinars, and sent clinician/staff representatives to a "best practice" meeting. Control practices received CQM reports at least quarterly.Main Measures: Changes in practice adherence to a set of 11 CKD CQMs KEY RESULTS: We observed significantly greater improvements among intervention practices for annual screening for albuminuria in patients with diabetes or hypertension (absolute change 22% in the intervention group vs. - 2.6% in the control group, p < 0.0001) and annual monitoring for albuminuria in patients with CKD (absolute change 21% in the intervention group vs. - 2.0% in the control group, p < 0.0001). Avoidance of NSAIDs in patients with CKD declined in both intervention and control groups, with a significantly greater decline in the control practices (absolute change - 5.0% in the intervention group vs. - 10% in the control group, p < 0.0001). There were no other significant changes found for the other CQMs. Variable implementation of CKD improvement strategies was noted across the intervention practices.Conclusions: Implementation of a primary care improvement model designed to improve CKD identification and management resulted in significantly improved care on 3 out of 11 CQMs. Incomplete adoption of improvement strategies may have limited further improvement. Improving CKD identification and management likely requires a longer and more intensive intervention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Most patients with substance use disorders (SUDs) never receive treatment and SUDs are under-recognized in primary care (PC) where patients can be treated or linked to treatment. Asking PC patients to directly report SUD symptoms on questionnaires might help identify SUDs but to our knowledge, this approach is previously untested.Objective: To describe the prevalence and severity of DSM-5 SUD symptoms reported by PC patients as part of routine care.Design: Cross-sectional study using secondary data.Participants: A total of 241,265 adult patients who visited one of 25 PC sites in an integrated health system in Washington state and had alcohol, cannabis, or other drug use screening documented in their EHRs (March 2015-July 2018) were included in main analyses if they had a positive screen for high-risk substance use defined as AUDIT-C score 7-12 points, or report of past-year daily cannabis use or any other drug use.Main Measures: The main outcome was number of SUD symptoms based on Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, 5th edition (DSM-5), reported on Symptom Checklists (0-11) for alcohol or other drugs: 2-3 mild; 4-5 moderate; 6-11 severe.Results: Of screened patients, 16,776 (5.7%) reported high-risk use of alcohol (2.4%), cannabis (3.9%), and/or other drugs (1.7%), and 65.0-69.9% of those completed Symptom Checklists. Of those with high-risk alcohol use, 52.5% (95% CI 50.9-54.0%) reported ≥ 2 symptoms consistent with mild-severe alcohol use disorders. Of those reporting daily cannabis use, 29.8% (28.6-30.9%) reported ≥ 2 symptoms consistent with mild-severe SUDs. Of those reporting any other drug use, 37.5% (35.7-39.3%) reported ≥ 2 symptoms consistent with mild-severe SUDs.Conclusions and Relevance: Many PC patients who screened positive for high-risk substance use reported symptoms consistent with DSM-5 SUDs on self-report Symptom Checklists. Use of SUD Symptom Checklists could support PC providers in making SUD diagnoses and initiating discussions of substance use. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Little is known about the frequency, patterns, and determinants of readmissions among patients initially hospitalized for an ambulatory care-sensitive condition (ACSC). The degree to which hospitalizations in close temporal proximity cluster has also not been studied. Readmission patterns involving clustering likely reflect different underlying determinants than the same number of readmissions more evenly spaced.Objective: To characterize readmission rates, patterns, and predictors among patients initially hospitalized with an ACSC.Design: Retrospective analysis of the 2010-2014 Nationwide Readmissions Database.Participants: Non-pregnant patients aged 18-64 years old during initial ACSC hospitalization and who were discharged alive (N = 5,007,820).Main Measures: Frequency and pattern of 30-day all-cause readmissions, grouped as 0, 1, 2+ non-clustered, and 2+ clustered readmissions.Key Results: Approximately 14% of patients had 1 readmission, 2.4% had 2+ non-clustered readmissions, and 3.3% patients had 2+ clustered readmissions during the 270-day follow-up. A higher Elixhauser Comorbidity Index was associated with increased risk for all readmission groups, namely with adjusted odds ratios (AORs) ranging from 1.12 to 3.34. Compared to patients aged 80 years and older, those in younger age groups had increased risk of 2+ non-clustered and 2+ clustered readmissions (AOR range 1.27-2.49). Patients with chronic versus acute ACSCs had an increased odds ratio of all readmission groups compared to those with 0 readmissions (AOR range 1.37-2.69).Conclusions: Among patients with 2+ 30-day readmissions, factors were differentially distributed between clustered and non-clustered readmissions. Identifying factors that could predict future readmission patterns can inform primary care in the prevention of readmissions following ACSC-related hospitalizations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Studies suggest that black patients have better interactions, on average, with physicians of their own race. Whether this reflects greater "cultural competence" in race-concordant relationships, or other effects of race unrelated to physician behavior, is unclear. It is also unclear if physician race influences patient decision-making.Objective: To determine whether physician race affects patients' ratings of physicians and decision-making, independent of physician behavior.Design: Randomized study using standardized video vignettes.Participants: Primary care patients with coronary risk factors or disease.Interventions: Each participant viewed one of 16 vignettes depicting a physician reviewing cardiac catheterization results and recommending coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery. Vignettes varied only in terms of physicians' race, gender, age, and communication style (high vs. low patient-centeredness).Main Measures: Participants rated the video physician's communication, interpersonal style, competence, trustworthiness, likability, and overall performance (0-4 Likert scales). They also rated the necessity of CABG (0-5 scale) and whether they would undergo CABG or obtain a second opinion if they were the video patient (0-3 scales).Key Results: Participants included 107 black and 131 white patients (72% participation rate). Black participants viewing a black (vs. white) video physician gave higher ratings on all physician attributes (e.g., overall rating 3.22 vs. 2.34, p < 0.001) and were more likely to perceive CABG as necessary (4.05 vs. 3.72, p = 0.03) and say they would undergo CABG if they were the video patient (2.43 vs. 2.09, p = 0.004). Patient-centered communication style reduced, but did not eliminate, the impact of race concordance. Physician race was not associated with any outcomes among white patients.Conclusions: Black patients viewed the doctor in a scripted vignette more positively, and were more receptive to the same recommendation, communicated in the same way, with a black vs. white physician. Patient-centered communication reduced but did not eliminate the effect of physician race. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Half of women undergoing mammography have dense breasts. Mandatory dense breast notification and educational materials have been shown to confuse women, rather than empower them.Objective: This study used a mixed method, multi-stakeholder approach to assess acceptability of an interactive, computer-animated agent that provided breast density information to women and changes in knowledge, satisfaction, and informational needs.Design: A pre-post survey and qualitative focus groups assessed the acceptability of the computer-animated agent among women. An anonymous, online survey measuring acceptability was delivered to a multi-stakeholder group.Participants: English-speaking, mammography-eligible women ages 40-74 were invited and 44 women participated in one of nine focus groups. In addition, 14 stakeholders representing primary care, radiology, patient advocates, public health practitioners, and researchers completed the online survey.Interventions: A prototype of a computer-animated agent was delivered to women in a group setting; stakeholders viewed the prototype independently.Main Measures: Data collected included open-ended qualitative questions that guided discussion about the content and form of the computer-animated agent. Structured surveys included domains related to knowledge, acceptability, and satisfaction. Stakeholder acceptability was measured with a series of statements about aspects of the intervention and delivery approach and are reported as the proportion of respondents who endorsed each statement.Key Results: Six of 12 knowledge items demonstrated improvement post-intervention, satisfaction with the agent was high (81%), but the number of unanswered questions did not improve (67% vs. 54%, p = 0.37). Understanding of the distinction between connective and fatty tissue in the breast did not increase (30% vs. 26%, p = 0.48). Results of the multi-stakeholder survey suggest broad acceptability of the approach and agent.Conclusions: Findings highlight the benefits of a brief interactive educational exposure as well as misperceptions that persisted. Results demonstrate the need for an evidence-based, accessible intervention that is easy to understand for patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Acupuncture has been shown to be effective for the treatment of chronic musculoskeletal back, neck, and osteoarthritis pain. However, access to acupuncture treatment has been limited in medically underserved and low-income populations.Objective: Acupuncture therapy delivered in groups could reduce cost and expand access. We compared the effectiveness of group versus individual acupuncture for pain and function among ethnically diverse, low-income primary care patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain.Design: This was a randomized comparative effectiveness non-inferiority trial in 6 Bronx primary care community health centers. Participants with chronic (> 3 months) back, neck, or osteoarthritis pain were randomly assigned to individual or group acupuncture therapy for 12 weeks.Participants: Seven hundred seventy-nine participants were randomized. Mean age was 54.8 years. 