Search

OBJECTIVE: To investigate Covid-19 vaccination as a potential secondary public health benefit of case management for Medicaid beneficiaries with health and social needs. DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SETTING: The CommunityConnect case management program for Medicaid beneficiaries is run by Contra Costa Health, a county safety net health system in California. Program enrollment data were merged with comprehensive county vaccination records. STUDY DESIGN: Individuals with elevated risk of hospital and emergency department use were randomized each month to a case management intervention or usual care. Interdisciplinary case managers offered coaching, community referrals, healthcare connections, and other support based on enrollee interest and need. Using survival analysis with intent-to-treat assignment, we assessed rates of first-dose Covid-19 vaccination from December 2020 to September 2021. In exploratory sub-analyses we also examined effect heterogeneity by gender, race/ethnicity, age, and primary language. DATA COLLECTION AND EXTRACTION METHODS: Data were extracted from county and program records as of September 2021, totaling 12,866 interventions and 25,761 control enrollments. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Approximately 58% of enrollees were female and 41% were under age 35. Enrollees were 23% White, 12% Asian/Pacific Islander, 20% Black/African American, and 36% Hispanic/Latino, and 10% other/unknown. Approximately 35% of the intervention group engaged with their case manager. Approximately 56% of all intervention and control enrollees were vaccinated after 9 months of analysis time. Intervention enrollees had a higher vaccination rate compared to control enrollees (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]: 1.06; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.02-1.10). In sub-analyses, the intervention was associated with stronger likelihood of vaccination among males and individuals under age 35. CONCLUSIONS: Case management infrastructure modestly improved Covid-19 vaccine uptake in a population of Medicaid beneficiaries that over-represents social groups with barriers to early Covid-19 vaccination. Amidst mixed evidence on vaccination-specific incentives, leveraging trusted case managers and existing case management programs may be a valuable prevention strategy.

ImportanceHousing deposits and tenancy supports have become new Medicaid benefits in multiple states; however, evidence on impacts from these specific housing interventions is limited.ObjectiveTo evaluate the association of rental housing deposits and health care use among Medicaid beneficiaries receiving social needs case management as part of a Whole-Person Care (Medicaid 1115 waiver) pilot program in California.Design, setting, and participantsThis cohort study compared changes in health care use among a group of adults who received a housing deposit between October 2018 and December 2021 along with case management vs a matched comparison group who received case management only in Contra Costa County, California, a large county in the San Francisco Bay Area. All participants were enrolled in health and social needs case management based on elevated risk of acute care use. Data analysis took place from March 2023 to June 2024.ExposureRental housing deposit funds that covered 1-time moving transition costs. Funds averaged $1750 per recipient.Main outcomes and measuresChanges in hospitalizations, emergency department visits, primary care visits, specialty care visits, behavioral health visits, psychiatric emergency services, or detention intakes during the 6 months before vs 6 months after deposit receipt. Changes 12 months before and after deposit receipt were examined as a sensitivity analysis.ResultsOf 1690 case management participants, 845 received a housing deposit (362 [42.8%]

OBJECTIVE: To examine how a preexisting initiative to align health care, public health, and social services influenced COVID-19 pandemic response. DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SETTING: In-depth interviews with administrators and frontline staff in health care, public health, and social services in Contra Costa County, California from October, 2020, to May, 2021. STUDY DESIGN: Qualitative, semi-structured interviews examined how COVID-19 response used resources developed for system alignment prior to the pandemic. DATA COLLECTION: We interviewed 31 informants including 14 managers in public health, health care, or social services and 17 social needs case managers who coordinated services across these sectors on behalf of patients. An inductive-deductive qualitative coding approach was used to systematically identify recurrent themes. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We identified four distinct components of the countys system alignment capabilities that supported COVID-19 response, including (1) an organizational culture of adaptability fostered through earlier system alignment efforts, which included the ability and willingness to rapidly implement new organizational processes, (2) trusting relationships among organizations based on prior, positive experiences of cross-sector collaboration, (3) capacity to monitor population health of historically marginalized community members, including information infrastructures, data analytics, and population monitoring and outreach, and (4) frontline staff with flexible skills to support health and social care who had built relationships with the highest risk community members. CONCLUSIONS: Prior investments in aligning systems provided unanticipated benefits for organizational and community resilience during the COVID-19 pandemic. Our results illustrate a pathway for investment in system alignment efforts that build capacity within organizations and relationships between organizations to enhance resilience to crisis. Our findings suggest the usefulness of an integrated concept of organizational and community resilience that understands the resilience of systems of care as a vital resource for community resilience during crisis.

