Search

Background Much of the research on high-cost patients in healthcare has taken a static approach to studying what is actually a dynamic process. High-cost patients often utilize services across multiple sectors along care pathways, but due to the cross-sectional nature of many study designs, we lack a clear understanding of the temporal relationship between high-cost spending in community and acute care. Studying care trajectories for high cost patients with cardiovascular disease (CVD) can shed light on the dynamic interplay between community-based and acute care along the care continuum, and provide information about signals in community care that may indicate future elective and urgent hospitalizations. Methods Using linked health administrative data in Ontario, Canada, 74,683 incident cases with cardiovascular disease were identified between the years 2009 and 2011. Patients were followed for 36 months (total study duration 2009–2014) until the first urgent or elective admission to hospital for a heart-related condition. We used an extended Cox survival model with competing risks to study the relationship between high-cost spending in community care with two mutually exclusive outcomes: urgent or elective hospitalizations. Results Elective hospitalizations were most clearly signaled by a high-cost utilization of community-based specialist services in the month prior to hospital admission (hazard ratio 9.074, p

Background: There is no commonly accepted comprehensive framework for describing the practical specifics of external support for practice change. Our goal was to develop such a taxonomy that could be used by both external groups or researchers and health care leaders. Methods: The leaders of 8 grants from Agency for Research and Quality for the EvidenceNOW study of improving cardiovascular preventive services in over 1500 primary care practices nationwide worked collaboratively over 18 months to develop descriptions of key domains that might comprehensively characterize any external support intervention. Combining literature reviews with our practical experiences in this initiative and past work, we aimed to define these domains and recommend measures for them. Results: The taxonomy includes 1 domain to specify the conceptual model(s) on which an intervention is built and another to specify the types of support strategies used. Another 5 domains provide specifics about the dose/mode of that support, the types of change process and care process changes that are encouraged, and the degree to which the strategies are prescriptive and standardized. A model was created to illustrate how the domains fit together and how they would respond to practice needs and reactions. Conclusions: This taxonomy and its use in more consistently documenting and characterizing external support interventions should facilitate communication and synergies between 3 areas (quality improvement, practice change research, and implementation science) that have historically tended to work independently. The taxonomy was designed to be as useful for practices or health systems managing change as it is for research.

Primary care is a key setting for the delivery of parent-focused behavioral interventions. Various methods of intervention show promising efficacy, but fail to engage adequate parental participation. The objective of this study was to understand factors underlying parents’ attitudes towards the content, sources, and delivery methods of behavioral guidance in primary care.

Background Unhealthy alcohol use is the third leading cause of preventable death in the United States. Evidence demonstrates that screening for unhealthy alcohol use and providing persons engaged in risky drinking with brief behavioral and counseling interventions improves health outcomes, collectively termed screening and brief interventions. Medication assisted therapy (MAT) is another effective method for treatment of moderate or severe alcohol use disorder. Yet, primary care clinicians are not regularly screening for or treating unhealthy alcohol use. Methods and analysis We are initiating a clinic-level randomized controlled trial aimed to evaluate how primary care clinicians can impact unhealthy alcohol use through screening, counseling, and MAT. One hundred and 25 primary care practices in the Virginia Ambulatory Care Outcomes Research Network (ACORN) will be engaged; each will receive practice facilitation to promote screening, counseling, and MAT either at the beginning of the trial or at a 6-month control period start date. For each practice, the intervention includes provision of a practice facilitator, learning collaboratives with three practice champions, and clinic-wide information sessions. Clinics will be enrolled for 6–12 months. After completion of the intervention, we will conduct a mixed methods analysis to identify changes in screening rates, increase in provision of brief counseling and interventions as well as MAT, and the reduction of alcohol intake for patients after practices receive practice facilitation. Discussion This study offers a systematic process for dissemination and implementation of the evidence-based practice of screening, counseling, and treatment for unhealthy alcohol use. Practices will be asked to implement a process for screening, counseling, and treatment based on their practice characteristics, patient population, and workflow. We propose practice facilitation as a robust and feasible intervention to assist in making changes within the practice. We believe that the process can be replicated and used in a broad range of clinical settings; we anticipate this will be supported by our evaluation of this approach. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04248023, Registered 5 February 2020.

To respond to the COVID-19 pandemic and recover from its aftermath, primary care teams will face waves of overwhelming demand for information and the need to significantly transform care delivery. Innovation: Oregon Health & Science University’s primary care team envisioned and implemented the COVID-19 Connected Care Center, a statewide telephone “hotline” service. Results: The hotline has taken more than 5825 calls from patients in 33 of Oregon’s 36 counties in less than 3 months. In preliminary survey data, 86% of patients said their questions were answered during the call, 90% would recommend this service, and 70% reported a reduction in stress levels about coronavirus. In qualitative interviews, patients reported their questions answered, short wait times, nurses spent time as needed, and appropriate follow-up was arranged. Conclusion: Academic health centers may have the capacity to leverage their extensive resources to rapidly launch a multiphased pandemic response that meets peoples’ need for information and access to primary care, while minimizing risk of infection and emergency department use and rapidly supporting primary care teams to make the necessary operational changes to do the same in their communities. Such efforts require external funding in a fee-for-service payment model.

PURPOSE We undertook a study to identify conditions and operational changes linked to improvements in smoking and blood pressure (BP) outcomes in primary care. METHODS We purposively sampled and interviewed practice staff (eg, office managers, clinicians) from a subset of 104 practices participating in EvidenceNOW—a multisite cardiovascular disease prevention initiative. We calculated Clinical Quality Measure improvements, with targets of 10-point or greater absolute improvements in the proportion of patients with smoking screening and, if relevant, counseling and in the proportion of hypertensive patients with adequately controlled BP. We analyzed interview data to identify operational changes, transforming these into numeric data. We used Configurational Comparative Methods to assess the joint effects of multiple factors on outcomes. RESULTS In clinician-owned practices, implementing a workflow to routinely screen, counsel, and connect patients to smoking cessation resources, or implementing a documentation change or a referral to a resource alone led to an improvement of at least 10 points in the smoking outcome with a moderate level of facilitation support. These patterns did not manifest in health- or hospital system–owned practices or in Federally Qualified Health Centers, however. The BP outcome improved by at least 10 points among solo practices after medical assistants were trained to take an accurate BP. Among larger, clinician-owned practices, BP outcomes improved when practices implemented a second BP measurement when the first was elevated, and when staff learned where to document this information in the electronic health record. With 50 hours or more of facilitation, BP outcomes improved among larger and health- and hospital system–owned practices that implemented these operational changes. CONCLUSIONS There was no magic bullet for improving smoking or BP outcomes. Multiple combinations of operational changes led to improvements, but only in specific contexts of practice size and ownership, or dose of external facilitation.

