Search

Purpose Our purpose is to describe how coaches who are clinical faculty help in the developmental process of residents to become better physicians and to lead the improvement of quality and safety in the Dartmouth-Hitchcock Leadership Preventive Medicine Residency Program (DHLPMR). Methods Using a semi-structured interview guide, eight coaches were interviewed and two focus groups were held with a total of nine residents. The qualitative data were content analysed to understand how both the coaches and residents perceive coaches' work and their role. Results The interviews with the coaches suggest that they take great pride in their work: they find it to be challenging and meaningful. The coaches use various skills and techniques - asking questions, listening deeply, observing the resident in action, offering encouragement and challenging the resident to think or act differently. The residents also perceive the work of the coach to help them progress on their learning journey. The role of the coach tends to go beyond coaching residents relative to improving an aspect of health care performance to creating the conditions for transformation and growth for the residents and the coaches. Conclusion The DHLPMR program is a unique residency program that has the intention to foster the development of future physician leaders who have the ability to both practise medicine and improve the clinical practices in which they work. The coaches are a vital ingredient in this program as they convey the residents/fellows on their leadership learning journey. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To assess the use of a co-designed patient-reported outcome (PRO) clinical dashboard and estimate its impact on shared decision-making (SDM) and symptomatology in adults with advanced cancer or chronic kidney disease (CKD)., Materials and Methods: We developed a clinical PRO dashboard within the Northwestern Medicine Patient-Reported Outcomes system, enhanced through co-design involving 20 diverse constituents. Using a single-group, pretest-posttest design, we evaluated the dashboard's use among patients with advanced cancer or CKD between June 2020 and January 2022. Eligible patients had a visit with a participating clinician, completed at least two dashboard-eligible visits, and consented to follow-up surveys. PROs were collected 72 h prior to visits, including measures for chronic condition management self-efficacy, health-related quality of life (PROMIS measures), and SDM (collaboRATE). Responses were integrated into the EHR dashboard and accessible to clinicians and patients., Results: We recruited 157 participants: 66 with advanced cancer and 91 with CKD. There were significant improvements in SDM from baseline, as assessed by collaboRATE scores. The proportion of participants reporting the highest level of SDM on every collaboRATE item increased by 15 percentage points from baseline to 3 months, and 17 points between baseline and 6-month follow-up. Additionally, there was a clinically meaningful decrease in anxiety levels over study period (T-score baseline: 53; 3-month: 52; 6-month: 50; P < .001), with a standardized response mean (SRM) of -0.38 at 6 months., Discussion: PRO clinical dashboards, developed and shared with patients, may enhance SDM and reduce anxiety among patients with advanced cancer and CKD., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Medical Informatics Association.)

Background: Depression is common in Parkinson's disease (PD) but is underrecognized clinically. Although systematic screening is a recommended strategy to improve depression recognition in primary care practice, it has not been widely used in PD care., Methods: The 15-item Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS-15) was implemented at 5 movement disorders clinics to screen PD patients. Sites developed processes suited to their clinical workflow. Qualitative interviews with clinicians and patients provided information on feasibility, acceptability, and perceived utility., Results: Prior to implementation, depression screening was recorded in 12% using a formal instrument; 64% were screened informally by clinical interview, and no screening was recorded in 24%. Of 1406 patients seen for follow-up care during the implementation period, 88% were screened, 59% using the GDS-15 (self-administered in 51% and interviewer administered in 8%), a nearly 5-fold increase in formal screening. Lack of clinician or staff time and inability to provide the GDS-15 to the patient ahead of the visit were the most commonly cited reasons for lack of screening using the GDS-15; 378 (45%) patients completing the GDS-15 screened positive for depression, and 137 were enrolled for a 12-month prospective follow-up. Mean GDS-15 scores improved from 8.8 to 7.0 (P < 0.0001) and the 39-item Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire emotional subscore from 42.2 to 36.7 (P = 0.0007)., Conclusions: Depression screening in PD using a formal instrument can be achieved at much higher levels than is currently practiced, but there are barriers to implementing this in clinical practice. An individual site-specific process is necessary to optimize screening rates., (© 2024 The Author(s). Movement Disorders Clinical Practice published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.)

Maternal vaccination during pregnancy, in general and against COVID-19 infection, offers protection to both mother and baby, but uptake remains suboptimal. This study aimed to explore the perceptions regarding COVID-19 vaccination in pregnancy, particularly for marginalised populations and those living with social or medical complexity. A total of 96 semi-structured in-depth interviews were conducted with 40 women, 15 partners, 21 HCPs, and 20 policy makers, across all four nations of the United Kingdom (UK), discussing their lived experience of utilising, delivering, or developing policy for COVID-19 vaccination in pregnancy during the pandemic. Three themes were derived: (1) historical and social context, (2) communication of information and guidance, and (3) appraisal and action. Together these captured the participants' legacy of mistrust in drugs during pregnancy; prior positive experiences; concerns about missing information, conflicting information, or false information about COVID-19 vaccines; and confusing guidance for pregnant women. The final theme describes the participants' behaviour and actions undertaken consequent to their experiences and the available information. The findings suggest efforts to improve COVID-19 vaccination in pregnancy may be best focused on personalised communication of information. A trusting relationship and prior positive experiences with other vaccines, both in and outside of pregnancy, positively influenced perceptions of COVID-19 vaccination.

Background: Care partners of people with serious illness experience significant challenges and unmet needs during the patient's treatment period and after their death. Learning from others with shared experiences can be valuable, but opportunities are not consistently available., Objective: This study aims to design and prototype a regional, facilitated, and web-based peer support network to help active and bereaved care partners of persons with serious illness be better prepared to cope with the surprises that arise during serious illness and in bereavement., Methods: An 18-member co-design team included active care partners and those in bereavement, people who had experienced serious illness, regional health care and support partners, and clinicians. It was guided by facilitators and peer network subject-matter experts. We conducted design exercises to identify the functions and specifications of a peer support network. Co-design members independently prioritized network specifications, which were incorporated into an early iteration of the web-based network., Results: The team prioritized two functions: (1) connecting care partners to information and (2) facilitating emotional support. The design process generated 24 potential network specifications to support these functions. The highest priorities included providing a supportive and respectful community; connecting people to trusted resources; reducing barriers to asking for help; and providing frequently asked questions and responses. The network platform had to be simple and intuitive, provide technical support for users, protect member privacy, provide publicly available information and a private discussion forum, and be easily accessible. It was feasible to enroll members in the ConnectShareCare web-based network over a 3-month period., Conclusions: A co-design process supported the identification of critical features of a peer support network for care partners of people with serious illnesses in a rural setting, as well as initial testing and use. Further testing is underway to assess the long-term viability and impact of the network., (©Elizabeth A O’Donnell, Aricca D Van Citters, Inas S Khayal, Matthew M Wilson, David Gustafson, Amber E Barnato, Andrea C Buccellato, Colleen Young, Megan M Holthoff, Eugene Korsunskiy, Stephanie C Tomlin, Amelia M Cullinan, Alexandra C Steinbaugh, Jennifer J Hinson, Kristen R Johnson, Andrew Williams, Ruth M Thomson, Janet M Haines, Anne B Holmes, Ann D Bradley, Eugene C Nelson, Kathryn B Kirkland. Originally published in JMIR Human Factors (https://humanfactors.jmir.org), 08.05.2024.)