OBJECTIVES: Physician practices are increasingly owned by health systems, which may support or hinder adoption of innovative care processes for adults with chronic conditions. We examined health system- and physician practice-level capabilities associated with adoption of (1) patient engagement strategies and (2) chronic care management processes for adult patients with diabetes and/or cardiovascular disease. STUDY DESIGN: We analyzed data collected from the National Survey of Healthcare Organizations and Systems, a nationally representative survey of physician practices (n = 796) and health systems (n = 247) (2017-2018). METHODS: Multivariable multilevel linear regression models estimated system- and practice-level characteristics associated with practice adoption of patient engagement strategies and chronic care management processes. RESULTS: Health systems with processes to assess clinical evidence (β = 6.54 points on a 0-100 scale; P = .004) and with more advanced health information technology (HIT) functionality (β = 2.77 points per SD increase on a 0-100 scale; P = .03) adopted more practice-level chronic care management processes, but not patient engagement strategies, compared with systems lacking these capabilities. Physician practices with cultures oriented to innovation, more advanced HIT functionality, and with a process to assess clinical evidence adopted more patient engagement strategies and chronic care management processes. CONCLUSIONS: Health systems may be better able to support the adoption of practice-level chronic care management processes, which have a strong evidence base for implementation, compared with patient engagement strategies, which have less evidence to guide effective implementation. Health systems have an opportunity to advance patient-centered care by expanding practice-level HIT functionality and developing processes to appraise clinical evidence for practices.

BACKGROUND: The study examined stakeholder experiences of a statewide learning collaborative, sponsored and led by Blue Cross Blue Shield of Massachusetts (BCBSMA) and facilitated by the Institute for Healthcare Improvement (IHI) to reduce racial and ethnic disparities in quality of care. METHODS: Interviews of key stakeholders (n=44) were analyzed to assess experiences of collaborative learning and interventions to reduce racial and ethnic disparities in quality of care. The interviews included BCBSMA, IHI, provider groups, and external experts. RESULTS: Breast cancer screening, colorectal cancer screening, hypertension management, and diabetes management were focal areas for reducing disparities. Collaborative learning methods involved expert coaching, group meetings, and sharing of best practices. Interventions tested included pharmacist-led medication management, strategies to improve the collection of race, ethnicity, and language (REaL) data, transportation access improvement, and community health worker approaches. Stakeholder experiences highlighted three themes: (1) the learning collaborative enabled the testing of interventions by provider groups, (2) infrastructure and pilot funding were foundational investments, but groups needed more resources than they initially anticipated, and (3) expertise in quality improvement and health equity were critical for the testing of interventions and groups anticipated needing this expertise into the future. CONCLUSIONS: BCBSMAs learning collaborative and intervention funding supported contracted providers in enhancing REaL data collection, implementing equity-focused interventions on a small scale, and evaluating their feasibility and impact. The collaborative facilitated learning among groups on innovative approaches for reducing racial disparities in quality. Concerns about sustainability underscore the importance of expertise for implementing initiatives to reduce racial and ethnic disparities.