Background: Facilitation is an effective approach for helping practices implement sustainable evidence-based practice improvements. Few studies examine the facilitation infrastructure and support needed for large-scale dissemination and implementation initiatives. Methods: The Agency for Health care Research and Quality funded 7 Cooperatives, each of which worked with over 200 primary care practices to rapidly disseminate and implement improvements in cardiovascular preventive care. The intervention target was to improve primary care practice capacity for quality initiative and the ABCS of cardiovascular disease prevention: aspirin in high-risk individuals, blood pressure control, cholesterol management, and smoking cessation. We identified the organizational elements and infrastructures Cooperatives used to support facilitators by reviewing facilitator logs, online diary data, semistructured interviews with facilitators, and fieldnotes from facilitator observations. We analyzed these data using a coding and sorting process. Results: Each Cooperative partnered with 2 to 16 organizations, piecing together 16 to 35 facilitators, often from other quality improvement projects. Quality assurance strategies included establishing initial and ongoing training, processes to support facilitators, and monitoring to assure consistency and quality. Cooperatives developed facilitator toolkits, implemented initiative-specific training, and developed processes for peer-to-peer learning and support. Conclusions: Supporting a large-scale facilitation workforce requires creating an infrastructure, including initial training, and ongoing support and monitoring, often borrowing from other ongoing initiatives. Facilitation that recognizes the need to support the vital integrating functions of primary care might be more efficient and effective than this fragmented approach to quality improvement.

Background: Integrating behavioral health into primary care can improve care quality; however, most electronic health records are not designed to meet the needs of integrated teams. We worked with practices and behavioral health (BH) clinicians to design a suite of electronic health record tools to address these needs (“BH e-Suite”). The purpose of this article is to examine whether implementation of the BH e-Suite changes process of care, intermediate clinical outcomes, and patient experiences, and whether its use is acceptable to practice members and BH clinicians. Methods: We conducted a convergent mixed-methods proof-of-concept study, implementing the BH e-Suite across 6 Oregon federally qualified community health centers (“intervention clinics”). We matched intervention clinics to 6 control clinics, based on location and patient panel characteristics, to assess whether process of care (Patient Health Questionnaire-9 [PHQ-9] and Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 screening) and intermediate outcomes (PHQ-9, Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 scores) changed postimplementation. Prepost patient surveys were used to assess changes in patient experience. To elucidate factors influencing implementation, we merged quantitative findings with structured observations, surveys, and interviews with practice members. Results: Implementation improved process of care (PHQ-9 screening). During the course of the study, change in intermediate outcomes was not observed. Degree of BH e-Suite implementation varied: 2 clinics fully implemented, 2 partially implemented, and 2 practices did not implement at all. Initial practice conditions (eg, low resistance to change, higher capacity), process characteristics (eg, thoughtful planning), and individual characteristics (eg, high self-efficacy) were related to degree of implementation. Conclusions: Health information technology tools designed for behavioral health integration must fit the needs of clinics for the successful uptake and improvement in patient experiences. Research is needed to further assess the effectiveness of this tool in improving patient outcomes and to optimize broader dissemination of this tool among primary care clinics integrating behavioral health.

Purpose: Practice facilitators (“facilitators”) can play an important role in supporting primary care practices in performing quality improvement (QI), but they need complete and accurate clinical performance data from practices9 electronic health records (EHR) to help them set improvement priorities, guide clinical change, and monitor progress. Here, we describe the strategies facilitators use to help practices perform QI when complete or accurate performance data are not available. Methods: Seven regional cooperatives enrolled approximately 1500 small-to-medium-sized primary care practices and 136 facilitators in EvidenceNOW, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality9s initiative to improve cardiovascular preventive services. The national evaluation team analyzed qualitative data from online diaries, site visit field notes, and interviews to discover how facilitators worked with practices on EHR data challenges to obtain and use data for QI. Results: We found facilitators faced practice-level EHR data challenges, such as a lack of clinical performance data, partial or incomplete clinical performance data, and inaccurate clinical performance data. We found that facilitators responded to these challenges, respectively, by using other data sources or tools to fill in for missing data, approximating performance reports and generating patient lists, and teaching practices how to document care and confirm performance measures. In addition, facilitators helped practices communicate with EHR vendors or health systems in requesting data they needed. Overall, facilitators tailored strategies to fit the individual practice and helped build data skills and trust. Conclusion: Facilitators can use a range of strategies to help practices perform data-driven QI when performance data are inaccurate, incomplete, or missing. Support is necessary to help practices, particularly those with EHR data challenges, build their capacity for conducting data-driven QI that is required of them for participating in practice transformation and performance-based payment programs. It is questionable how practices with data challenges will perform in programs without this kind of support.

PURPOSE Improving primary care quality is a national priority, but little is known about the extent to which small to medium-size practices use quality improvement (QI) strategies to improve care. We examined variations in use of QI strategies among 1,181 small to medium-size primary care practices engaged in a national initiative spanning 12 US states to improve quality of care for heart health and assessed factors associated with those variations. METHODS In this cross-sectional study, practice characteristics were assessed by surveying practice leaders. Practice use of QI strategies was measured by the validated Change Process Capability Questionnaire (CPCQ) Strategies Scale (scores range from −28 to 28, with higher scores indicating more use of QI strategies). Multivariable linear regression was used to examine the association between practice characteristics and the CPCQ strategies score. RESULTS The mean CPCQ strategies score was 9.1 (SD = 12.2). Practices that participated in accountable care organizations and those that had someone in the practice to configure clinical quality reports from electronic health records (EHRs), had produced quality reports, or had discussed clinical quality data during meetings had higher CPCQ strategies scores. Health system–owned practices and those experiencing major disruptive changes, such as implementing a new EHR system or clinician turnover, had lower CPCQ strategies scores. CONCLUSION There is substantial variation in the use of QI strategies among small to medium-size primary care practices across 12 US states. Findings suggest that practices may need external support to strengthen their ability to do QI and to be prepared for new payment and delivery models.

Integrated behavioral health and primary care is a patient-centered approach designed to address a person's physical, emotional, and social healthcare needs. Increasingly, practices are integrating care to help achieve the Quadruple Aim, yet no studies have examined, using qualitative methods, patients' experiences of care in integrated settings. The purpose of this study was to examine patients' experiences of care in community-based settings integrating behavioral health and primary care. This is a qualitative study of 24 patients receiving care across five practices participating in Advancing Care Together (ACT). ACT was a 4-year demonstration project (2010-2014) of primary care and community mental health centers (CMHCs) integrating care. We conducted in-depth interviews in 2014 and a multidisciplinary team analyzed data using an inductive qualitative descriptive approach. Nineteen patients described receiving integrated care. Both primary care and CMHC patients felt cared for when the full spectrum of their needs, including physical, emotional, and social circumstances, were addressed. Patients perceived personal, interpersonal, and organizational benefits from integrated care. Interactions with integrated team members helped patients develop and/or improve coping skills; patients shared lessons learned with family and friends. Service proximity, provider continuity and trust, and a number of free initial behavioral health appointments supported patient access to, and engagement with, integrated care. In contrast, patients' prior experience, provider "mismatch," clinician turnover, and restrictive insurance coverage presented barriers in accessing and sustaining care. Patients in both primary care and CMHCs perceived similar benefits from integrated care related to personal growth, improved quality, and access to care. Policy makers and practice leadership should attend to proximity, continuity, trust, and cost/coverage as factors that can impede or facilitate engagement with integrated care.

