Search

PURPOSE Care continuity is foundational to the clinician/patient relationship; however, little has been done to operationalize continuity of care (CoC) as a clinical quality measure. The American Board of Family Medicine developed the Primary Care CoC clinical quality measure as part of the Measures That Matter to Primary Care initiative. METHODS Using 12-month Optum Clinformatics Data Mart claims data, we calculated the Bice-Boxerman Continuity of Care Index for each patient, which we rolled up to create an aggregate, physician-level CoC score. The physician quality score is the percent of patients with a Bice-Boxerman Index [greater than or equal to] 0.7 (70%). We tested validity in 2 ways. First, we explored the validity of using 0.7 as a threshold for patient CoC within the Optum claims database to validate its use for reflecting patient-level continuity. Second, we explored the validity of the physician CoC measure by examining its association with patient outcomes. We assessed reliability using signal-to-noise methodology. RESULTS Mean performance on the measure was 27.6%; performance ranged from 0% to 100% (n = 555,213 primary care physicians). Higher levels of CoC were associated with lower levels of care utilization. The measure indicated acceptable levels of validity and reliability. CONCLUSIONS Continuity is associated with desirable health and cost outcomes as well as patient preference. The CoC clinical quality measure meets validity and reliability requirements for implementation in primary care payment and accountability. Care continuity is important and complementary to access to care, and prioritizing this measure could help shift physician and health system behavior to support continuity. https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.2880, INTRODUCTION Continuity of care (CoC) is a central tenet of primary care and is associated with fewer hospitalizations and emergency department (ED) visits, better patterns of care utilization, lower costs [...]

The current US system of reimbursement for dementia care does not support the complex biospychosocial needs of families living with Alzheimer disease and related dementias. We propose an alternative payment system for dementia care that would provide insurance coverage for evidence-based, collaborative dementia care models. This payment model involves a per member per month payment for care management services that would target community-dwelling beneficiaries living with dementia and evidence-based education and support programs for unpaid caregivers. This payment model has the potential to align the incentives of payers and providers and create market demand for the implementation of collaborative dementia care models across the nation.

BackgroundMobile phone and tablet ownership have increased in the United States over the last decade, contributing to the growing use of mobile health (mHealth) interventions to help patients manage chronic health conditions like diabetes. However, few studies have characterized mobile device ownership and the presence of health-related apps on mobile devices in people with a self-reported history of hypertension. ObjectiveThis study aimed to describe the prevalence of smartphone, tablet, and basic mobile phone ownership and the presence of health apps by sociodemographic factors and self-reported hypertension status (ie, history) in a nationally representative sample of US adults, and to describe whether mobile devices are associated with health goal achievement, medical decision making, and patient-provider communication. MethodsData from 3285 respondents from the 2017 Health Information National Trends Survey were analyzed. Participants were asked if they owned a smartphone, tablet, or basic mobile phone and if they had health apps on a smartphone or tablet. Participants were also asked if their smartphones or tablets helped them achieve a health-related goal like losing weight, make a decision about how to treat an illness, or talk with their health care providers. Chi-square analyses were conducted to test for differences in mobile device ownership, health app presence, and app helpfulness by patient characteristics. ResultsApproximately 1460 (37.6% weighted prevalence) participants reported a history of hypertension. Tablet and smartphone ownership were lower in participants with a history of hypertension than in those without a history of hypertension (55% vs 66%, P=.001, and 86% vs 68%, P