35.3% of participants identified as black and 56.9% identified as Latino. Seventy-six percent were Medicaid insured, 60% reported poor/fair health, and 37% were unable to work due to disability.Interventions: Participants received weekly acupuncture treatment in either group or individual setting for 12 weeks.Main Measures: Primary outcome was pain interference on the Brief Pain Inventory at 12 weeks; secondary outcomes were pain severity (BPI), physical and mental well-being (PROMIS-10), and opiate use. Outcome measures were collected at baseline, 12 and 24 weeks.Key Results: 37.5% of individual arm and 30.3% in group had > 30% improvement in pain interference (d = 7.2%, 95% CI - 0.6%, 15.1%). Non-inferiority of group acupuncture was not demonstrated for the primary outcome assuming a margin of 10%. In the responder analysis of physical well-being, 63.1% of individual participants and 59.5% of group had clinically important improvement at 12 weeks (d = 3.6%, 95% CI - 4.2%, 11.4%).Conclusions: Both individual and group acupuncture therapy delivered in primary care settings reduced chronic pain and improved physical function at 12 weeks; non-inferiority of group was not shown.Trial Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov # NCT02456727. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: National guidelines advise decreasing opioids for chronic pain, but there is no guidance on implementation.Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of an Integrated Pain Team (IPT) clinic in decreasing opioid dose and mitigating opioid risk.Design: This study prospectively compared two matched cohorts receiving chronic pain care through IPT (N = 147) versus usual primary care (UPC, N = 147) over 6 months. Patients were matched on age, sex, psychiatric diagnoses, and baseline opioid dose.Patients: Veterans receiving care at a VA medical center or VA community-based clinics.Intervention: Interdisciplinary IPT, consisting of a collocated medical provider, psychologist, and pharmacist embedded in VA primary care providing short-term biopsychosocial management of veterans with chronic pain and problematic opioid use.Main Measures: Change in opioid dose expressed as morphine equivalent daily dose (MEDD) and opioid risk mitigation evaluated at baseline, 3 months, and 6 months.Key Results: Compared with veterans receiving UPC, those followed by IPT had a greater mean MEDD decrease of 42 mg versus 8 mg after 3 months and 56 mg versus 17 mg after 6 months. In adjusted analysis, compared with UPC, veterans in IPT achieved a 34-mg greater mean reduction at 3 months (p = 0.002) and 38-mg greater mean reduction at 6 months (p = 0.003). Nearly twice as many patients receiving care through IPT versus UPC reduced their daily opioid dose by ≥50%, representing more than a two-fold improvement at 3 months, which was sustained at 6 months [odds ratio = 2.03; 95% CI = 1.04-3.95, p = 0.04]. Significant improvements were also demonstrated in opioid risk mitigation by 6 months, including increased urine drug screen monitoring, naloxone kit distribution, and decreased co-prescription of opioids and benzodiazepines (all p values < 0.001).Conclusions: Interdisciplinary biopsychosocial models of pain care can be embedded in primary care and lead to significant improvements in opioid dose and risk mitigation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Integrating mental health services into primary care settings is complex and challenging. Although facilitation strategies have successfully supported implementation of primary care mental health integration and other complex innovations, we know little about the time required or its cost.Objective: To examine the time and organizational cost of facilitating implementation of primary care mental health integration.Design: Descriptive analysis.Participants: One expert external facilitator and two internal regional facilitators who helped healthcare system stakeholders, e.g., leaders, managers, clinicians, and non-clinical staff, implement primary care mental health integration at eight clinics.Intervention: Implementation facilitation tailored to the needs and resources of the setting and its stakeholders.Main Measures: We documented facilitators' and stakeholders' time and types of activities using a structured spreadsheet collected from facilitators on a weekly basis. We obtained travel costs and salary information. We conducted descriptive