Search

Care management (CM) is a promising team-based, patient-centered approach "designed to assist patients and their support systems in managing medical conditions more effectively." As little is known about its implementation, this article describes CM implementation and associated lessons from 12 Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality-sponsored projects. Two rounds of data collection resulted in project-specific narratives that were analyzed using an iterative approach analogous to framework analysis. Informants also participated as coauthors. Variation emerged across practices and over time regarding CM services provided, personnel delivering these services, target populations, and setting(s). Successful implementation was characterized by resource availability (both monetary and nonmonetary), identifying as well as training employees with the right technical expertise and interpersonal skills, and embedding CM within practices. Our findings facilitate future context-specific implementation of CM within medical homes. They also inform the development of medical home recognition programs that anticipate and allow for contextual variation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Care management is becoming increasingly offered in the U.S. as a means of helping patients better manage their chronic diseases and possibly avoid worsening or exacerbations of their conditions, which can result in potentially avoidable and costly healthcare services. Since care management can be provided using different intervention methods and by different entities, we sought to compare different models of care management delivery on their long-term medical savings. Specifically, we compare health plan provided care management to provider delivered care management. Evaluation of the effectiveness of care management programs can be challenging because it can take time for patients to make recommended changes and then demonstrate healthcare savings associated with those changes. In this study, we modeled the unknown form of the time-varying program effects using a spline-based technique in the Bayesian framework, where the number and locations of knots were treated unknown and learned via reversible jump Markov chain Monte Carlo. We also addressed additional modeling challenges from features seen in our healthcare cost data such as highly right-skewed outcomes with non-constant variances and extra zeros. To provide a more robust analysis, we incorporated a follow-up period of up to 4 years that is longer than the most of the published studies on care management. The results of this work demonstrate that cost savings do accrue with specific models of care management. In particular, the embedded model of care management was significantly more effective than the health plan provided care management in controlling medical costs after 2 years of engagement, and the savings increased over time. This information should help policy makers and employer groups achieve a better understanding of the potential value of care management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: To address the lack of smoking cessation programs available to young adults, Stop My Smoking (SMS) USA, a text messaging–based smoking cessation program, was developed and pilot tested. Methods: This was a two-arm randomized controlled trial with adaptive randomization (arms were balanced by sex and smoking level [heavy vs. light]), conducted nationally in the United States. One hundred sixty-four 18- to 25-year-old daily smokers who were seriously thinking about quitting in the next 30 days were randomized to either (a) the 6-week SMS USA intervention (n = 101) or (b) an attention-matched control group aimed at improving sleep and physical activity (n = 63). The main outcome measure was 3-month continuous abstinence, verified by a significant other. Participants but not researchers were blinded to study arm allocation. Results: Based upon intent-to-treat analyses, intervention participants (39%) were significantly more likely than control participants (21%) to have quit at 4 weeks postquit (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 3.33, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.48, 7.45). Findings were not sustained at 3 months postquit, although rates in the SMS USA group were favored (40% vs. 30%, respectively; aOR = 1.59, 95% CI: 0.78, 3.21). Subsequent analyses suggested that among intervention participants, SMS USA might be more influential for youth not currently enrolled in a higher education (p = .06). Conclusions: Consistent with pilot studies, the sample was underpowered. Data suggest, however, that the SMS USA program affects smoking cessation rates at 4 weeks postquit. More research is needed before conclusions can be made about long-term impact. Identifying profiles of users for whom the program may be particularly beneficial also will be important. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Primary care practices able to create linkages with community resources may be more successful at helping patients to make and sustain health behavior changes. Methods: Health behavior-change interventions in eight practice-based research networks were examined. Data were collected July 2005–October 2007. A comparative analysis of the data was conducted to identify and understand strategies used for linking primary care practices with community resources. Results: Intervention practices developed three strategies to initiate and/or implement linkages with community resources: pre-identified resource options, referral guides, and people external to the practice who offered support and connection to resources. To initiate linkages, practices required the capacity to identify patients, make referrals, and know area resources. Linkage implementation could still be defeated if resources were not available, accessible, affordable, and perceived as valuable. Linkages were facilitated by boundary-spanning strategies that compensated for the lack of infrastructure between practices and resources, and by brokering strategies that identified interested community partners and aided mutually beneficial connections with them. Linkages were stronger when they incorporated practice or resource abilities to motivate the patient, such as brief counseling or postreferral outreach. Further, data suggested that sustaining linkages requires continuous attention and ongoing communication between practices and resources. Conclusions: Creating linkages between primary care practices and community resources has the potential to benefit both patients and clinicians and to lessen the burden on the U.S. healthcare system resulting from poor health behaviors. Infrastructure support and communication systems must be developed to foster sustainable linkages between practices and local resources. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Background: Obesity is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in the United States (US). Primary care medical practices can educate patients about the health effects of obesity and help patients with obesity lose and manage their weight. However, implementation of weight management in primary care is challenging. We sought to examine how practices that implement weight management services do so feasibly., Methods: Multiple methods including site visits, observations, interviews, and document reviews were utilized to identify and learn from primary care practices located across the US. A qualitative multidimensional classification of empirical cases was performed to identify unique delivery features that were feasible to implement in primary care., Results: Across 21 practices, 4 delivery models were identified: group, integrated into standard primary care, hiring an "other" professional, and using a specific program. Model characteristics included who delivered the weight management services, whether delivered to an individual or group, the types of approaches used, and how the care was reimbursed or paid. Most practices integrated weight management services and primary care delivery, although some created specific carve-out programs., Conclusion: This study identified 4 models that may serve to overcome challenges in delivering weight management services in primary care. Based on practice characteristics, preferences, and resources, primary care practices can identify a model for successfully implementing weight management services that best fits their context and needs. It is time for primary care to truly address obesity care as the health issue it is and make it a standard of care for all patients with obesity., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: None., (© Copyright by the American Board of Family Medicine.)