OBJECTIVE: To identify potential orderings of primary care practice adoption of patient engagement strategies overall and separately for interpersonally and technologically oriented strategies. DATA SOURCES: We analyzed physician practice survey data (n = 71) on the adoption of 12 patient engagement strategies. STUDY DESIGN: Mokken scale analysis was used to assess latent traits among the patient engagement strategies. DATA COLLECTION: Three groupings of patient engagement strategies were analyzed: (1) all 12 patient engagement strategies, (2) six interpersonally oriented strategies, and (3) six technologically oriented strategies. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We did not find scalability among all 12 patient engagement strategies, however, separately analyzing the subgroups of six interpersonally and six technologically oriented strategies demonstrated scalability (Loevingers H coefficient of scalability [range]: interpersonal strategies, H = 0.54 [0.49-0.60], technological strategies, H = 0.42 [0.31, 0.54]). Ordered patterns emerged in the adoption of strategies for both interpersonal and technological types. CONCLUSIONS: Common pathways of practice adoption of patient engagement strategies were identified. Implementing interpersonally intensive patient engagement strategies may require different physician practice capabilities than technological strategies. Rather than simultaneously adopting multiple patient engagement strategies, gradual and purposeful practice adoption may improve the impact of these strategies and support sustainability.

ObjectiveHealth systems are expanding efforts to address health and social risks, although the heterogeneity of early evidence indicates need for more nuanced exploration of how such programs work and how to holistically assess program success. This qualitative study aims to identify characteristics of success in a large-scale, health and social needs case management program from the perspective of interdisciplinary case managers.SettingCase management program for high-risk, complex patients run by an integrated, county-based public health system.Participants30 out of 70 case managers, purposively sampled to represent their interdisciplinary health and social work backgrounds. Interviews took place in March-November 2019.Primary and secondary outcome measuresThe analysis intended to identify characteristics of success working with patients.ResultsCase managers described three characteristics of success working with patients: (1) establishing trust; (2) observing change in patients' mindset or initiative and (3) promoting stability and independence. Cross-cutting these characteristics, case managers emphasised the importance of patients defining their own success, often demonstrated through individualised, incremental progress. Thus, moments of success commonly contrasted with external perceptions and operational or productivity metrics.ConclusionsThemes emphasise the importance of compassion for complexity in patients' lives, and success as a step-by-step process that is built over longitudinal relationships.

BackgroundHealth care systems can support dissemination of innovations, such as social risk screening in physician practices, but to date, no studies have examined the association of health system characteristics and practice-level adoption of social risk screening.PurposeThe aim of the study was to examine the association of multilevel organizational capabilities and adoption of social risk screening among system-owned physician practices.MethodologySecondary analyses of the 2018 National Survey of Healthcare Organizations and Systems were conducted. Multilevel linear regression models examined physician practice and system characteristics associated with practice adoption of screening for five social risks (food insecurity, housing instability, utility needs, interpersonal violence, and transportation needs), accounting for clustering of practices within systems using random effects.ResultsSystem-owned practices screened for an average of 1.7 of the five social risks assessed. The intraclass correlation indicated 16% of practice variation in social risk screening was attributable to differences between their health systems owners, with 84% attributable to differences between individual practices. Practices owned by systems with multiple hospitals screened for an additional 0.44 social risks (p = .046) relative to practices of systems without hospitals. Practice characteristics associated with social risk screening included health information technology capacity (β = 0.20, p = .005), innovation culture (β = 0.26, p < .001), and patient engagement strategies (β = 0.57, p < .001).ConclusionsHealth care system capabilities account for less variation in physician practice adoption of social risk screening compared to practice-level capabilities.Practice implicationsEfforts to expand social risk screening among system-owned physician practices should focus on supporting practice capabilities, including enhancing health information technology, promoting an innovative organizational culture, and advancing patient engagement strategies.