Background: Maternity care services in the United Kingdom have undergone drastic changes due to pandemic-related restrictions. Prior research has shown maternity care during the pandemic was negatively experienced by women and led to poor physical and mental health outcomes in pregnancy. A synthesis is required of published research on women's experiences of maternity care during the latter half of the COVID-19 pandemic., Aim: To update a previous systematic review of maternity care experiences during the pandemic to June 2021, exploring experiences of maternity care specifically within the United Kingdom and how they may have changed, in order to inform future maternity services., Methods: A systematic review of qualitative literature was conducted using comprehensive searches of five electronic databases and the Cochrane COVID Study Register, published between 1 June 2021 and 13 October 2022, and further updated to 30 September 2023. Thematic Synthesis was utilised for data synthesis., Findings: Of 21,860 records identified, 27 studies were identified for inclusion. Findings included 14 descriptive themes across the five core concepts: (1)Care-seeking and experience; (2)Virtual care; (3)Self-monitoring; (4)COVID-19 vaccination; (5)Ethical future of maternity care., Discussion: Our findings in the UK are consistent with those globally, and extend those of the previous systematic review, particularly about women's perceptions of the COVID-19 vaccine during pregnancy., Conclusion: Our findings suggest the following are important to women for future maternity care: personalisation and inclusiveness; clear and evidence-based communication to facilitate informed decision-making; and achieving balance between social commitments and time spent settling into motherhood., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest Six studies included in the qualitative evidence synthesis were authored by at least one member of the review team (SAS, LAM, PvD, or the wider RESILIENT Study Group). However, data extraction, quality assessment, and synthesis of these papers were not conducted by any of these authors, rather by TD and GH who have no competing interests. The RESILIENT Study has been adopted by the National Institute for Health and Care Research Applied Research Collaboration South London [NIHR ARC South London] at King’s College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

The coproduction learning health system (CLHS) model extends the definition of a learning health system to explicitly bring together patients and care partners, health care teams, administrators, and scientists to share the work of optimizing health outcomes, improving care value, and generating new knowledge. The CLHS model highlights a partnership for coproduction that is supported by data that can be used to support individual patient care, quality improvement, and research. We provide a case study that describes the application of this model to transform care within an oncology program at an academic medical center., Competing Interests: No conflicts of interest have been declared relating to the manuscript., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)

Objective: Dashboards can support person-centered care by helping people partner with their clinicians to coproduce care based on preferences, shared decision-making, and evidence-based treatments. We engaged caregivers of children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA), adults with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), and clinicians in a pilot study to assess their experiences and the utility and impact of an electronic previsit questionnaire and point-of-care dashboard to support coproduction of rheumatology care., Methods: We employed a mixed-methods design to assess users' perceptions of a customized electronic health record rheumatology module at four pediatric rheumatology practices and two adult rheumatology practices. We surveyed a convenience sample of caregivers of children with JIA (n = 113), adults with RA (n = 116), and clinicians (n = 12). We conducted semistructured interviews with 13 caregivers and patients and six care teams. Experiences were evaluated using descriptive statistics and thematic analyses., Results: Caregivers of children with JIA and adults with RA reported the dashboards were useful during discussions (88%) and helped them talk about what mattered most (82%), make health care decisions (83%), and create a treatment plan (77%). Clinicians provided similar feedback. Two-thirds (67%) of caregivers and adults and 55% of clinicians would recommend the dashboard to peers. System usability scores (77.1 ± 15.6) were above average. Dashboards helped users make sense of health information, communicate more effectively, and make decisions. Improvements to the dashboards and workflows could enhance patient self-management and clinician efficiency., Conclusion: Visual point-of-care dashboards can support caregivers, patients, and clinicians to coproduce rheumatology care. Findings demonstrate a need to spread and scale for broader benefit and impact., (© 2023 The Authors. ACR Open Rheumatology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American College of Rheumatology.)

Introduction: The Cystic Fibrosis (CF) Foundation sponsored the design, pilot testing, and implementation of the CF Learning Network (CFLN) to explore how the Foundation's Care Center Network (CCN) could become a learning health system. Six years after the design, the Foundation commissioned a formative mixed methods evaluation of the CFLN to assess: CFLN participants' understanding of program goals, attributes, and perceptions of current and future impact., Methods: We performed semi-structured interviews with CFLN participants to identify perceived goals, attributes, and impact of the network. Following thematic analyses, we developed and distributed a survey to CFLN members and a matched sample of CCN programs to understand whether the themes were unique to the CFLN., Results: Interviews with 24 CFLN participants were conducted. Interviewees identified the primary CFLN goal as improving outcomes for people living with CF, with secondary goals of providing training in quality improvement (QI), creating a learning community, engaging all stakeholders in improvement, and spreading best practices to the CCN. Project management, use of data, common QI methods, and the learning community were seen as critical to success. Survey responses were collected from 103 CFLN members and 25 CCN members. The data revealed that CFLN respondents were more likely than CCN respondents to connect with other CF programs, routinely use data for QI, and engage patient and family partners in QI., Conclusions: Our study suggests that the CFLN provides value beyond that achieved by the CCN. Key questions remain about whether spread of the CFLN could improve outcomes for more people living with CF., Competing Interests: Authors Bruce C. Marshall and Kathryn A. Sabadosa are employees of the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation. The authors state they have no conflicts of interest., (© 2022 The Authors. Learning Health Systems published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of University of Michigan.)