Purpose: Care continuity is foundational to the clinician/patient relationship; however, little has been done to operationalize continuity of care (CoC) as a clinical quality measure. The American Board of Family Medicine developed the Primary Care CoC clinical quality measure as part of the Measures That Matter to Primary Care initiative.Methods: Using 12-month Optum Clinformatics Data Mart claims data, we calculated the Bice-Boxerman Continuity of Care Index for each patient, which we rolled up to create an aggregate, physician-level CoC score. The physician quality score is the percent of patients with a Bice-Boxerman Index ≥0.7 (70%). We tested validity in 2 ways. First, we explored the validity of using 0.7 as a threshold for patient CoC within the Optum claims database to validate its use for reflecting patient-level continuity. Second, we explored the validity of the physician CoC measure by examining its association with patient outcomes. We assessed reliability using signal-to-noise methodology.Results: Mean performance on the measure was 27.6%; performance ranged from 0% to 100% (n = 555,213 primary care physicians). Higher levels of CoC were associated with lower levels of care utilization. The measure indicated acceptable levels of validity and reliability.Conclusions: Continuity is associated with desirable health and cost outcomes as well as patient preference. The CoC clinical quality measure meets validity and reliability requirements for implementation in primary care payment and accountability. Care continuity is important and complementary to access to care, and prioritizing this measure could help shift physician and health system behavior to support continuity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Contrast-sparing strategies have been developed for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) patients at increased risk of contrast-induced acute kidney injury (CI-AKI), and numerous CI-AKI risk prediction models have been created. However, the potential clinical and economic consequences of using predicted CI-AKI risk thresholds for assigning patients to contrast-sparing regimens have not been evaluated. We estimated the clinical and economic consequences of alternative CI-AKI risk thresholds for assigning Medicare PCI patients to contrast-sparing strategies., Methods: Medicare data were used to identify inpatient PCI from January 2017 to June 2021. A prediction model was developed to assign each patient a predicted probability of CI-AKI. Multivariable modeling was used to assign each patient two marginal predicted values for each of several clinical and economic outcomes based on (1) their underlying clinical and procedural characteristics plus their true CI-AKI status in the data and (2) their characteristics plus their counterfactual CI-AKI status. Specifically, CI-AKI patients above the predicted risk threshold for contrast-sparing were reassigned their no CI-AKI (counterfactual) outcomes. Expected event rates, resource use, and costs were estimated before and after those CI-AKI patients were reassigned their counterfactual outcomes. This entailed bootstrapped sampling of the full cohort., Results: Of the 542,813 patients in the study cohort, 5,802 (1.1%) had CI-AKI. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for the prediction model was 0.81. At a predicted risk threshold for CI-AKI of >2%, approximately 18.0% of PCI patients were assigned to contrast-sparing strategies, resulting in (/100,000 PCI patients) 121 fewer deaths, 58 fewer myocardial infarction readmissions, 4,303 fewer PCI hospital days, $11.3 million PCI cost savings, and $25.8 million total one-year cost savings, versus no contrast-sparing strategies., Limitations: Claims data may not fully capture disease burden and are subject to inherent limitations such as coding inaccuracies. Further, the dataset used reflects only individuals with fee-for-service Medicare, and the results may not be generalizable to Medicare Advantage or other patient populations., Conclusions: Assignment to contrast-sparing regimens at a predicted risk threshold close to the underlying incidence of CI-AKI is projected to result in significant clinical and economic benefits.

Objectives: To study the predictive validity of the CMS Practice Assessment Tool (PAT) among 632 primary care practices., Study Design: Retrospective observational study., Methods: The study included primary care physician practices recruited by the Great Lakes Practice Transformation Network (GLPTN), 1 of 29 CMS-awarded networks, and used data from 2015 to 2019. At enrollment, trained quality improvement advisers scored each of the PAT's 27 milestones by its degree of implementation based on interviews with staff, review of documents, direct observation of practice activity, and professional judgment. The GLPTN also tracked each practice's status regarding alternative payment model (APM) enrollment. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was used to identify summary scores; mixed-effects logistic regression was used to assess the relationship between derived scores with APM participation., Results: EFA revealed that the PAT's 27 milestones could be summed into 1 overall score and 5 secondary scores. By the end of the 4-year project, 38% of practices were enrolled in an APM. A baseline overall score and 3 secondary scores were associated with increased odds of joining an APM (overall score: odds ratio [OR], 1.06; 95% CI, 0.99-1.12; P = .061; data-driven care quality score: OR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.00-1.22; P = .040; efficient care delivery score: OR, 1.08; 95% CI, 1.03-1.13; P = .003; collaborative engagement score: OR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.80-0.96; P = .005)., Conclusions: These results demonstrate that the PAT has adequate predictive validity for APM participation.

Although management of multiple myeloma has changed substantially in the last decade, it is unknown whether the burden of ESRD due to multiple myeloma has changed, or whether survival of patients with multiple myeloma on RRT has improved. Regarding ESRD due to multiple myeloma necessitating RRT in the United States, we evaluated temporal trends between 2001 and 2010 for demography-adjusted incidence ratios, relative to rates in 2001-2002, and mortality hazards from RRT initiation, relative to hazards in 2001-2002. In this retrospective cohort study, we used the US Renal Data System database (n=1,069,343), 2001-2010, to identify patients with ESRD due to multiple myeloma treated with RRT (n=12,703). Demography-adjusted incidence ratios of ESRD from multiple myeloma decreased between 2001-2002 and 2009-2010 in the overall population (demography-adjusted incidence ratio 0.82; 95% confidence interval, 0.79 to 0.86) and in most demographic subgroups examined. Mortality rates were 86.7, 41.4, and 34.4 per 100 person-years in the first 3 years of RRT, respectively, compared with 32.3, 20.6, and 21.3 in matched controls without multiple myeloma. Unadjusted mortality hazards ratios declined monotonically after 2004 to a value of 0.72; 95% confidence interval, 0.67 to 0.77 in 2009-2010, and declines between 2001-2002 and 2008-2009 were observed (P<0.05) in most demographic subgroups examined. Findings were similar when adjustment was made for demographic characteristics, comorbidity markers, and laboratory test values. These data suggest the incidence of RRT from multiple myeloma in the United States has decreased in the last decade, and clinically meaningful increases in survival have occurred for these patients., (Copyright © 2016 by the American Society of Nephrology.)