Search

Introduction Collabo RATE is a brief patient survey focused on shared decision making. This paper aims to (i) provide insight on facilitators and challenges to implementing a real-time patient survey and (ii) evaluate Collabo RATE scores and response rates across multiple clinical settings with varied patient populations. Method All adult patients at three United States primary care practices were eligible to complete Collabo RATE post-visit. To inform key learnings, we aggregated all mentions of unanticipated decisions, problems and administration errors from field notes and email communications. Mixed-effects logistic regression evaluated the impact of site, clinician, patient age and patient gender on the Collabo RATE score. Results While Collabo RATE score increased only slightly with increasing patient age ( OR 1.018, 95% CI 1.014-1.021), female patient gender was associated with significantly higher Collabo RATE scores ( OR 1.224, 95% CI 1.073-1.397). Clinician also predicts Collabo RATE score (random effect variance 0.146). Site-specific factors such as clinical workflow and checkout procedures play a key role in successful in-clinic implementation and are significantly related to Collabo RATE scores, with Site 3 scoring significantly higher than Site 1 ( OR 1.759, 95% CI 1.216 to 2.545) or Site 2 (z=−2.71, 95% CI −1.114 to −0.178). Discussion This study demonstrates that Collabo RATE can be used in diverse primary care settings. A clinic's workflow plays a crucial role in implementation. Patient experience measurement risks becoming a burden to both patients and administrators. Episodic use of short measurement tools could reduce this burden. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To estimate the impact of opting-out from Medicare supervision requirements for certified registered nurse anesthetists (CRNAs) on anesthesiologists' work patterns.Data Sources/study Setting: Secondary data from two national surveys of anesthesiologists and the Area Health Resource File.Study Design: We use a matching difference-in-difference regression which contrasts the change in work patterns for anesthesiologists in California, which dropped supervision requirements, to the change for similar anesthesiologists. Key outcome variables include the number of weekly hours worked, the type of work done, and type of care delivery teams.Data Collection/extraction Methods: Self-reported national survey data drawn from members of the American Society of Anesthesiologists.Principal Findings: Anesthesiologists in California saw no change in time spent working or time spent supervising CRNAs. There was a decrease in direct care clinical work hours along with a shift in working more in intraoperative care, a decrease in postoperative care, and an increase in the percentage of cases supervising residents.Conclusions: Anesthesiologists had small but real responses to California's decisions to opt-out of the physician supervision requirement for CRNAs, doing more work in intraoperative care and less outside of the operating room. Total hours worked saw no change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Out-of-network emergency department (ED) use, or use that occurs outside the contracted network, may lead to increased care fragmentation and cost. We examined factors associated with out-of-network ED use among Medicaid beneficiaries.Data Sources and Study Setting: Enrollment, claims, and encounter data for adult Medi-Cal health plan members with 1+ ED visits and complete Medicaid eligibility during the study period from 2013 to 2014.Study Design: We analyzed the data to identify factors associated with out-of-network ED use classified by mode of arrival (ambulance vs. nonambulance).Data Extraction Methods: We extracted encounter, ambulance, and ED census data and linked them together based on ED visit date.Principal Findings: Of 11,143 ED visits, 6,808 (61.1 percent) were out-of-network. The number of hours the study ED was on ambulance diversion increased the odds of out-of-network visits for the 3,365 (30.2 percent) ED visits arriving by ambulance. For all visit types, assignment to a primary care clinic at the in-network hospital and having had any primary care visit during the study period decreased the odds of out-of-network ED care. Individuals were more likely to go out-of-network for ED care if they lived in neighborhoods containing out-of-network EDs.Conclusions: There are a number of factors related to out-of-network ED use, including the proximity and density of out-of-network EDs, race and ethnicity, a prior history of out-of-network ED use, and individuals' connection to primary care. EDs that serve Medicaid beneficiaries may need to explore alternative sites and modalities of care as alternatives to the ED, and consider their ability to absorb large numbers of out-of-network visits given already limited capacity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To assess the coverage effects of California's 2011 Low-Income Health Program (LIHP), enacted as an "early expansion" under the Affordable Care Act (ACA), and to demonstrate the feasibility of using Census data to measure county-level coverage changes.Data Sources/study Setting: 2008-2012 American Community Survey (ACS). The sample contained California adults ages 19-64 