Background: Patient-reported outcomes-symptoms, treatment side effects, and health-related quality of life-are important to consider in chronic illness care. The increasing availability of health IT to collect patient-reported outcomes and integrate results within the electronic health record provides an unprecedented opportunity to support patients' symptom monitoring, shared decision-making, and effective use of the health care system., Objective: The objectives of this study are to co-design a dashboard that displays patient-reported outcomes along with other clinical data (eg, laboratory tests, medications, and appointments) within an electronic health record and conduct a longitudinal demonstration trial to evaluate whether the dashboard is associated with improved shared decision-making and disease management outcomes., Methods: Co-design teams comprising study investigators, patients with advanced cancer or chronic kidney disease, their care partners, and their clinicians will collaborate to develop the dashboard. Investigators will work with clinic staff to implement the co-designed dashboard for clinical testing during a demonstration trial. The primary outcome of the demonstration trial is whether the quality of shared decision-making increases from baseline to the 3-month follow-up. Secondary outcomes include longitudinal changes in satisfaction with care, self-efficacy in managing treatments and symptoms, health-related quality of life, and use of costly and potentially avoidable health care services. Implementation outcomes (ie, fidelity, appropriateness, acceptability, feasibility, reach, adoption, and sustainability) during the co-design process and demonstration trial will also be collected and summarized., Results: The dashboard co-design process was completed in May 2020, and data collection for the demonstration trial is anticipated to be completed by the end of July 2022. The results will be disseminated in at least one manuscript per study objective., Conclusions: This protocol combines stakeholder engagement, health care coproduction frameworks, and health IT to develop a clinically feasible model of person-centered care delivery. The results will inform our current understanding of how best to integrate patient-reported outcome measures into clinical workflows to improve outcomes and reduce the burden of chronic disease on patients and health care systems., International Registered Report Identifier (irrid): DERR1-10.2196/38461., (©Laura M Perry, Victoria Morken, John D Peipert, Betina Yanez, Sofia F Garcia, Cynthia Barnard, Lisa R Hirschhorn, Jeffrey A Linder, Neil Jordan, Ronald T Ackermann, Alexandra Harris, Sheetal Kircher, Nisha Mohindra, Vikram Aggarwal, Rebecca Frazier, Ava Coughlin, Katy Bedjeti, Melissa Weitzel, Eugene C Nelson, Glyn Elwyn, Aricca D Van Citters, Mary O'Connor, David Cella. Originally published in JMIR Research Protocols (https://www.researchprotocols.org), 21.09.2022.)

There is increasing interest in asking patients questions before their visits to elicit goals and concerns, which is part of the move to support the concept of coproducing care. The phrasing and delivery of such questions differs across settings and is likely to influence responses. This report describes a study that (i) used a three-level model to categorize the goals and concerns elicited by two different pre-visit questions, and (ii) describes associations between responses elicited and the phrasing and delivery of the two questions. The questions were administered to patients with rheumatic disease, and patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Paper-based responses from 150 patients with rheumatic disease and 338 patients with IBD were analyzed (163 paper, 175 electronic). The goals and concerns elicited were primarily disease or symptom-specific. The specific goal and concern examples featured in one pre-visit question were more commonly reported in responses to that question, compared to the question without examples. Questions completed electronically before the visit were associated with longer responses than those completed on paper in the waiting room. In conclusion, how and when patients' goals and concerns are elicited appears to have an impact on responses and warrants further investigation.

Objective: Determine differences in utilization patterns, disease severity, and outcomes between patients with and without diabetes mellitus diagnosed with COVID-19 in 2020., Research Design and Methods: We used an observational cohort comprised of Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries with a medical claim indicating a COVID-19 diagnosis. We performed inverse probability weighting between beneficiaries with and without diabetes to account for differences in socio-demographic characteristics and comorbidities., Results: In the unweighted comparison of beneficiaries, all characteristics were significantly different (P<0.001). Beneficiaries with diabetes were younger, more likely to be black, had more comorbidities, higher rates of Medicare-Medicaid dual-eligibility, and were less likely to be female. In the weighted sample, hospitalization rates for COVID-19 among beneficiaries with diabetes was higher (20.5% vs 17.1%; p < 0.001). Outcomes of hospitalizations were similarly worse among beneficiaries with diabetes: admissions to ICU during hospitalizations (7.78% vs. 6.11%; p < 0.001); in-hospital mortality (3.85% vs 2.93%; p < 0.001); and ICU mortality (2.41% vs 1.77%). Beneficiaries with diabetes had more ambulatory care visits (8.9 vs. 7.8, p < 0.001) and higher overall mortality (17.3% vs. 14.9%, p < 0.001) following COVID-19 diagnosis., Conclusion: Beneficiaries with diabetes and COVID-19 had higher rates of hospitalization, ICU use and overall mortality. While the mechanism of how diabetes impacts the severity of COVID-19 may not be fully understood, there are important clinical implications for persons with diabetes. A diagnosis of COVID-19 leads to greater financial and clinical burden than for their counterparts, persons without diabetes, including perhaps most significantly, higher death rates., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Austin, Leggett, Schmidt, Bolin, Nelson, Oliver and King.)

Background: Despite progress in developing learning health systems (LHS) and associated metrics of success, a gap remains in identifying measures to guide the implementation and assessment of the impact of an oncology LHS. Our aim was to identify a balanced set of measures to guide a person-centered oncology LHS., Methods: A modified Delphi process and clinical value compass framework were used to prioritize measures for tracking LHS performance. A multidisciplinary group of 77 stakeholders, including people with cancer and family members, participated in 3 rounds of online voting followed by 50-minute discussions. Participants rated metrics on perceived importance to the LHS and discussed priorities., Results: Voting was completed by 94% of participants and prioritized 22 measures within 8 domains. Patient and caregiver factors included clinical health (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status, survival by cancer type and stage), functional health and quality of life (Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System [PROMIS] Global-10, Distress Thermometer, Modified Caregiver Strain Index), experience of care (advance care planning, collaboRATE, PROMIS Self-Efficacy Scale, access to care, experience of care, end-of-life quality measures), and cost and resource use (avoidance and delay in accessing care and medications, financial hardship, total cost of care). Contextual factors included team well-being (Well-being Index; voluntary staff turnover); learning culture (Improvement Readiness, compliance with Commission on Cancer quality of care measures); scholarly engagement and productivity (institutional commitment and support for research, academic productivity index); and diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging (screening and follow-up for social determinants of health, inclusivity of staff and patients)., Conclusions: The person-centered LHS value compass provides a balanced set of measures that oncology practices can use to monitor and evaluate improvement across multiple domains., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press.)