Objective The federal meaningful use (MU) program was aimed at improving adoption and use of electronic health records, but practicing physicians have criticized it. This study was aimed at quantifying the benefits (ie, usefulness) and burdens (ie, workload) of the MU program for practicing family physicians. Materials and Methods An interdisciplinary national panel of experts (physicians and engineers) identified the work associated with MU criteria during patient encounters. They conducted a national survey to assess each criterion’s level of patient benefit and compliance burden. Results In 2015, 480 US family physicians responded to the survey. Their demographics were comparable to US norms. Eighteen of 31 MU criteria were perceived as useful for more than half of patient encounters, with 13 of those being useful for more than two-thirds. Thirteen criteria were useful for less than half of patient encounters. Four useful criteria were reported as having a high compliance burden. Discussion There was high variability in physicians’ perceived benefits and burdens of MU criteria. MU Stage 1 criteria, which are more related to basic/routine care, were perceived as beneficial by most physicians. Stage 2 criteria, which are more related to complex and population care, were perceived as less beneficial and more burdensome to comply with. Conclusion MU was discontinued, but the merit-based incentive payment system within the Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015 adopted its criteria. For many physicians, MU created a significant practice burden without clear benefits to patient care. This study suggests that policymakers should not assess MU in aggregate, but as individual criteria for open discussion.

Several recent national initiatives have called for increased efforts to integrate social determinants of health (SDH) into health care settings using health information technology (HIT). However, there is limited evidence to guide the implementation of these recommendations in practice. Research is needed to understand what SDH information is most important to collect, how SDH information can be used to inform clinical care and referrals, and ultimately, whether and how integrating SDH screening and action into primary care affects individual and population health. We recently proposed a conceptual framework to illustrate how HIT can be used to bring SDH information into primary care. In this paper, we describe how we are putting this conceptual model into practice within the OCHIN network of community health centers by highlighting examples of ongoing research, identifying knowledge gaps, and outlining a roadmap of future research to move the field forward.

Little is known about how health care organizations are developing tools for identifying/addressing patients' social determinants of health (SDH). We describe the processes recently used by 6 organizations to develop SDH screening tools for ambulatory care and the barriers they faced during those efforts. Common processes included reviewing literature and consulting primary care staff. The organizations prioritized avoiding redundant data collection, integrating SDH screening into existing workflows, and addressing diverse clinic needs. This article provides suggestions for others hoping to develop similar tools/strategies for identifying patients' SDH needs in ambulatory care settings, with recommendations for further research.

Across the US, states have initiated reforms to improve population health by coordinating efforts among health care stakeholders and addressing health-related social needs. Washington State's Medicaid Transformation Project (MTP), launched in 2017, seeks to achieve these goals by supporting the state's Accountable Communities of Health, independent organizations that convene and coordinate the health care and social service sectors in nine regions of the state. MTP places Medicaid funds in the hands of ACHs for the purpose of building health system capacity and carrying out health improvement projects. It includes new supports for aging, housing and employment, and substance use disorder treatment. Early lessons from MTP are emerging that can inform health system transformation efforts in other states. MTP demonstrates the advantages of creating new organizations to serve as regional conveners and coordinators. However, the introduction of new entities will require states to clearly articulate the varying roles of these entities and existing managed care organizations and state agencies. States will need to balance the tradeoffs of local control versus centralization. For example, it may be optimal to standardize electronic health information exchanges but allow organizations flexibility to adopt other interventions that match their local context. In addition, states should build treatment and comparison groups into their program designs in order to generate high-quality evidence about the impact of new health care delivery and payment models.

Engaging primary care practices in initiatives designed to enhance quality, reduce costs, and promote safety is challenging as practices are already participating in numerous projects and mandated programs designed to improve care delivery and quality. Recruiters must expand their recruitment tools to engage today’s practices in quality improvement. Using grant proposals, online diaries, observational site visits, and interviews with key stakeholders, the authors identify successful practice recruitment strategies in the EvidenceNOW initiative, which aimed to recruit approximately 1500 small- to medium-sized primary care practices. Recruiters learned they needed to articulate how participation in EvidenceNOW aligned with other initiatives and could help practices succeed with federal and state initiatives, recognition programs, and existing or future payment requirements. Recruiters, initiative leaders, and funders must now consider how their efforts align with ongoing initiatives to successfully recruit and engage practices, ease practice burden, and encourage participation in efforts that support practice transformation.

BACKGROUND Overweight and obese body mass index (BMI) status affects an increasing number of children in the United States. The school setting has been identified as a focus area to implement obesity prevention programs. METHODS A database search of PubMed, Education Search Complete, and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) was conducted for peer-reviewed articles published between January 2005 and December 2015 pertaining to programs offered in the school setting to grades K-12 in the United States with a nutrition education component and measured BMI percentile or BMI z-score as an outcome. RESULTS Seven studies focused on elementary (K-5) populations and 2 studies focused on grades 6-8. Among the 9 identified studies, those with long-term (greater than 1 year) implementation showed more pronounced results with positive impact on reducing overweight/obese BMI measures. CONCLUSIONS This set of studies suggests that long-term nutrition education delivered in the school setting can provide children with tools to attain a healthy weight status. Additional studies examining participants' BMI status years after the initial study, and studies examining programs in grades 9-12 are needed to determine the most effective delivery time and methods.

Background Integrating behavioral health and primary care is beneficial to patients and health systems. However, for integration to be widely adopted, studies demonstrating its benefits in community practices are needed. The objective of this study was to evaluate effect of integrated care, adapted to local contexts, on depression severity and patients' experience of care. Methods This study used a convergent mixed-methods design, merging findings from a quasi-experimental study with patient interviews conducted as part of Advancing Care Together, a community demonstration project that created an innovation incubator for practices implementing evidence-based integration strategies. The study included 475 patients with a 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) score ≥10 at baseline, from 5 practices. Results Statistically significant reductions in mean PHQ-9 scores were observed in all practices, ranging from 2.72 to 6.46 points. Clinically, 50% of patients had a ≥5-point reduction in PHQ-9 score and 32% had a ≥50% reduction. This finding was corroborated by patient interviews that demonstrated positive experiences with behavioral health clinicians and acquiring new skills to cope with adverse situations at work and home. Conclusions Integrating behavioral health and primary care, when adapted to fit into community practices, reduced depression severity and enhanced patients' experience of care. Integration is a worthwhile investment; clinical leaders, policymakers, and payers should support integration in their communities.