Background: The delivery of Intensive Behavioral Therapy (IBT) for obesity by primary care providers (PCPs) has been covered by Medicare to support elderly individuals with obesity (BMI > 30 kg/m2) in managing their weight since 2011 for individual therapy and 2015 for group therapy. We conducted a cohort study of PCPs in an attempt to understand patterns of uptake of IBT for obesity services among PCPs serving the Medicare population across the U.S., Methods: We used the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Provider Utilization and Payment Data from 2013 to 2019 to identify all PCPs who served more than 10 Medicare beneficiaries in each of the seven-year period to form a longitudinal panel. The procedure codes G0447 and G0473 were used to identify PCPs who provided IBT; and the characteristics of these providers were compared by the IBT-uptake status., Results: Of the 537,754 eligible PCPs who served Medicare patients in any of the seven years, only 1.2% were found to be IBT service providers in at least one year from 2013 through 2019 (246 always users, 1,358 early adopters, and 4,563 late adopters). IBT providers shared a few common characteristics: they were more likely to be male, internal medicine providers, saw a higher number of Medicare beneficiaries, and practiced in the South and Northeast regions. Having higher proportion of patients with hyperlipidemia was associated with higher likelihood of a provider being an IBT-user., Conclusions: Very few PCPs continuously billed IBT services for Medicare patients with obesity. Further investigation is needed to mitigate barriers to the uptake of IBT services among PCPs., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2023 Ozoor et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

Objective: To fill the gap in knowledge on systematic differences between primary care practices (PCP) that do or do not provide intensive behavioral therapy (IBT) for obese Medicare patients., Methods: A mixed modality survey (paper and online) of primary care practices obtained from a random sample of Medicare databases and a convenience sample of practice-based research network practices., Key Results: A total of 287 practices responded to the survey, including 140 (7.4% response rate) from the random sample and 147 (response rate not estimable) from the convenience sample. We found differences between the IBT-using and non-using practices in practice ownership, patient populations, and participation in Accountable Care Organizations. The non-IBT-using practices, though not billing for IBT, did offer some other assistance with obesity for their patients. Among those who had billed for IBT, but stopped billing, the most commonly cited reason was billing difficulties. Many providers experienced denied claims due to billing complexities., Conclusions: Although the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services established payment codes for PCPs to deliver IBT for obesity in 2011, very few providers submitted fee-for-service claims for these services after almost 10 years. A survey completed by both a random and convenience sample of practices using and not using IBT for obesity payment codes revealed that billing for these services was problematic, and many providers that began using the codes discontinued using them over the past 7 years., (© 2021. Society of General Internal Medicine.)