Background: The IBD Qorus Collaborative aims to reduce variation and increase the value of care for the adult inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) community. To evaluate the success of the collaborative, we aimed to develop a balanced set of outcome measures that reflect a multistakeholder view of value in IBD care. To achieve this, we used the Clinical Value Compass framework and engaged a mixed-stakeholder group to conduct a modified Delphi process. The end result was a 10-measure set to assess the value of IBD care., Method: The modified Delphi process included 3 iterative rounds of blinded voting and interactive webinar-style discussion. We recruited 18 participants for the Delphi panel, including clinicians, researchers, patients, Crohn's & Colitis Foundation staff, and payers. Participants first identified constructs to measure, then identified the tools to measure those constructs. A literature review and environmental scan of current measures in 4 domains were performed, and relevant measures were proposed for discussion and voting in each domain. Throughout the process, participants were invited to contribute additional measures., Conclusion: The modified Delphi process led to selection of 10 value measures across 4 domains: (1) patient experience; (2) functional status; (3) clinical status; and (4) health care costs and utilization. We have successfully completed a 3-stage modified Delphi process to develop a balanced set of value measures for adult IBD care. The value measure set expands upon prior efforts that have established quality measures for IBD care by adding cost and experience of care elements. This work positions IBD Qorus to better assess, study, improve, and demonstrate value at individual, system, and population levels and will inform and empower related research, improvement, and implementation efforts., (© 2021 Crohn’s & Colitis Foundation. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: COVID-19, a respiratory disease caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus, emerged in 2019 and led to a worldwide pandemic in 2020. The COVID-19 pandemic has been a massive natural experiment in the formation of mitigation strategies to prevent cases and to provide effective healthcare for those afflicted. Regional differences in the impact of the pandemic on morbidity and mortality have been driven by political and regional differences in the coproduction of public health and social policy. We explored the United States (US) experience of COVID-19 for trends and correlations with other nations and also at the national, regional, state and local levels., Objective: To identify geographic and temporal trends in the spread of COVID-19 in the United States., Methods: Population data on COVID-19 cases and mortality were acquired on a daily basis from multiple publicly available databases, including the New York Times and Johns Hopkins University. At each geographic level (national, state and county), geographic entities' reported cases were evaluated for correlations using linear least-squares methods to identify patterns of correlation in the cases independent of scale. We evaluated for two specific characteristics: (i) the nature of the curvature of the line linking across percentile scores, ranging from concave to convex and (ii) the area under this curve, indicating how effectively a selected region (nation, state and county) is linked to its entire containing unit (world, country and state). We used this approach to identify three distinct COVID behavior phenotypes, each of which consisted of a number of states in the USA., Results: We found that COVID activity in the USA follows a unique trend compared to other countries and that within the USA during the first year of the pandemic, three initial COVID phenotypes emerged: (i) the metropolitan outbreak (early outbreak phenotype); (ii) the regional outbreak (summer peak phenotype) and (iii) trans-regional outbreak (fall/winter peak phenotype), which, taken in sum, represent the overall USA national trend. Each phenotype has specific behavioral characteristics and is composed of a cluster of different states experiencing different conditions., Conclusion: Our findings suggest a new opportunity for public health strategy in the pandemic, namely to apply targeted public health approaches to address the specific needs of each phenotype. In the future, we should create databases that capture key health and hardship data elements at the smallest geographic level possible and use these to track trends, predict the future and apply targeted coproduction approaches to more effectively and efficiently safeguard population health, economic vitality and social well-being., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of International Society for Quality in Health Care. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Introduction: The greatest challenge confronting political, public health, business, education and social welfare leaders in the COVID pandemic era is to restore the economy, businesses and schools without further risking public health. The 'COVID Compass' project aims to provide helpful information to guide local decisions by tracking state and local policies over time and their impact on a balanced set of outcomes-health metrics, economic trends and social hardship indicators., Methods: We selected a parsimonious set of 'local level' health, economic and hardship outcomes and linked them to 'local level' actions aimed to decrease COVID-19 health effects and to mitigate hardship for people, businesses and the economy. Data trends will be released frequently (e.g. weekly and monthly) to show changes in health economic and social hardship 'outcomes' (based on quantitative data), alongside policy, health care, public health and individual/social 'actions' (based on both qualitative and quantitative data)., Results: Work on initial analytic and visualization prototypes of the COVID Compass is currently in progress at national, state and local levels., Conclusion: Building a national, regional and local integrated database platform that captures upstream policies, actions and behaviors and links them to downstream health, economic and social hardship outcomes will offer a more comprehensive view of the data necessary for decision-makers and citizens to more effectively and intelligently monitor and mitigate harms caused by the pandemic., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of International Society for Quality in Health Care. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: Coproduction of healthcare services by patients and professionals is seen as an increasingly important mechanism to support person-centred care delivery. Coproduction invites a deeper understanding of what persons sometimes called 'patients' bring to development of a service. Yet, little is known about tools that may help elicit that information., Objective: Our objective was to explore potential benefits and limitations of an electronic pre-visit survey (PVS) and dashboard by studying uptake and experiences within the inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) community., Methods: We conducted a mixed-method evaluation of patients and clinicians using the IBD Qorus PVS and dashboard at 24 programmes participating in the IBD Qorus learning health system. We analysed (i) descriptive statistics and thematic analyses of 537 patient surveys, (ii) semi-structured interviews with seven patients and six care teams and (iii) usage data collected between 25 March 2019 and 26 April 2020., Results: Nearly two-thirds (64%; n = 38) of clinicians enrolled ≥25 patients into IBD Qorus; 59% (n = 29) of clinicians received ≥25 electronic PVS, with 3834 PVS received during the study period. Post-visit evaluation surveys were completed by patients following 26% (n = 993) of PVS completions. Among patients who reported using the dashboard for 1 or more months (n = 537), two-thirds (65%, n = 344) used the dashboard at a clinic visit and one-third used it outside the clinic (33%, n = 176). Most patients who used the dashboard during a clinic visit said it was helpful in discussions with their clinician (82%), in talking about what matters most (76%) and in making healthcare decisions (71%). Patients using the dashboard during the clinic visit reported higher levels of shared decision-making than those who did not use the dashboard (82% vs. 65%, P < 0.001). This relationship remained significant after controlling for receipt of care at a clinic with the highest levels of patient-reported shared decision-making (odds ratio: 2.1; confidence interval: 1.3-3.3). Patients and clinicians found the greatest value in using the PVS and dashboard to share concerns and symptoms, prepare for a visit and support discussions during the visit. The lack of integration with existing electronic health records (EHRs) limited clinician usage of the PVS and dashboard., Conclusions: The PVS and dashboard created a shared language, which supported coproduction and shared decision-making and facilitated a shared understanding of goals, concerns, symptoms and well-being. To support uptake, future systems should reduce implementation burden for healthcare professionals and integrate seamlessly with existing EHR systems and workflows., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of International Society for Quality in Health Care. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Introduction: Coproduction introduces a fundamental shift in how healthcare service is conceptualised. The mechanistic idea of healthcare being a 'product' generated by the healthcare system and delivered to patients is replaced by that of a service co-created by the healthcare system and the users of healthcare services. Fjeldstad et al offer an approach for conceptualising value creation in complex service contexts that we believe is applicable to coproduction of healthcare service. We have adapted Fjeldstad's value creation model based on a detailed case study of a renal haemodialysis service in Jonkoping, Sweden, which demonstrates coproduction characteristics and key elements of Fjeldstad's model., Methods and Analysis: We propose a five-part coproduction value creation model for healthcare service: (1) v alue chain , characterised by a standardised set of processes that serve a commonly occurring need; (2) v alue shop , which offers a customised response for unique cases; (3) a facilitated value network , which involves groups of individuals struggling with similar challenges; (4) interconnection between shop, chain and network elements and (5) leadership . We will seek to articulate and assess the value creation model through the work of a community of practice comprised of a diverse international workgroup with representation from executive, financial and clinical leaders as well as other key stakeholders from multiple health systems. We then will conduct pilot studies of a qualitative self-assessment process in participating health systems, and ultimately develop and test quantitative measures for assessing coproduction value creation., Ethics and Dissemination: This study has been approved by the Dartmouth-Hitchcock Health Institutional Review Board (D-HH IRB) as a minimal risk research study. Findings and scholarship will be disseminated broadly through continuous engagement with health system stakeholders, national and international academic presentations and publications and an internet-based electronic platform for publicly accessible study information., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Ninety percent of health care systems now offer patient portals to access electronic health records (EHRs) in the United States, but only 15% to 30% of patients use these platforms. Using PubMed, the authors identified 53 studies published from September 2013 to June 2019 that informed best practices and priorities for future research on patient engagement with EHR data through patient portals, These studies mostly involved outpatient settings and fell into 3 major categories: interventions to increase use of patient portals, usability testing of portal interfaces, and documentation of patient and clinician barriers to portal use. Interventions that used one-on-one patient training were associated with the highest portal use. Patients with limited health or digital literacy faced challenges to portal use. Clinicians reported a lack of workflows to support patient use of portals in routine practice. These studies suggest that achieving higher rates of patient engagement through EHR portals will require paying more attention to the needs of diverse patients and systematically measuring usability as well as scope of content. Future work should incorporate implementation science approaches and directly address the key role of clinicians and staff in promoting portal use.