Introduction A practice embarks on a radical reformulation of how care is designed and delivered when it decides to integrate medical and behavioral health care for its patients and success depends on managing complex change in a complex system. We examined the ways change is managed when integrating behavioral health and medical care. Method Observational cross-case comparative study of 19 primary care and community mental health practices. We collected mixed methods data through practice surveys, observation, and semistructured interviews. We analyzed data using a data-driven, emergent approach. Results The change management strategies that leadership employed to manage the changes of integrating behavioral health and medical care included: (a) advocating for a mission and vision focused on integrated care; (b) fostering collaboration, with a focus on population care and a team-based approaches; (c) attending to learning, which includes viewing the change process as continuous, and creating a culture that promoted reflection and continual improvement; (d) using data to manage change, and (e) developing approaches to finance integration. Discussion This paper reports the change management strategies employed by practice leaders making changes to integrate care, as observed by independent investigators. We offer an empirically based set of actionable recommendations that are relevant to a range of leaders (policymakers, medical directors) and practice members who wish to effectively manage the complex changes associated with integrated primary care. (PsycINFO Database Record

The study of healthcare disparities in Latino immigrants is underdeveloped and limited by risk to participants. To validate an electronic health record (EHR)-based algorithm that could serve as a safe proxy for self-reported immigration status for health services researchers. Primary collection/analysis of interview data and secondary analysis of electronic health record data. We developed an EHR algorithm to classify a population of patients as likely undocumented or recent Latino immigrants and validated this algorithm by conducting semi-structured interviews of staff whose main role entails asking about immigration status. We presented them with a list of patients (masked to the interviewer) with whom they had worked, and asked them to indicate patient’s immigration status, if they recalled it. We analyzed the correspondence between staff knowledge and our EHR algorithm. Staff described routine conversations with patients about immigration status. The EHR algorithm had fair agreement (66.2%, 95% CI 57.3–74.2) with staff knowledge. When the staff were more confident of their assessment, agreement increased (77.6%, 95% CI 63.4–88.2). The EHR has potential for studying immigration status in health services research, although more study is needed to determine the accuracy and utility of EHRs for this purpose.

Objective: To investigate whether inadequate intake of micronutrients, as defined by the Institute of Medicine's (IOM) Recommended Dietary Allowance (RDA) according to gender, is associated with lower working memory performance in healthy seniors. Method: 601 female and 530 male seniors (≥60 years) in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) were included. Analyses of the association between RDA micronutrient reference levels and having a memory performance score in the lowest quartile were stratified by gender. Logistic regression was used to estimate unadjusted and adjusted odds ratios for having a memory performance score in the lowest quartile for individuals with inadequate RDA levels compared to adequate RDA levels. Results: Over half of participants had inadequate intake of vitamin C, choline, and zinc. Men who had less than the RDA of choline from their food were more likely to be in the lowest memory performance quartile, while women who with inadequate B2 were more likely to be in the lowest quartile. Discussion: Inadequate intake of micronutrients was significantly associated with lower working memory performance.

Objectives This article describes a method for developing electronic health record (EHR) tools for use in primary care settings. Methods The “Translating Research into Agile Development” (TRIAD) method relies on the close collaboration of researchers, end users, and development teams. This five-step method for designing a tailored EHR tool includes (1) assessment, observation, and documentation; (2) structured engagement for collaboration and iterative data collection; (3) data distillation; (4) developmental feedback from clinical team members on high-priority EHR needs and input on design prototypes and EHR functionality; and (5) agile scrum sprint cycles for prototype development. Results The TRIAD method was used to modify an existing EHR for behavioral health clinicians (BHCs) embedded with primary care teams, called the BH e-Suite. The structured engagement processes stimulated discussions on how best to automate BHC screening tools and provide goal tracking functionality over time. Data distillation procedures rendered technical documents, with information on workflow steps, tasks, and associated challenges. In the developmental feedback phase, BHCs gave input on screening assessments, scoring needs, and other functionality to inform prototype feature development. Six 2-week sprint cycles were conducted to address three domains of prototype development: assessment and documentation needs, information retrieval, and monitoring and tracking. The BH e-Suite tool resulted with eight new EHR features to accommodate BHCs' needs. Conclusion The TRIAD method can be used to develop EHR functionality to address the evolving needs of health professionals in primary care and other settings. The BH e-Suite was developed through TRIAD and was found to be acceptable, easy to use, and improved care delivery during pilot testing. The BH e-Suite was later adopted by OCHIN Inc., which provided the tool to its 640 community health centers. This suggests that the TRIAD method is a promising research and development approach.

Background The use of implementation strategies is an active and purposive approach to translate research findings into routine clinical care. The Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) identified and defined discrete implementation strategies, and Proctor and colleagues have made recommendations for specifying operationalization of each strategy. We use empirical data to test how the ERIC taxonomy applies to a large dissemination and implementation initiative aimed at taking cardiac prevention to scale in primary care practice. Methods EvidenceNOW is an Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality initiative that funded seven cooperatives across seven regions in the USA. Cooperatives implemented multi-component interventions to improve heart health and build quality improvement capacity, and used a range of implementation strategies to foster practice change. We used ERIC to identify cooperatives’ implementation strategies and specified the actor, action, target, dose, temporality, justification, and expected outcome for each. We mapped and compiled a matrix of the specified ERIC strategies across the cooperatives, and used consensus to resolve mapping differences. We then grouped implementation strategies by outcomes and justifications, which led to insights regarding the use of and linkages between ERIC strategies in real-world scale-up efforts. Results Thirty-three ERIC strategies were used by cooperatives. We identified a range of revisions to the ERIC taxonomy to improve the practical application of these strategies. These proposed changes include revisions to four strategy names and 12 definitions. We suggest adding three new strategies because they encapsulate distinct actions that were not described in the existing ERIC taxonomy. In addition, we organized ERIC implementation strategies into four functional groupings based on the way we observed them being applied in practice. These groupings show how ERIC strategies are, out of necessity, interconnected, to achieve the work involved in rapidly taking evidence to scale. Conclusions Findings of our work suggest revisions to the ERIC implementation strategies to reflect their utilization in real-work dissemination and implementation efforts. The functional groupings of the ERIC implementation strategies that emerged from on-the-ground implementers will help guide others in choosing among and linking multiple implementation strategies when planning small- and large-scale implementation efforts. Trial registration Registered as Observational Study at www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02560428). Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s13012-019-0876-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

In the current 3-month, two arm, unblinded, single site, pilot randomized controlled trial, 120 high fall risk hospitalized older adults (age ≥65) were contacted, and 67 participants were enrolled. The intervention arm received a brief motivational interviewing (MI) intervention. Both arms received routine hospital fall prevention protocols. Measurements were conducted at baseline, 2 days, 1 week, 1 month, and 3 months. MI intervention took approximately 21 minutes and was provided at beginning proficiency level. Approximately 66% of participants completed 3-month data collection. The intervention group reported a greater decrease in fear of falling after the intervention than the control arm (β = −0.856 vs. β = −0.236) and maintained fall prevention behaviors at 3 months (β = 0.001 vs. β = −0.083) ( p < 0.05). The current study found brief MI for fall prevention in acute settings feasible and provided preliminary evidence for a positive impact of MI [ Journal of Gerontological Nursing, 45 (9), 19–29.].