analysis of time data and estimated organizational cost.Key Results: The external facilitator devoted 263 h (0.09 FTE), including travel, across all 8 clinics over 28 months. Internal facilitator time varied across networks (1792 h versus 1169 h), as well as clinics. Stakeholder participation time was similar across networks (1280.6 versus 1363.4 person hours) but the number of stakeholders varied (133 versus 199 stakeholders). The organizational cost of providing implementation facilitation also varied across networks ($263,490 versus $258,127). Stakeholder participation accounted for 35% of the cost of facilitation activities in one network and 47% of the cost in the other.Conclusions: Although facilitation can improve implementation of primary care mental health integration, it requires substantial organizational investments that may vary by site and implementation effort. Furthermore, the cost of using an external expert to transfer facilitation skills and build capacity for implementation efforts appears to be minimal. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Primary care practices increasingly rely on the growing workforce of nurse practitioners (NPs) to meet primary care demand. Understanding teamwork between NPs and physicians in primary care practices is critically important.Objective: We assessed teamwork between NPs and physicians practicing within the same primary care practice and determined how teamwork affects their job satisfaction, intent to leave their current job, and quality of care.Design: A cross-sectional survey design was used to collect data from both NPs and physicians in New York State in 2017.Participants: 584 participants (398 NPs and 186 physicians) from 476 primary care practices completed the survey yielding a 27% response rate for NPs and 12% for physicians.Main Measures: The survey tool contained validated measures of teamwork and three outcomes: job satisfaction, intent to leave, and perceived quality of care. Simple and multi-level multivariable regression models were built.Key Results: Most participants (76%) were either moderately satisfied or very satisfied with their job (NP sample: 75%; physician sample: 77%) and about 10% intended to leave their current job (NP sample: 11%; physician sample: 9%). The average perceived quality of care was the same across NP and physician samples with a mean of 8.5 on a 11 point scale. After controlling for confounders, a higher organizational-level teamwork score was associated with higher job satisfaction (cumulative OR: 3.00; 95% CI: 1.85-4.88), lower odds of intent to leave (OR: 0.25; 95% CI: 0.09-0.74), and higher perceived quality of care (b=1.00; 95% CI: 0.77-1.23).Conclusions: This study produced evidence about NP-physician teamwork in primary care practices. We found the vast majority of NPs and physicians reported favorable teamwork, and that teamwork affects clinician job satisfaction and intent to leave as well as perceived quality of care in their practices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Evidence is limited and mixed as to how the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) Medicaid expansions affected the utilization of primary care physicians (PCPs) and emergency departments (EDs) at the national level.Objective: To examine the association between the ACA Medicaid expansions and changes in the utilization of PCP and ED visits at the national level during the first 3 years (2014-2016) of the implementation.Design: A difference-in-differences analysis to compare outcomes between individuals in 32 states that expanded Medicaid versus individuals in 19 non-expansion states.Participants: A nationally representative sample of US-born individuals 26-64 years old with family incomes lower than 138% of the federal poverty level from the 2010-2016 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey.Intervention: ACA Medicaid expansions MAIN MEASURES: We examined PCP-related outcomes ((i) whether a participant had any PCP visit during a year and (ii) the annual number of PCP visits per person) and ED-related outcomes ((i) whether a participant had any ED visit during a year and (ii) the annual number of ED visits per person).Key Results: A total of 17,803 participants were included in our analysis. We found that the proportion of individuals with any PCP visit during a year marginally increased (difference-in-differences estimate, + 3.6 percentage points [pp]; 95% CI, - 0.4 pp to + 7.6 pp; P = 0.08) following the Medicaid expansions, without any change in the annual number of PCP visits per person. We found no evidence that ED utilization (both the proportion of individuals with any ED visit during a year and the annual number of ED visits per person) changed meaningfully after the Medicaid expansions.Conclusion: Using the nationally representative data of individuals who were affected by the ACA, we found that the ACA Medicaid expansions were associated with a modest improvement in access to PCPs without an increase in ED use. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]