Objective: It is unclear whether data from patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are captured and used by clinicians despite policy initiatives. We examined the extent to which fall risk and urinary incontinence (UI) reported on PROMS and provided to clinicians prior to a patient visit are subsequently captured in the electronic medical record (EMR). Additionally, we aimed to determine whether the use of PROMs and EMR documentation is higher for visits where PROM data was provided to clinicians., Design: We conducted a cross-sectional patient-reported risk assessment survey and semi-structured interviews with clinicians to identify themes related to the use of PROMs., Setting: Fourteen primary care clinics in the US (eight intervention and six control clinics), between October 2013 and May 2015., Participants: Primary care clinicians and older adult (≥66 years) patients completing a 46-item health risk assessment, including PROMs for fall risk and UI., Intervention: Risk assessment results provided to the clinician or nurse practitioners prior to the clinic visit in intervention clinics; data was not provided in control clinics., Main Outcome: 1) Agreement between ICD-9 codes of fall risk or UI in the EMR and patient-reports, and 2) clinician experience of PROMs use and impact on coding., Results: A total of 505 older adult patients were included in the study, 176 at control clinics and 329 at intervention clinics. While patient reports of fall risk and UI were readily captured by PROMs, this information was only coded in the EMR between 3% - 14% of the time (poor Kappa agreement). Intervention clinics performed slightly better than control clinics. Clinician interviews (n = 16) revealed low use of PROMs data with multiple barriers cited including poor access to data, high quantity of data, interruption to workflow, and a lack of training on PROMs., Conclusions: Current strategies of providing PROMs data prior to clinic visits may not be an effective way of communicating important health information to busy clinicians; ultimately resulting in underuse. Better systems of presenting PROMs data, and clinician training on the importance of PROMs and their use, is needed.

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) have great promise, but evidence of success is mixed. This study uses data from Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center and Kaiser-Permanente Colorado to evaluate providing PROMs directly to the primary care physician. We compared changes over time in urinary incontinence, falls, and mental and physical health between clinics providing augmented PROMs (N = 202 patients) and control clinics (N = 102 patients). Both the control and treatment groups exhibited improvements, but there was no significant difference in outcomes over time. These results suggest that measuring and printing out PROMs for primary care physicians will not result in better patient outcomes without physician clinical engagement.

A novel, comprehensive health risk index for adults has been validated and is now ready for use to improve the health of individuals and populations. This health risk index provides an estimate of the avoidable risk of death for adults 30 years or older. It includes 12 evidence-based clinical and behavioral risk factors and was validated on discrimination and calibration using the NHANES (National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey) and Framingham Heart Study cohorts. The results from both cohorts were consistent and similar. Discrimination was good, and calibration was acceptable but tended to overpredict mortality risk for females in the higher-risk deciles.

Context: Current methods for tracking harm either require costly full manual chart review (FMCR) or rely on proxy methods that have questionable accuracy. We propose an administrative measure of harm detection that uses electronically captured data., Objective: Determine the level of agreement on harm event occurrence when harm is detected based on an administrative harm measurement tool (AHMT) compared with FMCR., Design: A retrospective chart review was used to measure the level of agreement in harm detection between an AHMT that uses electronically captured data and a FMCR., Setting: The inpatient hospital setting was used., Patients: Approximately 771 medical records from 5 hospitals were reviewed., Main Outcome Measures: Measures of positive predictive value, negative predictive value, weighted sensitivity, weighted specificity, and concordance were used to evaluate agreement between the 2 methods., Results: Although there was agreement at the harm-event level, the results were not all as high as desired: adjusted sensitivity 65%, adjusted specificity 85%, positive predictive value (PPV) 59%, negative predictive value (NPV) 88%, and concordance 75%. The patient-level results show greater agreement: adjusted sensitivity 95%, adjusted specificity 86%, PPV 61%, NPV 99%, and concordance 81%., Conclusion: The AHMT is sufficiently accurate for use as a within hospital tool to reliably detect and track harm. Nevertheless, it is not recommended as a tool to make comparisons across institutions, which has policy and payment implications. Further research using administrative harm detection, including the use of a broader set of measures and electronic health records, is needed.