The growing numbers of cancer survivors challenge delivery of high-quality survivorship care by healthcare systems. Innovative ways to improve care coordination for patients with cancer and multiple chronic conditions (“complex cancer survivors”) are needed to achieve better care outcomes, improve patient experience of care, and lower cost. Our study, Project CONNECT, will adapt and implement three evidence-based care coordination strategies, shown to be effective for primary care conditions, among complex cancer survivors. Specifically, the purpose of this study is to: 1) Implement a system-level EHR-driven intervention for 500 complex cancer survivors at Parkland; 2) Test effectiveness of the strategies on system- and patient-level outcomes measured before and after implementation; and 3) Elucidate system and patient factors that facilitate or hinder implementation and result in differences in experiences of care coordination between complex patients with and without cancer. Project CONNECT is a quasi-experimental implementation study among 500 breast and colorectal cancer survivors with at least one of the following chronic conditions: diabetes, hypertension, chronic lung disease, chronic kidney disease, or heart disease. We will implement three evidence-based care coordination strategies in a large, county integrated safety-net health system: 1) an EHR-driven registry to facilitate patient transitions between primary and oncology care; 2) co-locating a nurse practitioner trained in care coordination within a complex care team; 3) and enhancing teamwork through coaching. Segmented regression analysis will evaluate change in system-level (i.e. composite care quality score) and patient-level outcomes (i.e. self-reported care coordination). To evaluate implementation, we will merge quantitative findings with structured observations and physician and patient interviews. This study will result in an evaluation toolkit identifying key model elements, barriers, and facilitators that can be used to guide care coordination interventions in other safety-net settings. Because Parkland is a vanguard of safety-net healthcare nationally, findings will be widely applicable as other safety-nets move toward increased integration, enhanced EHR capability, and experience with growing patient diversity. Our proposal recognizes the complexity of interventions and scaffolds evidence-based strategies together to meet the needs of complex patients, systems of care, and service integration. ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02943265 . Registered 24 October 2016.

BACKGROUND: Integrating primary care and behavioral health is an important focus of health system transformation. METHOD: Cross-case comparative analysis of 19 practices in the U.S. describing integrated care clinical workflows. Surveys, observation visits, and key informant interviews analyzed using immersion-crystallization. RESULTS: Staff performed tasks and behaviors – guided by protocols or scripts – to support four workflow phases: (1) Identifying; (2) Engaging/transitioning; (3) Providing treatment; and (4) Monitoring/adjusting care. Shared electronic health records (EHR) and accessible staffing/scheduling facilitated workflows. CONCLUSION: Stakeholders should consider these workflow phases, address structural features, and utilize a developmental approach as they operationalize integrated care delivery.

This chapter assumes you will want to know how your integrated care efforts are affecting your practice. It demystifies measurement and provides principles and a framework for measuring, not everything, but what really matters to your practice and your patients. It provides guidance about what to measure, how to get started, how you can use measurement as a routine part of practice, and what challenges to anticipate.

The objective of this study was to empirically demonstrate the use of a new framework for describing the strategies used to implement quality improvement interventions and provide an example that others may follow. Implementation strategies are the specific approaches, methods, structures, and resources used to introduce and encourage uptake of a given intervention's components. Such strategies have not been regularly reported in descriptions of interventions' effectiveness, or in assessments of how proven interventions are implemented in new settings. This lack of reporting may hinder efforts to successfully translate effective interventions into "real-world" practice. A recently published framework was designed to standardize reporting on implementation strategies in the implementation science literature. We applied this framework to describe the strategies used to implement a single intervention in its original commercial care setting, and when implemented in community health centers from September 2010 through May 2015. Per this framework, the target (clinic staff) and outcome (prescribing rates) remained the same across settings; the actor , action , temporality , and dose were adapted to fit local context. The framework proved helpful in articulating which of the implementation strategies were kept constant and which were tailored to fit diverse settings, and simplified our reporting of their effects. Researchers should consider consistently reporting this information, which could be crucial to the success or failure of implementing proven interventions effectively across diverse care settings. Trial Registration clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02299791.

Objectives. Clinician communication with patients regarding worrisome findings in Prescription Drug Monitoring Programs (PDMPs) may influence patient responses and subsequent care. The authors studied the range of approaches clinicians report when communicating with patients in this situation and how practice policies and procedures may influence this communication. Design. Qualitative interviews of clinician PDMP users. Setting: Oregon registrants in the state’s PDMP. Subjects. Thirty-three clinicians practicing in pain management, emergency medicine, primary care, psychiatry, dentistry, and surgery. Methods. The authors conducted semi-structured interviews via telephone with clinicians who routinely used the PDMP. A multidisciplinary team used a grounded theory approach to identify ways clinicians reported using information from the PDMP when communicating with patients, and policies that influenced that communication. Results. Clinicians reported using a range of approaches for communicating about PDMP results, from openly sharing, to questioning patients without disclosing access to the PDMP, to avoiding the conversation. Clinicians also reported practice policies and procedures that influenced communication with their patients about prescribing and ongoing care, including policies that normalized use of the PDMP with all patients and those that facilitated difficult conversations by providing a rationale not to prescribe in certain circumstances. Conclusion. Clinicians’ self-reported approaches to sharing PDMP findings and communicating prescribing decisions with patients vary and may be facilitated by appropriate practice policies. Such communication may have implications for patient engagement and alliance building. More research is needed to identify best practices and potential guidelines for effectively communicating about PDMP findings, as this may enhance health outcomes.

Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is the most prevalent chronic liver disease in children and adolescents. The goal of this study was to describe the demographic, anthropometric and biochemical data of children and adolescents diagnosed with NAFLD during a seven-year period in an outpatient pediatric clinic in the Southwest region of the US and to evaluate relationships between race, BMI, ALT, triglyceride levels, age and gender with a diagnosis of NAFLD. A retrospective medical record review of patients who attended an outpatient pediatric clinic with a billing diagnosis ICD-9 code of 571.8 was conducted. Forty-one patients met these criteria. The majority was male (74%) Hispanic (32%), Hispanic/Latino (68%) and obese. The small number of patients diagnosed with NAFLD in our study is consistent with previously reported results. Our results indicate that the population of this culturally diverse, high-risk population has significant clinical markers that are indicative of NAFLD.