years (n = 237,876) and children 0-18 years (n = 113,159) with incomes below 200 percent of the federal poverty level.Study Design: Differences-in-differences analysis comparing public coverage, private insurance, and the uninsured rate in counties that expanded the LIHP in 2011 versus California counties not expanding during this time. Additional analyses tested for heterogeneous impacts of the LIHP and spillover effects on children.Principal Findings: Compared to nonexpansion counties, public coverage for adults increased by 1.8 percentage points (p = .02) in expanding counties, while the uninsured rate declined by 2.1 percentage points (p = .01). There was no significant change in private coverage. Public coverage gains were largest for Latinos and those with limited English proficiency. The expansion produced a positive spillover effect on children's Medicaid enrollment.Conclusions: California's 2011 expansion produced significant increases in public coverage for low-income individuals, particularly Latinos. Substate coverage analyses with the ACS can add valuable detail to future assessments of the ACA. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To predict the true cost of developing and maintaining an electronic immunization registry, and to set the framework for developing future cost-effective and cost-benefit analysis.Data Sources/study Setting: Primary data collected at three immunization registries located in California, accounting for 90 percent of all immunization records in registries in the state during the study period.Study Design: A parametric cost analysis compared registry development and maintenance expenditures to registry performance requirements.Data Collection/extraction Methods: Data were collected at each registry through interviews, reviews of expenditure records, technical accomplishments development schedules, and immunization coverage rates.Principal Findings: The cost of building immunization registries is predictable and independent of the hardware/software combination employed. The effort requires four man-years of technical effort or approximately $250,000 in 1998 dollars. Costs for maintaining a registry were approximately $5,100 per end user per three-year period.Conclusions: There is a predictable cost structure for both developing and maintaining immunization registries. The cost structure can be used as a framework for examining the cost-effectiveness and cost-benefits of registries. The greatest factor effecting improvement in coverage rates was ongoing, user-based administrative investment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To investigate the impact of quality information on the willingness of consumers to enroll in health plans that restrict provider access.Data Sources and Setting: A survey administered to respondents between the ages of 25 and 64 in the West Los Angeles area with private health insurance.Study Design: An experimental approach is used to measure the effect of variation in provider network features and information about the quality of network physicians on hypothetical plan choices. Conditional logit models are used to analyze the experimental choice data. Next, choice model parameter estimates are used to simulate the impact of changes in plan features on the market shares of competing health plans and to calculate the quality level required to make consumers indifferent to changes in provider access.Principal Findings: The presence of quality information reduced the importance of provider network features in plan choices as hypothesized. However, there were not statistically meaningful differences by type of quality measure (i.e., consumer assessed versus expert assessed). The results imply that large quality differences are required to make consumers indifferent to changes in provider access. The impact of quality on plan choices depended more on the particular measure and less on the type of measure. Quality ratings based on the proportion of survey respondents "extremely satisfied with results of care" had the greatest impact on plan choice while the proportion of network doctors "affiliated with university medical centers" had the least. Other consumer and expert assessed measures had more comparable effects.Conclusions: Overall the results provide empirical evidence that consumers are willing to trade high quality for restrictions on provider access. This willingness to trade implies that relatively small plans that place restrictions on provider access can successfully compete against less restrictive plans when they can demonstrate high quality. However, the results of this study suggest that in many cases, the level of quality required for consumers to accept access restrictions may be so high as to be unattainable. The results provide empirical support for the current focus of decision support efforts on consumer assessed quality measures. At the same time, however, the results suggest that consumers would also value quality measures based on expert assessments. This finding is relevant given the lack of comparative quality information based on expert judgment and research suggesting that consumers have apprehensions about their ability to meaningfully interpret performance-based quality measures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]