First we present a case vignette. Mollie is a 50-year-old woman with chronic, disabling back and knee pain, who has struggled with depression and alcohol misuse, is the primary caregiver for her ailing mother and a newcomer to the community. As a primary care patient at Dartmouth Health Connect, whose mission is "bringing humanity back to health care," Mollie receives exemplary person-centered care from her physician, health coach and behavioral health specialist. Second, we summarize the care model design features that enable care for people with challenging health and social circumstances. The design features include: primary care capitation, interdisciplinary team care, daily huddles and bi-weekly work rounds, and systematic use of patient-reported information and guidance.

Background: The Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial aimed to determine the comparative effectiveness of surgical care versus nonoperative care by measuring longitudinal values: outcomes, satisfaction, and costs., Methods: This paper aims to summarize available evidence from the Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial by addressing 2 important questions about outcomes and costs for 3 types of spine problem: (1) how do outcomes and costs of spine patients differ depending on whether they are treated surgically compared with nonoperative care? (2) What is the incremental cost per quality adjusted life year for surgical care over nonoperative care?, Results: After 4 years of follow-up, patients with 3 spine conditions that may be treated surgically or nonoperatively have systematic differences in value endpoints. The average surgical patient enjoys better health outcomes and higher treatment satisfaction but incurs higher costs., Conclusions: Spine care is preference sensitive and because outcomes, satisfaction, and costs vary over time and between patients, data on value can help patients make better-informed decisions and help payers know what their dollars are buying.

Background: Bringing new therapies to patients with rare diseases depends in part on optimizing clinical trial conduct through efficient study start-up processes and rapid enrollment. Suboptimal execution of clinical trials in academic medical centers not only results in high cost to institutions and sponsors, but also delays the availability of new therapies. Addressing the factors that contribute to poor outcomes requires novel, systematic approaches tailored to the institution and disease under study., Objective: To use clinical trial performance metrics data analysis to select high-performing cystic fibrosis (CF) clinical research teams and then identify factors contributing to their success., Design: Mixed-methods research, including semi-structured qualitative interviews of high-performing research teams., Participants: CF research teams at nine clinical centers from the CF Foundation Therapeutics Development Network., Approach: Survey of site characteristics, direct observation of team meetings and facilities, and semi-structured interviews with clinical research team members and institutional program managers and leaders in clinical research., Key Results: Critical success factors noted at all nine high-performing centers were: 1) strong leadership, 2) established and effective communication within the research team and with the clinical care team, and 3) adequate staff. Other frequent characteristics included a mature culture of research, customer service orientation in interactions with study participants, shared efficient processes, continuous process improvement activities, and a businesslike approach to clinical research., Conclusions: Clinical research metrics allowed identification of high-performing clinical research teams. Site visits identified several critical factors leading to highly successful teams that may help other clinical research teams improve clinical trial performance.

We predict self-care will become the new principal source of care. People living with diverse chronic conditions spend more time on self-management than with their providers. The increasing burden of chronic disease and costs coupled with value-based payments and innovative care models will generate a shift away from expensive specialized care toward high-value self-care facilitated by information technology, social support, and clinical expertise. This predicted shift in the value stream carries with it risks and uncertainties but will likely prevail as society seeks to confer "agency" by enabling people to make decisions and engage effectively in care coproduction.

Background: Total joint arthroplasty (TJA) is one of the most widely performed elective procedures; however, there are wide variations in cost and quality among facilities where the procedure is performed., Questions/purposes: The purposes of this study were to (1) develop a generalizable clinical care pathway for primary TJA using inputs from clinical, academic, and patient stakeholders; and (2) identify system- and patient-level processes to provide safe, effective, efficient, and patient-centered care for patients undergoing TJA., Methods: We used a combination of quantitative and qualitative methods to design a care pathway that spans 14 months beginning with the presurgical office visit and concluding 12 months after discharge. We derived care suggestions from interviews with 16 hospitals selected based on readmission rates, cost, and quality (n = 10) and author opinion (n = 6). A 32-member multistakeholder panel refined the pathway during a 1-day workshop. Participants were selected based on leadership in orthopaedic (n = 4) and anesthesia (n = 1) specialty societies; involvement in organizations specializing in safety and high reliability care (n = 3), lean production/consumption of care (n = 3), and patient experience of care (n = 3); membership in an interdisciplinary care team of a hospital selected for interviewing (n = 8); recent receipt of a TJA (n = 1); and participation in the pathway development team (n = 9)., Results: The care pathway includes 40 suggested processes to improve care, 37 techniques to reduce waste, and 55 techniques to improve communication. Central themes include standardization and process improvement, interdisciplinary communication and collaboration, and patient/family engagement and education. Selected recommendations include standardizing care protocols and staff roles; aligning information flow with patient and process flow; identifying a role accountable for care delivery and communication; managing patient expectations; and stratifying patients into the most appropriate care level., Conclusions: We developed a multidisciplinary clinical care pathway for patients undergoing TJA based on principles of high-value care. The pathway is ready for clinical testing and context-specific adaptation., Level of Evidence: Level V, therapeutic study. See the Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Context Scientific and Therapeutic Advances: Remarkable biomedical research advances have led to innovative and increasingly effective therapies. We highlight several scientific milestones in elucidating the pathophysiology of cystic fibrosis (CF) and review the therapies that have become available over the past 20 years., Impact of the Quality Improvement Initiative: In 2002, the CF Foundation launched a multifaceted quality improvement initiative to accelerate improvement in CF care. We present evidence of substantial improvement in process measures, such as more consistent outpatient follow-up, and key medical outcomes, including survival, pulmonary function and nutritional status., Critical Success Factors: We offer our perspective on factors critical to the success of the quality improvement initiative, including a compelling strategic plan and the commitment of the CF Foundation to its implementation; the investment in building improvement capacity at CF care centres; the engagement of people with CF and their families as partners; and the integration of quality improvement into the existing CF care framework., Directions for the Next Decade: In addition to a continued investment in building and sustaining improvement capacity at CF care centres, and deeper patient engagement, we will address the oppressive treatment burden. We will also complement the measurement of clinical outcomes with patient reported outcomes and healthcare costs for a balanced assessment of the quality and value of care., Conclusions: Major advances in basic science and therapeutic development coupled with improvements in healthcare delivery have resulted in striking gains in medical outcomes for people with CF.