Background: Care coordinators are increasingly featured in patient-centered medical home (PCMH) projects, yet little research examines how coordinators themselves define and experience their role. This is the first study describing experiences of care coordinators across the US from their own perspectives. Methods: This qualitative study used a 5-month private, online discussion forum to gather data from 25 care coordinators from PCMH practices representing diversity in practice size, setting, and type. Participants answered questions and interacted with one another, creating an online social learning collaborative while allowing for data collection for research. Results: Coordinators identified barriers and facilitators in their work at the organization/system level, the interpersonal level, and the individual level. Some factors emerged as both barriers and facilitators, including the functionality of clinical information technology; the availability of community resources; interactions with clinicians and other health care facilities; interactions with patients; and self-care practices for mental health and wellness. Colocation and full integration into practices were other key facilitators, whereas excessive case loads and data management responsibilities were felt to be important barriers. Conclusions: While all the barriers and facilitators were important to performing coordinators9 roles, relationship building materialized as key to effective care coordination, whether with clinicians, patients, or outside organizations. We discuss implications for practice and provide suggestions for further research.

Strategies to engage patients to improve and enhance research and clinical care are increasingly being implemented in the United States, yet little is known about best practices for or the impacts of meaningful patient engagement.We describe and reflect on our patient stakeholder groups, engagement framework, experiences, and lessons learned in engaging patients in research, from generating proposal ideas to disseminating findings.The ADVANCE (Accelerating Data Value Across a National Community Health Center Network) clinical data research network is the nation's largest clinical dataset on the safety net, with outpatient clinical data from 122 health systems (1109 clinics) in 23 states.Patients stakeholders codeveloped the ADVANCE engagement framework and its implementation in partnership with network leaders. In phase I of ADVANCE, patients were involved with designing studies (input on primary outcome measures and methods) and usability testing (of the patient portal). In phase II, the network is prioritizing research training, dissemination opportunities, an "ambassador" program to pair more experienced patient stakeholders with those less experienced, and evaluation of engagement activities and impacts.The ADVANCE framework for patient engagement has successfully involved a diverse group of patients in the design, implementation, and interpretation of comparative effectiveness research. Our experience and framework can be used by other organizations and research networks to support patient engagement activities.

Motivational Interviewing (MI) is an evidence-based approach for fostering behavior change and holds potential to engage patients in behavior change related to fall prevention. A two-arm, unblinded, pilot randomized controlled trial was conducted in a hospital setting to determine the feasibility (recruitment and retention), establish suitable procedures for the intervention (duration and quality of MI), and to test study measurements (fear of falling, importance and confidence related to fall prevention, patient activation, fall prevention behaviors, and fall rates). Participants were high fall risk older inpatients (age ≥ 65). The intervention arm received MI at one time during hospitalization in addition to routine hospital fall prevention intervention. The control arm received the routine hospital care for fall prevention only. Measures were collected at baseline, 2-days, 1-week, 1-month, and 3-month. A total of 120 inpatients were contacted by the study team and 67 were randomized: intervention arm (n=36) and control arm (n=31). Approximately 66% of participants completed the study at the 3-month data collection and MI intervention took an average of 21 minutes and was of adequate quality. The intervention group reported less fear of falling after the MI intervention and maintained fall prevention behaviors over time (p

Background Children with health insurance have increased access to healthcare and receive higher quality care. However, despite recent initiatives expanding children’s coverage, many remain uninsured. New technologies present opportunities for helping clinics provide enrollment support for patients. We developed and tested electronic health record (EHR)-based tools to help clinics provide children’s insurance assistance. Methods We used mixed methods to understand tool adoption, and to assess impact of tool use on insurance coverage, healthcare utilization, and receipt of recommended care. We conducted intent-to-treat (ITT) analyses comparing pediatric patients in 4 intervention clinics (n = 15,024) to those at 4 matched control clinics (n = 12,227). We conducted effect-of-treatment-on-the-treated (ETOT) analyses comparing intervention clinic patients with tool use (n = 2240) to intervention clinic patients without tool use (n = 12,784). Results Tools were used for only 15% of eligible patients. Qualitative data indicated that tool adoption was limited by: (1) concurrent initiatives that duplicated the work associated with the tools, and (2) inability to obtain accurate insurance coverage data and end dates. The ITT analyses showed that intervention clinic patients had higher odds of gaining insurance coverage (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 1.32, 95% confidence interval [95%CI] 1.14–1.51) and lower odds of losing coverage (aOR = 0.77, 95%CI 0.68–0.88), compared to control clinic patients. Similarly, ETOT findings showed that intervention clinic patients with tool use had higher odds of gaining insurance (aOR = 1.83, 95%CI 1.64–2.04) and lower odds of losing coverage (aOR = 0.70, 95%CI 0.53–0.91), compared to patients without tool use. The ETOT analyses also showed higher rates of receipt of return visits, well-child visits, and several immunizations among patients for whom the tools were used. Conclusions This pragmatic trial, the first to evaluate EHR-based insurance assistance tools, suggests that it is feasible to create and implement tools that help clinics provide insurance enrollment support to pediatric patients. While ITT findings were limited by low rates of tool use, ITT and ETOT findings suggest tool use was associated with better odds of gaining and keeping coverage. Further, ETOT findings suggest that use of such tools may positively impact healthcare utilization and quality of pediatric care. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02298361; retrospectively registered on November 5, 2014. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s12913-018-3159-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Federal value-based payment programs require primary care practices to conduct quality improvement activities, informed by the electronic reports on clinical quality measures that their electronic health records (EHRs) generate. To determine whether EHRs produce reports adequate to the task, we examined survey responses from 1,492 practices across twelve states, supplemented with qualitative data. Meaningful-use participation, which requires the use of a federally certified EHR, was associated with the ability to generate reports—but the reports did not necessarily support quality improvement initiatives. Practices reported numerous challenges in generating adequate reports, such as difficulty manipulating and aligning measurement time frames with quality improvement needs, lack of functionality for generating reports on electronic clinical quality measures at different levels, discordance between clinical guidelines and measures available in reports, questionable data quality, and vendors that were unreceptive to changing EHR configuration beyond federal requirements. The current state of EHR measurement functionality may be insufficient to support federal initiatives that tie payment to clinical quality measures.