BackgroundSocial needs case management programs are a strategy to coordinate social and medical care for high-risk patients. Despite widespread interest in social needs case management, not all interventions have shown effectiveness. A lack of evidence about the mechanisms through which these complex interventions benefit patients inhibits effective translation to new settings. The CommunityConnect social needs case management program in Contra Costa County, California recently demonstrated an ability to reduce inpatient hospital admissions by 11% in a randomized study. We sought to characterize the mechanisms through which the Community Connect social needs case management program was effective in helping patients access needed medical and social services and avoid hospitalization. An in-depth understanding of how this intervention worked can support effective replication elsewhere.MethodsUsing a case study design, we conducted semi-structured, qualitative interviews with case managers (n = 30) and patients enrolled in social needs case management (n = 31), along with field observations of patient visits (n = 31). Two researchers coded all interview transcripts and observation fieldnotes. Analysis focused on program elements identified by patients and staff as important to effectiveness.ResultsOur analyses uncovered three primary mechanisms through which case management impacted patient access to needed medical and social services: [1] Psychosocial work, defined as interpersonal and emotional support provided through the case manager-patient relationship, [2] System mediation work to navigate systems, coordinate resources, and communicate information and [3] Addressing social needs, or working to directly mitigate the impact of social conditions on patient health.ConclusionsThese findings highlight that the system mediation tasks which are the focus of many social needs assistance interventions offered by health care systems may be necessary but insufficient. Psychosocial support and direct assistance with social needs, enabled by a relationship-focused program, may also be necessary for effectiveness.

ObjectiveThis paper identifies implementation leadership characteristics in the school nutrition setting and places findings in the context of implementation leadership literature.MethodsFourteen interviews were conducted with school district leadership/staff in an urban school district. Modified grounded theory was employed.ResultsFour themes emerged: (1) understanding of technical/operational intervention details; (2) ability to proactively develop and communicate plans; (3) supervisory oversight; and (4) intervention framing. Themes were consistent with 4 of the 5 dimensions comprising the Implementation Leadership Scale: knowledgeable, proactive, perseverant, and distributed leadership. The supportive domain was not a major finding. An additional domain, how leaders message the intervention to staff, was identified.Conclusions and implicationsImplementation leadership in school nutrition appears similar, but not identical, to leader behaviors present in the Implementation Leadership Scale. School nutrition leaders might consider involving staff early in implementation planning, incorporating technical expertise, and clearly communicating the intervention purpose to support successful implementation. Future research might explore the interplay between leadership and implementation outcomes.

PurposeClinicians and policy makers are exploring the role of primary care in improving patients' social conditions, yet little research examines strategies used in clinical settings to assist patients with social needs.MethodsStudy used semistructured interviews with leaders and frontline staff at 29 diverse health care organizations with active programs used to address patients' social needs. Interviews focused on how organizations develop and implement case management-style programs to assist patients with social needs including staffing, assistance intensity, and use of referrals to community-based organizations (CBOs).ResultsOrganizations used case management programs to assist patients with social needs through referrals to CBOs and regular follow-up with patients. About one-half incorporated care for social needs into established case management programs and the remaining described standalone programs developed specifically to address social needs independent of clinical needs. Referrals were the foundation for assistance and included preprinted resource lists, patient-tailored lists, and warm handoffs to the CBOs. While all organizations referred patients to CBOs, some also provided more intense services such as assistance completing patients' applications for services or conducting home visits. Organizations described 4 operational challenges in addressing patients' social needs: (1) effectively engaging CBOs; (2) obtaining buy-in from clinical staff; (3) considering patients' perspectives; and (4) ensuring program sustainability.ConclusionAs the US health care sector faces pressure to improve quality while managing costs, many health care organizations will likely develop or rely on case management approaches to address patients' social conditions. Health care organizations may require support to address the key operational challenges.Visual abstract.

