Search

Background Graduate medical education (GME) program leaders struggle to incorporate quality measures in the ambulatory care setting, leading to knowledge gaps on how to provide feedback to residents and programs. While nationally collected quality of care data are available, their reliability for individual resident learning and for GME program improvement is understudied. Objective To examine the reliability of the Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set (HEDIS) clinical performance measures in family medicine and internal medicine GME programs and to determine whether HEDIS measures can inform residents and their programs with their quality of care. Methods From 2014 to 2017, we collected HEDIS measures from 566 residents in 8 family medicine and internal medicine programs under one sponsoring institution. Intraclass correlation was performed to establish patient sample sizes required for 0.70 and 0.80 reliability levels at the resident and program levels. Differences between the patient sample sizes required for reliable measurement and the actual patients cared for by residents were calculated. Results The highest reliability levels for residents (0.88) and programs (0.98) were found for the most frequently available HEDIS measure, colorectal cancer screening. At the GME program level, 87.5% of HEDIS measures had sufficient sample sizes for reliable measurement at alpha 0.7 and 75.0% at alpha 0.8. Most resident level measurements were found to be less reliable. Conclusions GME programs may reliably evaluate HEDIS performance pooled at the program level, but less so at the resident level due to patient volume.

PURPOSE Despite the importance of training in ambulatory care settings for residents to acquire important competencies, little is known about the organizational and environmental factors influencing the relative amount of time primary care residents train in ambulatory care during residency. The authors examined factors associated with postgraduate year 1 (PGY-1) residents' ambulatory care training time in Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME)-accredited primary care programs. METHOD U.S.-accredited family medicine (FM) and internal medicine (IM) programs' 2016-2017 National Graduate Medical Education (GME) Census data from 895 programs within 550 sponsoring institutions (representing 13,077 PGY-1s) were linked to the 2016 Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Cost Reports and 2015-2016 Area Health Resource File. Multilevel regression models examined the association of GME program characteristics, sponsoring institution characteristics, geography, and environmental factors with PGY-1 residents' percentage of time spent in ambulatory care. RESULTS PGY-1 mean (standard deviation, SD) percent time spent in ambulatory care was 25.4% (SD, 0.4) for both FM and IM programs. In adjusted analyses (% increase [standard error, SE]), larger faculty size (0.03% [SE, 0.01], P < .001), sponsoring institution's receipt of Teaching Health Center (THC) funding (6.6% (SE, 2.7), P < .01), and accreditation warnings (4.8% [SE, 2.5], P < .05) were associated with a greater proportion of PGY-1 time spent in ambulatory care. Programs caring for higher proportions of Medicare beneficiaries spent relatively less time in ambulatory care (< 0.5% [SE, 0.2], P < .01). CONCLUSIONS Ambulatory care time for PGY-1s varies among ACGME-accredited primary care residency programs due to the complex context and factors primary care GME programs operate under. Larger ACGME-accredited FM and IM programs and those receiving federal THC GME funding had relatively more PGY-1 time spent in ambulatory care settings. These findings inform policies to increase resident exposure in ambulatory care, potentially improving learning, competency achievement, and primary care access.

A growing population of older adults and improved effective treatments for inflammatory rheumatic diseases will increase the demand for more healthcare resources that already struggle with staggering outpatient clinic waiting times. Transformative delivery care models that provide sustainable healthcare services are urgently needed to meet these challenges. In this mini-review article, a proposed Lifelong Treatment Model for a decentralized follow-up of outpatient clinic patients living with rheumatoid arthritis is presented and discussed.Our conceptual model follows four steps for a transformative care delivery model supported by an Integrated Practice Unit; (1) Diagnosis, (2) Treatment, (3) Patient Empowered Disease Management, and (4) Telehealth. Through an Integrated Practice Unit, a multidisciplinary team could collaborate with patients with rheumatoid arthritis to facilitate high-value care that addresses most important outcomes of the patients; (1) Early Remission, (2) Decentralization, (3) Improved Quality of Life, and (4) Lifelong Sustain Remission.The article also addresses the growing challenges for the healthcare delivery system today for patients with rheumatoid arthritis and proposes how to reduce outpatient clinic visits without compromising quality and safety.

Implementing an innovation, such as offering new types of patient-physician encounters through the patient-centered medical home (PCMH) model while maintaining Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) accreditation standards (e.g., patient encounter minimums for trainees), is challenging.In 2009, the Group Health Family Medicine Residency (GHFMR) received an ACGME Program Experimentation and Innovation Project (PEIP) exception that redefined the minimum Family Medicine Resident Review Committee requirement to 1,400 face-to-face visits and 250 electronic visits (1 electronic visit defined as 3 secure message or telephone encounters). The authors report GHFMR residents' continuity clinic encounters, specifically volume, from 2006 through 2013 via pre- and post-PCMH implementation. They discuss the implications for leaders of high-performing practices who desire to innovate while maintaining accreditation.Post-PCMH residents had 20% more overall patient contact. The largest change in care delivery method included a large increase in secure messages between patients and residents. Pre-PCMH residents had more face-to-face encounters; however, post-PCMH residents had more contact for all types of patient care encounters (face-to-face, secure messaging, and telephone) per hour of clinic time.The ACGME PEIP exception, allowing the incorporation of the PCMH, facilitated an increase in patient access and immersed residents in primary care innovation (namely, practicing in a PCMH model during graduate medical education training). The next steps are to assess the effect of the PCMH on resident learning and clinical outcomes and to continue residents' access to training that keeps pace with today's health care delivery needs.