BACKGROUND: Burnout among primary care physicians, advanced practice clinicians (nurse practitioners and physician assistants [APCs]), and staff is common and associated with negative consequences for patient care, but the association of burnout with characteristics of primary care practices is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To examine the association between physician-, APC- and staff-reported burnout and specific structural, organizational, and contextual characteristics of smaller primary care practices. DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis of survey data collected from 9/22/2015–6/19/2017. SETTING: Sample of smaller primary care practices in the USA participating in a national initiative focused on improving the delivery of cardiovascular preventive services. PARTICIPANTS: 10,284 physicians, APCs and staff from 1380 primary care practices. MAIN MEASURE: Burnout was assessed with a validated single-item measure. KEY RESULTS: Burnout was reported by 20.4% of respondents overall. In a multivariable analysis, burnout was slightly more common among physicians and APCs (physician vs. non-clinical staff, adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 1.26; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.05–1.49, APC vs. non-clinical staff, aOR = 1.34, 95% CI, 1.10–1.62). Other multivariable correlates of burnout included non-solo practice (2–5 physician/APCs vs. solo practice, aOR = 1.71; 95% CI, 1.35–2.16), health system affiliation (vs. physician/APC-owned practice, aOR = 1.42; 95%CI, 1.16–1.73), and Federally Qualified Health Center status (vs. physician/APC-owned practice, aOR = 1.36; 95%CI, 1.03–1.78). Neither the proportion of patients on Medicare or Medicaid, nor practice-level patient volume (patient visits per physician/APC per day) were significantly associated with burnout. In analyses stratified by professional category, practice size was not associated with burnout for APCs, and participation in an accountable care organization was associated with burnout for clinical and non-clinical staff. CONCLUSIONS: Burnout is prevalent among physicians, APCs, and staff in smaller primary care practices. Members of solo practices less commonly report burnout, while members of health system-owned practices and Federally Qualified Health Centers more commonly report burnout, suggesting that practice level autonomy may be a critical determinant of burnout. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s11606-018-4679-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Failed diffusion of innovations may be linked to an inability to use and apply data, information, and knowledge to change perceptions of current practice and motivate change. Using qualitative and quantitative data from three large-scale health care delivery innovations-accountable care organizations, advanced primary care practice, and EvidenceNOW-we assessed where data-driven innovation is occurring and where challenges lie. We found that implementation of some technological components of innovation (for example, electronic health records) has occurred among health care organizations, but core functions needed to use data to drive innovation are lacking. Deficits include the inability to extract and aggregate data from the records; gaps in sharing data; and challenges in adopting advanced data functions, particularly those related to timely reporting of performance data. The unexpectedly high costs and burden incurred during implementation of the innovations have limited organizations' ability to address these and other deficits. Solutions that could help speed progress in data-driven innovation include facilitating peer-to-peer technical assistance, providing tailored feedback reports to providers from data aggregators, and using practice facilitators skilled in using data technology for quality improvement to help practices transform. Policy efforts that promote these solutions may enable more rapid uptake of and successful participation in innovative delivery system reforms.

Health care extension is an approach to providing external support to primary care practices with the aim of diffusing innovation. EvidenceNOW was launched to rapidly disseminate and implement evidence-based guidelines for cardiovascular preventive care in the primary care setting. Seven regional grantee cooperatives provided the foundational elements of health care extension-technological and quality improvement support, practice capacity building, and linking with community resources-to more than two hundred primary care practices in each region. This article describes how the cooperatives varied in their approaches to extension and provides early empirical evidence that health care extension is a feasible and potentially useful approach for providing quality improvement support to primary care practices. With investment, health care extension may be an effective platform for federal and state quality improvement efforts to create economies of scale and provide practices with more robust and coordinated support services.

BackgroundElectronic health records (EHRs) are a key tool for primary care practice. However, the EHR functionality is not keeping pace with the evolving informational and decision-support needs of behavioural health clinicians (BHCs) working on integrated teams.ObjectiveDescribe the workflows and tasks of integrated BHCs working with adult patients identify their health information technology (health IT) needs and develop EHR tools to address them.MethodA mixed-methods, comparative case study of six community health centres (CHCs) in Oregon, each with at least one BHC integrated into their primary care team. We observed clinical work and conducted interviews to understand workflows and clinical tasks, aiming to identify how effectively current EHRs supported integrated care delivery, including transitions, documentation, information sharing and decision-making. We analysed these data and employed a user-centred design process to develop EHR tools addressing the identified needs.ResultsBHCs used the primary care EHR for documentation and communication with other team members, but the EHR lacked the functionality to fully support integrated care. Needs include the ability to: (1) automate and track paper-based screening; (2) document behavioural health history; (3) access patient social and medical history relevant to behavioural health issues and (4) rapidly document and track progress on goals. To meet these needs, we engaged users and developed a set of EHR tools called the Behavioural Health e-Suite (BH e-Suite).ConclusionUS-based integrated primary care teams, and particularly BHCs working with adult populations, have unique information needs, workflows and tasks. These needs can be met and supported by the EHR with a moderate level of modification.

This study describes challenges that coordinated care organizations (CCOs), a version of accountable care organizations, experienced when attempting to finance integrated care for Medicaid recipients in Oregon and the strategies they developed to address these barriers.Cross-case comparative study.We conducted a cross-case comparative study of 5 diverse CCOs in Oregon. We interviewed key stakeholders: CCO leaders, practice leaders, and primary care and behavioral health clinicians. A multidisciplinary team analyzed data using an immersion-crystallization approach. Financial barriers to integrating care and strategies to address them emerged from this analysis. Findings were member-checked with a CCO integration workgroup to ensure wider applicability.State legislation that initiated CCOs promoted integration expansion. CCOs, however, struggled to create sustainable funding mechanisms to support integration. This was due to regulatory and financial silos that persisted despite CCO global budget formation; concerns about actuarial soundness that limited reasonable, yet creative, uses of federal funds to support integration; and billing difficulties connected to licensing and documentation requirements for behavioral and mental health providers. Despite these barriers, CCOs, with the help of the state, supported expanding integrated care in primary care by using state funds to pilot test integration models and to promote alternative payment methodologies.Oregon's CCO mandate included a focus on better integrating medical and behavioral healthcare for Medicaid recipients. Despite this intention, challenges exist in the financing of integration, many of which state and federal leaders can address through payment and regulatory reform.

Objective The pharmacist’s role and responsibilities in addressing the opioid epidemic have yet to be clearly defined, particularly from the patient’s point of view. This qualitative study explores the pharmacist’s role in promoting opioid safety from the perspective of pharmacists and patients. Design Focus groups. Setting Patient groups were held in person, and pharmacist groups were held online. Subjects Oregon pharmacists (N = 19, Mage = 39.0 years, range = 26–57 years, 58% female) and patients (N = 18, Mage = 60.1 years, range = 30–77 years, 71% female) with current experience dispensing or receiving opioid medications. Methods Pharmacists were asked about the challenges and opportunities for opioid safety monitoring and prescription dispensing. Patients were asked about their experiences accessing care, medications, and safety information. Focus group data were analyzed by a multidisciplinary team using an immersion-crystallization approach. Results Pharmacists and patients agreed that pharmacists are responsible for medication safety. Pharmacists expressed discomfort filling potentially high-risk opioid prescriptions and noted barriers such as lack of clinical information and discomfort policing high-risk prescribing. Patients were concerned about pharmacists potentially overstepping their professional responsibilities by interfering with prescribers’ clinical decisions. Conclusions Feedback from both pharmacists and patient participants suggests that there is uncertainty in the degree to which pharmacists can and should confront the prescription opioid epidemic directly. Ambiguities in the pharmacist’s role may be best clarified through structured training promoting enhanced between-party communication.