Background: Obesity is of epidemic proportion in the USA but most people with obesity do not receive treatment., Objective: To explore the experience of providing obesity management among primary care clinicians and their team members involved with weight loss in primary care practices. The study's focus was on examining the use of the Medicare payment code for intensive behavioral therapy for obesity (IBT), but other obesity management services and payment mechanisms were also studied., Design/participants: We conducted 85 interviews of clinicians (physician, advanced practice clinicians, registered dietitian, or other) practicing in primary care practices. Interviews gathered information about treatment approach to obesity, barriers, and facilitators to providing obesity care including the handling of billing and reimbursement (especially use of the IBT code), personal beliefs about the appropriateness of primary care providing weight loss services, and recommendations for improving weight management in primary care practice. The analysis was conducted using a grounded theory hermeneutic editing approach and the constant comparative method., Key Results: Seventy-five interviews were included in this analysis. We identified three primary themes: (1) clinicians and staff involved in obesity management in primary care believe that addressing obesity is an essential part of primary care services, (2) because providing obesity care can be challenging, many practices opt out of treatment, and (3) despite the challenges, many clinicians and others find treating obesity feasible, satisfying, and worthwhile., Conclusions: Treating obesity in primary care settings poses several challenges but can also be very satisfying and rewarding. To improve the ability of clinicians and practice members to treat obesity, important changes in payment, education, and work processes are necessary., (© 2021. Society of General Internal Medicine.)

Introduction: Our university hospital-based primary care practices transitioned a budding interest in telehealth to a largely telehealth-based approach in the face of the COVID-19 pandemic., Initial Work: Implementation of telehealth began in 2017. Health system barriers, provider and patient reluctance, and inadequate reimbursement prevented widespread adoption at the time. COVID-19 served as the catalyst to accelerate telehealth efforts., Implementation: COVID-19 resulted in the need for patient care with "social distancing." In addition, due to the pandemic, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and other insurers began expanded reimbursement for telehealth. More than 2000 providers received virtual health training in less than 2 weeks. In March 2020, we provided 2376 virtual visits, and in April 5293, which was more than 75 times the number provided in February; 73% of all visits in April were virtual (up from 0.5% in October 2019). As COVID-19 cases receded in May, June, and July, patient demand for virtual visits decreased, but 28% of visits in July were still virtual., Lessons Learned: Several key lessons are important for future efforts regarding clinical implementation: (1) prepare for innovation, (2) cultivate an innovation mindset, (3) standardize (but not too much), (4) technological innovation is necessary but not sufficient, and (5) communicate widely and often., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: None., (© Copyright 2021 by the American Board of Family Medicine.)

Purpose: The purpose of this project was to evaluate the real-world usability and usefulness of a revised version of the published Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality "Improving Your Office Testing Process" toolkit, designed to help primary care practices standardize and systematize laboratory testing processes., Method: We used a multiple case study approach to evaluate toolkit implementation in 2 primary care practices with existing quality improvement (QI) infrastructure. We collected qualitative data at baseline, midpoint (3 to 4 weeks), and follow-up (7 to 8 weeks postimplementation). Data included key informant interviews and practice site observations. Nineteen clinicians and staff participated in the interviews. Thematic analysis was used to summarize (1) how practices used the toolkit for guiding lab testing process improvement (usefulness), and (2) ease of use and practice experience with using the toolkit (usability)., Results: The toolkit was perceived as easy to use and easy to follow step by step. Two components of the toolkit were particularly useful: guidance on data gathering to inform quality improvement and tools for effective practice-patient communication. The toolkit's practice and patient assessments facilitated practice-specific insights into the lab processes considered most harmful to patients and informed improvement activities., Conclusion: The usability and usefulness of the toolkit were related to the characteristics of the toolkit itself (adaptability, simplicity, and design quality and packaging, and guidance in planning) and practice processes (presence of practice champions and implementation teams). In a set of 2 practices in which laboratory testing process improvement was a high priority and where well-established QI infrastructure exists, the toolkit was easy to use with little technical assistance., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: none declared., (© Copyright 2019 by the American Board of Family Medicine.)