Policy Points One of the most important possibilities of value-based payment is its potential to spur innovation in upstream prevention, such as attention to social needs that lead to poor health. Screening patients for social risks such as housing instability and food insecurity represents an early step physician practices can take to address social needs. At present, adoption of social risk screening by physician practices is linked with having high innovation capacity and focusing on low-income populations, but not exposure to value-based payment. Expanding social risk screening by physician practices may require standardization and technical assistance for practices that have less innovative capacity.ContextOne of the most important possibilities of value-based payment is its potential to spur innovation in upstream prevention, such as attention to social needs that lead to poor health. However, there is uncertainty about the conditions under which value-based payment will encourage health care providers to innovate to address upstream social risks.MethodsWe used the 2017-2018 National Survey of Healthcare Organizations and Systems (NSHOS), a nationally representative survey of physician practices (n = 2,178), to ascertain (1) the number of social risks for which practices systematically screen patients; (2) the extent of practices' participation in value-based payment models; and (3) measures of practices' capacity for innovation. We used multivariate regression models to examine predictors of social risk screening.FindingsOn average, physician practices systematically screened for 2.4 out of 7 (34%) social risks assessed by the survey. In the fully adjusted model, implementing social risk screening was not associated with the practices' overall exposure to value-based payment. Being in the top quartile on any of three innovation capacity scales, however, was associated with screening for 0.95 to 1.00 additional social risk (p < 0.001 for all three results) relative to the bottom quartile. In subanalysis examining specific payment models, participating in a Medicaid accountable care organization was associated with screening for 0.37 more social risks (p = 0.015). Expecting more exposure to accountable care in the future was associated with greater social risk screening, but the effect size was small compared with practices' capacity for innovation.ConclusionsOur results indicate that implementation of social risk screening-an initial step in enhancing awareness of social needs in health care-is not associated with overall exposure to value-based payment for physician practices. Expanding social risk screening by physician practices may require standardized approaches and implementation assistance to reduce the level of innovative capacity required.

IntroductionUnaddressed social risks among hospitalized patients with chronic conditions contribute to costly complications and preventable hospitalizations. This study examines whether the Centers for Medicaid and Medicare Services State Innovation Models initiative, through payment and delivery system reforms, accelerates the diagnosis of social risk factors among hospitalized adults with diabetes.MethodsEncounter-level data were from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project State Inpatient Databases (2010-2015, N=5,040,456). Difference-in-difference logistic regression estimated the extent to which hospitalized adults with diabetes in 4 State Innovation Models states (Arkansas, Massachusetts, Oregon, and Vermont) had increased odds of having a social risk factor diagnosed with an ICD-9 V code compared with hospitalized adults with diabetes in 4 comparison states (Arizona, Georgia, New Jersey, and New Mexico) 2 years after implementation. Data were analyzed between June and December 2019.ResultsAdults with diabetes who were hospitalized in State Innovation Models states had a 30% greater increase in the odds of having a V code documented after implementation than adults with diabetes who were hospitalized in comparison states (AOR=1.29, 95% CI=1.07, 1.56). However, V code use remained infrequent, with only 2.05% of encounters, on average, having any V codes on record in State Innovation Models states after implementation.ConclusionsThe State Innovation Models initiative slightly but significantly improved the diagnosis of social risks among hospitalized adults with diabetes. State-led delivery system and payment reform may help support movement of hospitals toward better recognition and management of social determinants of health.

Background and Objectives Area Agencies on Aging (AAAs) have funded, coordinated, and provided services since the 1960s, evolving in response to changes in policy, funding, and the political arena. Many of their usual service delivery programs and processes were severely disrupted with the onset of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. Increasing evidence suggests the importance of partnerships in AAA's capacity to adapt services; however, specific examples of adaptations have been limited. We sought to understand how partnerships may have supported adaptation during the pandemic, from the perspectives of both AAAs and their partners. Research Design and Methods We conducted a secondary analysis of qualitative data from an explanatory sequential mixed-methods parent study. Data were collected from 12 AAAs diverse in terms of geographic region, governance structure and size, as well as a range of partner organizations. We completed 105 in-depth interviews from July 2020 to April 2021. A 5-member multidisciplinary team coded the data using a constant comparative method of analysis, supported by ATLAS.ti Scientific Software. Results AAAs and their partners described strategies and provided examples of ways to rapidly transform service delivery including reducing isolation, alleviating food insecurity, adapting program design and delivery, and leveraging partnerships and repurposing resources. Discussion and Implications AAAs and partner organizations are uniquely positioned to innovate during times of disruption. Findings may enhance AAA and partner portfolios of evidence-based and evidence-supported programs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

I Background: i Social needs case management is an increasingly common strategy used by health care organizations to address integrated health and social needs ([1]). Thus, social needs case management may increase primary care use and reduce acute care use by flexibly helping patients overcome social barriers to care. [Extracted from the article]