Purpose: To provide empirical evidence on key organizing constructs shaping practical, real-world integration of behavior health and primary care to comprehensively address patients’ medical, emotional, and behavioral health needs. Methods: In a comparative case study using an immersion-crystallization approach, a multidisciplinary team analyzed data from observations of practice operations, interviews, and surveys of practice members, and implementation diaries. Practices were drawn from 2 studies of practices attempting to integrate behavioral health and primary care: Advancing Care Together, a demonstration project of 11 practices located in Colorado, and the Integration Workforce Study, a study of 8 practices across the United States. Results: We identified 5 key organizing constructs influencing integration of primary care and behavioral health: 1) Integration REACH (the extent to which the integration program was delivered to the identified target population), 2) establishment of continuum of care pathways addressing the location of care across the range of patient’s severity of illness, 3) approach to patient transitions: referrals or warm handoffs, 4) location of the integration workforce, and 5) participants’ mental model for integration. These constructs intertwine within an organization’s historic and social context to produce locally adapted approaches to integrating care. Contextual factors, particularly practice type, influenced whether specialty mental health and substance use services were colocated within an organization. Conclusion: Interaction among 5 organizing constructs and practice context produces diverse expressions of integrated care. These constructs provide a framework for understanding how primary care and behavioral health services can be integrated in routine practice. (J Am Board Fam Med 2015;28: S7–S20.)

Purpose: To examine the interrelationship among behavioral health clinician (BHC) staffing, scheduling, and a primary care practice9s approach to delivering integrated care. Methods: Observational cross-case comparative analysis of 17 primary care practices in the United States focused on implementation of integrated care. Practices varied in size, ownership, geographic location, and integrated care experience. A multidisciplinary team analyzed documents, practice surveys, field notes from observation visits, implementation diaries, and semistructured interviews using a grounded theory approach. Results: Across the 17 practices, staffing ratios ranged from 1 BHC covering 0.3 to 36.5 primary care clinicians (PCCs). BHC scheduling varied from 50-minute prescheduled appointments to open, flexible schedules slotted in 15-minute increments. However, staffing and scheduling patterns generally clustered in 2 ways and enabled BHCs to be engaged by referral or warm handoff. Five practices predominantly used warm handoffs to engage BHCs and had higher BHC-to-PCC staffing ratios; multiple BHCs on staff; and shorter, more flexible BHC appointment schedules. Staffing and scheduling structures that enabled warm handoffs supported BHC engagement with patients concurrent with the identification of behavioral health needs. Twelve practices primarily used referrals to engage BHCs and had lower BHC-to-PCC staffing ratios and BHC schedules prefilled with visits. This enabled some BHCs to bill for services, but also made them less accessible to PCCs in when patients presented with behavioral health needs during a clinical encounter. Three of these practices were experimenting with open scheduling and briefer BHC visits to enable real-time access while managing resources. Conclusion: Practices9 approaches to PCC-BHC staffing, scheduling, and delivery of integrated care mutually influenced each other and were shaped by the local context. Practice leaders, educators, clinicians, funders, researchers, and policy makers must consider these factors as they seek to optimize integrated systems of care.

Purpose: Provide credible estimates of the start-up and ongoing effort and incremental practice expenses for the Advancing Care Together (ACT) behavioral health and primary care integration interventions. Methods: Expenditure data were collected from 10 practice intervention sites using an instrument with a standardized general format that could accommodate the unique elements of each intervention. Results: Average start-up effort expenses were $44,076 and monthly ongoing effort expenses per patient were $40.39. Incremental expenses averaged $20,788 for start-up and $4.58 per patient for monthly ongoing activities. Variations in expenditures across practices reflect the differences in intervention specifics and organizational settings. Differences in effort to incremental expenditures reflect the extensive use of existing resources in implementing the interventions. Conclusions: ACT program incremental expenses suggest that widespread adoption would likely have a relatively modest effect on overall health systems expenditures. Practice effort expenses are not trivial and may pose barriers to adoption. Payers and purchasers interested in attaining widespread adoption of integrated care must consider external support to practices that accounts for both incremental and effort expense levels. Existing knowledge transfer mechanisms should be employed to minimize developmental start-up expenses and payment reform focused toward value-based, Triple Aim–oriented reimbursement and purchasing mechanisms are likely needed.

Purpose: This study reports REACH (the extent to which an intervention or program was delivered to the identified target population) of interventions integrating primary care and behavioral health implemented by real-world practices. Methods: Eleven practices implementing integrated care interventions provided data to calculate REACH as follows: 1) Screening REACH defined as proportion of target patients assessed for integrated care, and 2) Integrated care services REACH—defined as proportion of patients receiving integrated services of those who met specific criteria. Difference in mean REACH between practices was evaluated using t test. Results: Overall, 26.2% of target patients (n = 24,906) were assessed for integrated care and 41% (n = 836) of eligible patients received integration services. Practices that implemented systematic protocols to identify patients needing integrated care had a significantly higher screening REACH (mean, 70%; 95% CI [confidence interval], 46.6–93.4%) compared with practices that used clinicians9 discretion (mean, 7.9%; 95% CI, 0.6–15.1; P = .0014). Integrated care services REACH was higher among practices that used clinicians9 discretion compared with those that assessed patients systematically (mean, 95.8 vs 53.8%; P = .03). Conclusion: REACH of integrated care interventions differed by practices9 method of assessing patients. Measuring REACH is important to evaluate the extent to which integration efforts affect patient care and can help demonstrate the impact of integrated care to payers and policy makers.

Although unparalleled in the provision of intensive lifesaving treatments, US health care has only begun to focus on other important aspects of population health. To achieve the triple aim of better health, better care, and lower costs, payment and delivery systems must evolve. The accountable care movement is central to this evolution, and engagement by cardiovascular specialists can help to shape it. Sustained partnering with policy makers could improve patient care by appropriately directing cardiovascular medicine resources and avoiding unintended harm to well-functioning systems of care. Accountable care organizations (ACOs) are part of a new payment and delivery model that aims to improve quality of care while controlling costs for populations of patients.1,2 ACOs took conceptual shape ≈10 years ago as an approach to achieve these goals in a manner that fosters flexibility.3,4 Unlike the managed care movement in the 1990s, capitated payments have not been a foundational element of the ACO movement (although components of capitation will likely prove important5). ACOs were therefore less disruptive to the status quo ante, and, with inclusion in the Affordable Care Act of 2010, they gained considerable momentum. Although Medicare has specific requirements for ACO structure and patient attribution, state and private insurers have engaged in a variety of alternative ACO models that could drive innovation. Within ACOs, providers can be configured in a number of ways ranging from physician-led groups and integrated delivery systems to hospital-based systems coupled with independent practice associations.2–4,6 The adoption of electronic health records has been an important feature that allows ACOs to measure and integrate care for populations of patients. Regardless of structure, it is widely accepted that ACOs should (1) be provider led and accountable for the entire continuum of care for a population; …