The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPTF) recognizes that behaviors have a major impact on health and well-being. Currently, the USPSTF has 11 behavioral counseling intervention (BCI) recommendations. These BCIs can be delivered in a primary care setting or patients can be referred to other clinical or community programs. Unfortunately, many recommended BCIs are infrequently and ineffectually delivered, suggesting that more evidence is needed to understand which BCIs are feasible and referable. In response, the USPSTF convened an expert forum in 2013 to inform the evaluation of BCI feasibility. This manuscript reports on findings from the forum and proposes that researchers use several frameworks to help clinicians and the USPSTF evaluate which BCIs work under usual conditions. A key recommendation for BCI researchers is to use frameworks whose components can support dissemination and implementation efforts. These frameworks include the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR), which helps describe the essential components of an intervention, and pragmatic frameworks like Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance (RE-AIM) or Pragmatic-Explanatory Continuum Indicator Summary (PRECIS), which help to report study design elements and outcomes. These frameworks can both guide the design of more-feasible BCIs and produce clearer feasibility evidence. Critical evidence gaps include a better understanding of which patients will benefit from a BCI, how flexible interventions can be without compromising effectiveness, required clinician expertise, necessary intervention intensity and follow-up, impact of patient and clinician intervention adherence, optimal conditions for BCI delivery, and how new care models will influence BCI feasibility., (Copyright © 2015 American Journal of Preventive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Care management in primary care can be effective in helping patients with chronic disease improve their health; however, primary care practices are often challenged to identify revenue to pay for it. This study explored the impact of direct reimbursement on the provision of care management in a primary care physician organization., Methods: Using data on expenses and health plan reimbursement during the initial 16 months of care management implementation at 5 practices, we calculated the percentage of related costs that were covered by payments. Qualitative data from interviews with practice members were used to identify their perceived barriers to care management reimbursement and the impact of current reimbursement strategies on service delivery., Results: Direct reimbursement for care management covered only 21% of the costs. Reimbursement varied by care manager background, patient diagnoses, insurer, and indication for the visit. Barriers to gaining reimbursement included patient resistance to copay, clinician hesitation to bill for care management visits (for fear the patient may receive a bill), differential reimbursement policies of insurers, and general lack of reimbursement for care management in many cases. Although practice-level quality improvement incentives were an alternative means of supporting care management, because these incentives were not directly tied to the service of care management, they were used for other activities ultimately supporting patient care., Conclusions: This study highlights the need for sufficient reimbursement to initiate and maintain care management for patients in primary care as proposed for service reforms under the Affordable Care Act., (© Copyright 2015 by the American Board of Family Medicine.)