External groups requiring measures now include public and private payers, regulators, accreditors and others that certify performance levels for consumers, patients and payers. Although benefits have accrued from the growth in quality measurement, the recent explosion in the number of measures threatens to shift resources from improving quality to cover a plethora of quality-performance metrics that may have a limited impact on the things that patients and payers want and need (ie, better outcomes, better care, and lower per capita costs). Here we propose a policy that quality measurement should be: balanced to meet the need of end users to judge quality and cost performance and the need of providers to continuously improve the quality, outcomes and costs of their services; and parsimonious to measure quality, outcomes and costs with appropriate metrics that are selected based on end-user needs.

Objectives: This study evaluates the variation in practice patterns associated with contrast-induced acute kidney injury (CI-AKI) and identifies clinical practices that have been associated with a reduction in CI-AKI. Background CI-AKI is recognised as a complication of invasive cardiovascular procedures and is associated with cardiovascular events, prolonged hospitalisation, end-stage renal disease, and all-cause mortality. Reducing the risk of CI-AKI is a patient safety objective set by the National Quality Forum., Methods: This study prospectively collected quantitative and qualitative data from 10 centres, which participate in the Northern New England Cardiovascular Disease Study Group PCI Registry. Quantitative data were collected from the PCI Registry. Qualitative data were obtained through clinical team meetings to map care processes related to CI-AKI and focus groups to understand attitudes towards CI-AKI prophylaxis. Fixed and random effects modelling were conducted to test the differences across centres., Results: Significant variation in rates of CI-AKI were found across 10 medical centres. Both fixed effects and mixed effects logistic regression demonstrated significant variability across centres, even after adjustment for baseline covariates (p<0.001 for both modelling approaches). Patterns were found in reported processes and clinical leadership that were attributable to centres with lower rates of CI-AKI. These included reducing nil by mouth (NPO) time to 4 h prior to case, and standardising volume administration protocols in combination with administering three to four high doses of N-acetylcysteine (1200 mg) for each patient., Conclusions: These data suggest that clinical leadership and institution-focused efforts to standardise preventive practices can help reduce the incidence of CI-AKI.

Healthcare costs are unsustainable. The authors propose a solution to control costs without rationing (deliberate withholding of effective care) or payment reductions to doctors and hospitals. Three physician-led strategies comprise this solution: reduce (1) overuse of health services, (2) preventable complications and (3) waste within healthcare processes. These challenges know no borders.

Introduction: The objectives of the Breakthrough Series Collaborative are to close the gap between what we know and what we do, and to contribute to continuous quality improvement (CQI) of healthcare through collaborative learning. The improvement efforts are guided by a systematic approach, combining professional and improvement knowledge., Objectives: To explore what the improvement teams have learnt from participating in the collaborative and from dealing with promoting and inhibiting factors encountered., Method: Qualitative interviews with 19 team members were conducted in four focus groups, using the Critical Incident Technique. A critical incident is one that makes significant contributions, either positively or negatively, to an activity., Results: The elements of a culture of improvement are revealed by the critical incidents, and reflect the eight domains of knowledge, as a product of collaborative learning. The improvement knowledge and skills of individuals are important elements, but not enough to achieve sustainable changes. 90% of the material reflects the need for a system of CQI to solve the problems that organisations experience in trying to make lasting improvements., Conclusion: A pattern of three success factors for CQI emerges: (1) continuous and reliable information, including measurement, about best and current practice; (2) engagement of everybody in all phases of the improvement work: the patient and family, the leadership, the professional environment and the staff; and (3) an infrastructure based on improvement knowledge, with multidisciplinary teams, available coaching, learning systems and sustainability systems.

Background: In 2005, the Geisinger Health System (Danville, Pennsylvania) developed ProvenCare, first applied to coronary artery bypass graft (CABG), as an innovative provider-driven quality improvement program to promote reliable delivery of evidence-based best practices. A new mesosystem is created for each ProvenCare model, integrating the care delivery process between contributing microsystems and defining new mesosystem leadership. The approach has been expanded to many patient populations, including percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI)., A New Pci Mesosystem: In 2007 clinical microsystem thinking was applied to PCI: understanding the current processes and patterns, assembling the frontline professionals to redesign the processes, and using a beta-test phase to measure the changes and adjust accordingly, until the best process was established. A new mesosystem team was created to ensure that the right care is delivered at the tight time., Refining Implementation: In the course of developing the CABG initiative, Geisinger established role definitions to keep teams on track; a comprehensive plan from design through execution and follow-up; and guiding principles established for the teams engaged in designing, developing, and implementing ProvenCare programs., Preliminary Experience: For the 40 measurable process elements in the PCI mesosystem pathway, as of month seven (July 2008) of the beta-test phase, 55% of the patients received 100% of the identified process elements., Conclusion: Geisinger Health System has joined different microsystems to form an innovative mesosystem capable of producing reliable, evidence-based care for patient subpopulations. This approach to embedding evidence-based care into routine care delivery can be adapted by others.

Background: Two hospitals-a large, urban academic medical center and a rural, community hospital-have each chosen a similar microsystem-based approach to improvement, customizing the engagement of the micro-, meso-, and macrosystems and the improvement targets on the basis of an understanding of the local context. CINCINNATI CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL MEDICAL CENTER (CCHMC): Since 2004, strategic changes have been developed to support microsystems and their leaders through (1) ongoing improvement training for all macro-, meso-, and microsystem leaders; (2) financial support for physicians who are serving as co-leaders of clinical microsystems; (3) increased emphasis on aligning academic pursuits with improvement work at the clinical front lines; (4) microsystem leaders' continuous access to unit-level data through the organization's intranet; and (5) encouragement of unit leaders to share outcomes data with families., Cooley Dickinson Hospital (cdh): CDH has moved from near closure to a survival-turnaround focus, significant engagement in quality and finally, a complete reframing of a quality focus in 2004. Since then, it has deployed the clinical microsystems approach in one pilot care unit (West 2, a medical surgery unit), broadened it to two, then six more, and is now spreading it organizationwide. In "2+2 Charters," interdisciplinary teams address two strategic goals set by senior leadership and two goals set by frontline microsystem leaders and staff, Discussion: CCHMC and CDH have had a clear focus on developing alignment, capability, and accountability to fuse together the work at all levels of the hospital, unifying the macrosystem with the mesosystem and microsystem. Their improvement experience suggests tips and actions at all levels of the organization that could be adapted with specific context knowledge by others.

Background: Usual medical care in the United States is frequently not a satisfying experience for either patients or primary care physicians. Whether primary care can be saved and its quality improved is a subject of national concern. An increasing number of physicians are using microsystem principles to radically redesign their practices. Small, independent practices-micro practices-are often able to incorporate into a few people the frontline attributes of successful microsystems such as clear leadership, patient focus, process improvement, performance patterns, and information technology., Patient Focus, Process Improvement, and Performance Patterns: An exemplary microsystem will (1) have as its primary purpose a focus on the patient-a commitment to meet all patient needs; (2) make fundamental to its work the study, measurement, and improvement ofcare-a commitment to process improvement; and (3) routinely measure its patterns of performance, "feed back" the data, and make changes based on the data., Lessons From Micro Practices: The literature and experience with micro practices suggest that they (1) constitute an important group in which to demonstrate the value of microsystem thinking; (2) can become very effective clinical microsystems; (3) can reduce their overhead costs to half that of larger freestanding practices, enabling them to spend more time working with their patients; (4) can develop new tools and approaches without going through layers of clearance; and (5) need not reinvent the wheel., Conclusions: Patient-reported data demonstrate how micro practices are using patient focus, process improvement, performance patterns, and information technology to improve performance. Pati ents should be able to report that they receive "exactly the care they want and need exactly when and how they want and need it."

Background: Wherever, however, and whenever health care is delivered-no matter the setting or population of patients-the body of knowledge on clinical microsystems can guide and support innovation and peak performance. Many health care leaders and staff at all levels of their organizations in many countries have adapted microsystem knowledge to their local settings., Clinical Microsystems: A PANORAMIC VIEW: HOW DO CLINICAL MICROSYSTEMS FIT TOGETHER? As the patient's journey of care seeking and care delivery takes place over time, he or she will move into and out of an assortment of clinical microsystems, such as a family practitioner's office, an emergency department, and an intensive care unit. This assortment of clinical microsystems-combined with the patient's own actions to improve or maintain health--can be viewed as the patient's unique health system. This patient-centric view of a health system is the foundation of second-generation development for clinical microsystems., Lessons From the Field: These lessons, which are not comprehensive, can be organized under the familiar commands that are used to start a race: On Your Mark, Get Set, Go! ... with a fourth category added-Reflect: Reviewing the Race. These insights are intended as guidance to organizations ready to strategically transform themselves., Conclusion: Beginning to master and make use of microsystem principles and methods to attain macrosystem peak performance can help us knit together care in a fragmented health system, eschew archipelago building in favor of nation-building strategies, achieve safe and efficient care with reliable handoffs, and provide the best possible care and attain the best possible health outcomes.

Unlabelled: BACKGROUND, OBJECTIVES AND METHOD: The Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award (MBNQA) provides a set of criteria for organisational quality assessment and improvement that has been used by thousands of business, healthcare and educational organisations for more than a decade. The criteria can be used as a tool for self-evaluation, and are widely recognised as a robust framework for design and evaluation of healthcare systems. The clinical microsystem, as an organisational construct, is a systems approach for providing clinical care based on theories from organisational development, leadership and improvement. This study compared the MBNQA criteria for healthcare and the success factors of high-performing clinical microsystems to (1) determine whether microsystem success characteristics cover the same range of issues addressed by the Baldrige criteria and (2) examine whether this comparison might better inform our understanding of either framework., Results and Conclusions: Both Baldrige criteria and microsystem success characteristics cover a wide range of areas crucial to high performance. Those particularly called out by this analysis are organisational leadership, work systems and service processes from a Baldrige standpoint, and leadership, performance results, process improvement, and information and information technology from the microsystem success characteristics view. Although in many cases the relationship between Baldrige criteria and microsystem success characteristics are obvious, in others the analysis points to ways in which the Baldrige criteria might be better understood and worked with by a microsystem through the design of work systems and a deep understanding of processes. Several tools are available for those who wish to engage in self-assessment based on MBNQA criteria and microsystem characteristics.

Background: Transparency in health care, including the public reporting of health care results, is an expanding and unstoppable phenomenon. Health care systems have an opportunity to: (1) be proactive and accountable for the care they provide, (2) help patients learn more about their condition as a supplement to understanding the performance measures, and (3) use public reporting to foster process of care and outcome improvement initiatives. An overview is provided of the first 22 months of a transparency initiative at Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center (DHMC)., Launching the Transparency Initiative: An interdisciplinary operations group works with the various clinical programs--both providers and patients--to identify what quality and cost measures are most desired by patients and what measures are the focus of the clinical program's internal measurement and reporting processes. The measures are presented on the DHMC Web site, with access to additional resources, such as clinical decision aids., Discussion: A variety of factors are important to the transparency initiative--senior leaders' perceptions, risk management issues, resources required for the design and maintenance of the initiative, and developing both methodological protocols and technical systems.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to determine how many patients are needed to provide reliable patient ratings of care at the individual clinician level. SETTING AND SOURCES OF DATA: The study was conducted in an academic medical center and was based on analysis of 34,985 patients who completed a 50-item survey rating the care received during a recent outpatient visit to a physician or midlevel provider., Study Design: Analyses of patient satisfaction surveys was done to: 1) confirm the dimensions of satisfaction with outpatient care in an existing measure, and 2) determine the number of patients required to provide reliable estimates of clinician care for single items and an 11-item composite scale., Principal Findings: Factor analysis showed that the survey measured 2 dimensions of satisfaction: 1) clinician care, and 2) features of visiting the office. The 11-item clinician care scale had high reliability (Cronbach's alpha=0.97). The number of patients needed to achieve reliability of 0.80 at the clinician level was 66 for the 11-item scale and ranged from 52 to 91 for individual items. For primary care physicians only, the comparable number of patients per clinician was 77 for the 11-item scale and ranged from 50 to 147 across items., Conclusions: For the survey items that we analyzed, the answer to the question "How many patients are needed to obtain useful and reliable feedback?" is at least 50, but varies by item type (global vs. specific) and by number of items (composite scale or single-item rating) and by the conditions of use (for self-assessment and learning or reward and punishment).