Objective: Report lessons learned in an RCT of Stop My Smoking (SMS) USA, a mHealth smoking cessation program for young adult smokers., Methods: 164 18-24-year-olds were recruited nationally, online in 2011. Program evaluation data were provided at 12-week post-Quit Day., Results: (1) Inviting participants to complete a brief text messaging survey and then asking them to complete a longer online survey resulted in the highest response rate (89%). (2) The positive tone of program messages was the most commonly noted program strength. (3) Suggested improvements included more social connectivity and additional assistance overcoming stressful situations. (4) Half of intervention participants moved through the program linearly and half went through various paths that reflected multiple relapses. Suggestions to use pharmacotherapy resulted in 22% of heavy smokers to utilize it., Conclusion: Participant feedback provided concrete ways in which this and other young adult-focused interventions can improve messaging and program features to be even more salient., Practice Implications: Future young adult mHealth interventions could: Integrate models that are flexible to different "paths" of behavior change; address stressful life events directly and comprehensively; integrate proactive messaging that promotes pharmacotherapy options; and use text messaging as a gateway to longer online surveys., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Four health behaviors--smoking, risky drinking, physical inactivity, and unhealthy diets--contribute substantially to health care burden and are common among primary care patients. However, there is insufficient evidence to recommend broadly brief interventions to address all 4 of these in frontline primary care. This study took advantage of a multinetwork initiative to reflect on health behavior outcomes and the challenges of using a common set of measures to assess health behavior-change strategies for multiple health behaviors in routine primary care practice., Methods: Standardized, brief practical health behavior and quality of life measures used across 7 practice-based research networks (PBRNs) with independent primary care interventions in 54 primary care practices between August 2005 and December 2007 were analyzed. Mixed-effects longitudinal models assessed whether intervention patients improved diet, physical activity, smoking, alcohol consumption, and unhealthy days over time. Separate analyses were conducted for each intervention., Results: Of 4463 adults, 2199 had follow-up data, and all available data were used in longitudinal analyses. Adjusting for age, race/ethnicity, education, and baseline body mass index where available, diet scores improved significantly in 5 of 7 networks (P < .02). Physical activity improved significantly in 2 networks but declined in one network (P < .024). The likelihood of being a current smoker was reduced in 2 of 5 networks (P < .0001), and average alcoholic drinks per day was reduced in 2 networks (P < .02). Participants reported fewer unhealthy days at follow-up in 3 of 7 networks (P < .01). Details of implementation and the limitations in instrumentation help contextualize these modest outcomes., Conclusions: Although some patients in these 7 PBRNs improved in several health behaviors and quality of life, the strength of evidence for field-ready methods to address multiple health risk behaviors remains elusive. The use of common measures to assess changes in 4 unhealthy behaviors was achieved practically in PBRNs testing diverse strategies to improve behaviors; however, variations in implementation, instrumentation performance, and some features of study design overwhelmed potential cross-PBRN comparisons. For common measures to be useful for comparisons across practices or PBRNs, greater standardization of study designs and careful attention to practicable implementation strategies are necessary.

Purpose: In what ways is primary care practice-based research a facilitator of practice improvement vs a barrier to practice change? This article aims to alert investigators to the pitfalls they may face in undertaking the dual agenda of research and practice improvement., Methods: We derived examples of the relationship between the research and practice improvement goals of 17 Prescription for Health (P4H) grantees from verbal communications with the grantees, field notes from interviews and site visits, and entries made by grantees to an online diary managed by the P4H Analysis Team., Results: An analysis of key themes identified factors facilitating and impeding the dual goals of research and practice improvement. The requirements of conducting research mandated by institutional review boards, including patient enrollment and consent, often constituted barriers to practice improvement. The choice of practices in which to conduct research and improvement activities and the manner in which the practices are approached may affect the outcome of both research and practice improvement goals. Approaching practices with a time-limited project mentality can interfere with a process of permanent practice change. The RE-AIM construct (reach, efficacy/effectiveness, adoption, implementation, and maintenance) is useful in designing research interventions that facilitate practice improvement., Conclusions: Projects that meld research studies and practice improvement goals must pay attention to the potential conflicts between research and practice change, and must attempt to design research studies so that they facilitate rather than inhibit practice improvement.

Purpose: The purpose of this analysis and commentary was to explore the rationale for an integrated approach, within and outside the office, to help patients pursue healthy behaviors., Methods: We examined the role of integration, building on (1) patterns observed in a limited qualitative evaluation of 17 Prescription for Health projects, (2) several national policy initiatives, and (3) selected research literature on behavior change., Results: The interventions evaluated in Prescription for Health not only identified unhealthy behaviors and advised change, but also enabled patients to access information at home, use self-help methods, obtain intensive counseling, and receive follow-up. Few practices can replicate such a model with the limited staff and resources available in their offices. Comprehensive assistance can be offered to patients, however, by integrating what is feasible in the office with additional services available through the community and information media., Conclusions: Blending diverse clinical and community services into a cohesive system requires an infrastructure that fosters integration. Such a system provides the comprehensive model on which the quality of both health promotion and chronic illness care depend. Integrating clinical and community services is only the first step toward the ideal of a citizen-centered approach, in which diverse sectors within the community-health care among them-work together to help citizens sustain healthy behaviors. The integration required to fulfill this ideal faces logistical challenges but may be the best way for a fragmented health care system to fully serve its patients.