Search

Background: Team-based care is essential for delivering high-quality, comprehensive, and coordinated care. Despite considerable research about the effects of team-based care on patient outcomes, few studies have examined how team dynamics relate to provider outcomes., Purpose: The aim of this study was to examine relationships among team dynamics, primary care provider (PCP) clinical work satisfaction, and patient care coordination between PCPs in 18 Harvard-affiliated primary care practices participating in Harvard's Academic Innovations Collaborative., Methodology: First, we administered a cross-sectional survey to all 548 PCPs (267 attending clinicians, 281 resident physicians) working at participating practices; 65% responded. We assessed the relationship of team dynamics with PCPs' clinical work satisfaction and perception of patient care coordination between PCPs, respectively, and the potential mediating effect of patient care coordination on the relationship between team dynamics and work satisfaction. In addition, we embedded a qualitative evaluation within the quantitative evaluation to achieve a convergent mixed methods design to help us better understand our findings and illuminate relationships among key variables., Findings: Better team dynamics were positively associated with clinical work satisfaction and quality of patient care coordination between PCPs. Coordination partially mediated the relationship between team dynamics and satisfaction for attending clinicians, suggesting that higher satisfaction depends, in part, on better teamwork, yielding more coordinated patient care. We found no mediating effects for resident physicians. Qualitative results suggest that sources of satisfaction from positive team dynamics for PCPs may be most relevant to attending clinicians., Practice Implications: Improving primary care team dynamics could improve clinical work satisfaction among PCPs and patient care coordination between PCPs. In addition to improving outcomes that directly concern health care providers, efforts to improve aspects of team dynamics may also help resolve critical challenges in workforce planning in primary care.

Background: Primary care providers often fail to identify patients who are overweight or obese or discuss weight management with them. Electronic health record-based tools may help providers with the assessment and management of overweight and obesity., Purpose: We describe the design of a trial to examine the effectiveness of electronic health record-based tools for the assessment and management of overweight and obesity among adult primary care patients, as well as the challenges we encountered., Methods: We developed several new features within the electronic health record used by primary care practices affiliated with Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston, MA. These features included (1) reminders to measure height and weight, (2) an alert asking providers to add overweight or obesity to the problem list, (3) reminders with tailored management recommendations, and (4) a Weight Management screen. We then conducted a pragmatic, cluster-randomized controlled trial in 12 primary care practices., Results: We randomized 23 clinical teams ("clinics") within the practices to the intervention group (n = 11) or the control group (n = 12). The new features were activated only for clinics in the intervention group. The intervention was implemented in two phases: the height and weight reminders went live on 15 December 2011 (Phase 1), and all of the other features went live on 11 June 2012 (Phase 2). Study enrollment went from December 2011 through December 2012, and follow-up ended in December 2013. The primary outcomes were 6-month and 12-month weight change among adult patients with body mass index ≥25 who had a visit at one of the primary care clinics during Phase 2. Secondary outcome measures included the proportion of patients with a recorded body mass index in the electronic health record, the proportion of patients with body mass index ≥25 who had a diagnosis of overweight or obesity on the electronic health record problem list, and the proportion of patients with body mass index ≥25 who had a follow-up appointment about their weight or were prescribed weight loss medication., Lessons Learned: We encountered challenges in our development of an intervention within the existing structure of an electronic health record. For example, although we decided to randomize clinics within primary care practices, this decision may have introduced contamination and led to some imbalance of patient characteristics between the intervention and control practices. Using the electronic health record as the primary data source reduced the cost of the study, but not all desired data were recorded for every participant., Conclusion: Despite the challenges, this study should provide valuable information about the effectiveness of electronic health record-based tools for addressing overweight and obesity in primary care., (© The Author(s) 2015.)

Primary medication adherence occurs when a patient properly fills the first prescription for a new medication. Primary adherence only occurs about three-quarters of the time for antihypertensive medications. We assessed patients' barriers to primary adherence and attributes of patient-provider discussions that might improve primary adherence for antihypertensives. In total, 26 patients with incomplete primary adherence for an antihypertensive, identified using their retail pharmacy claims, participated in four focus groups. Following a moderators' guide developed a priori, moderators led patients in a discussion of patients' attitudes and experiences with hypertension and receiving an antihypertensive medication, barriers to primary adherence, and their preferences for shared decision making and communication with providers. Three authors analysed and organized data into salient themes, including patients' anger about and suspicion of their hypertension diagnosis, the need for medication and providers' credibility. A trusting patient-provider relationship, shared decision-making support, full disclosure of side effects and cost sensitivity were attributes that might enhance primary adherence. Developing decision support interventions that strengthen the patient-provider relationship by enhancing provider credibility and patient trust prior to prescribing may provide more effective approaches for improving primary adherence., (© The Author 2014. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

As health care organizations create larger networks, better coordination of primary and specialty care is paramount. Attention has focused on strengthening primary care by creating patient-centered medical homes. The "medical neighborhood" provides a framework for structured, reciprocal relationships that integrate specialty care and extend the principles of the medical home to all practicing physicians. The foundation of the medical neighborhood is the collaborative care agreement, which outlines mutual expectations for primary care physicians and specialists as they care for patients together. These expectations include a preconsultation exchange between the referring physician and the consultant, the consultation, and subsequent comanagement of patients over time. Although independent practices can create individualized collaborative care agreements with specific specialist colleagues, large health care provider networks and accountable care organizations should have 1 agreement for all affiliated physicians. Challenges to the medical neighborhood include fee-for-service reimbursement, existing referral relationships, and building a robust electronic platform, including a referral management module. Cooperation between physicians, regardless of their specialty, and innovation in payment models and electronic platforms will all be essential if medical neighborhoods are to succeed.

Background: Racial disparities exist in cardiovascular disease (CVD) prevention, but other non-clinical factors may influence treatment, further exacerbating disparities., Methods: Using Ohio Medicaid data from 1992 to 1999, we identified a sample of 19,106 individuals with CVD-related diagnoses or procedures. A review of pharmacy claims identified previous, new, and long-term users of lipid-lowering agents, including statins, fibrates, and bile sequestrants., Results: 3,934 (20.6%) Medicaid beneficiaries used lipid-lowering medications previously, 1,598 (10.5%) filed new claims, and 2,998 of 5,532 (54.2%) previous or new users filed >or=6 claims for refills. Minority adults

Background: Interventions that modify physician attitudes to enhance preventive service delivery are common, yet other factors may be relatively more important in determining whether these services are provided. We assessed associations between physicians' attitudes and delivery of preventive care, compared with factors related to the patient, visit, or practice., Methods: One hundred twenty-eight primary care physicians rated the importance of five preventive services and their effectiveness at delivering them. We assessed whether their patients had received cervical smears, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing, smoking cessation advice, recommendation to use aspirin to prevent myocardial infarction, or weight-maintenance counseling, when appropriate. Multilevel models assessed associations between physician attitudinal characteristics and a patient's likelihood of being up to date for each service., Results: Importance of PSA screening and tobacco cessation counseling were weakly associated with patients' receipt of preventive care; no association between attitudes and other services was observed. Factors such as having a visit for well care and use of prevention flowcharts were associated with delivery of preventive services to a greater extent., Conclusions: Physicians' attitudes toward prevention are necessary, but not sufficient in ensuring the delivery of preventive services. Future interventions should address visit- and practice-specific factors more closely associated with preventive care.

Nonprescriptive factors, including patient adherence, can affect the fluctuations in low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol observed in the clinical setting. In 241 statin-treated patients, although drugs and doses remained fixed, 57% of patients initially successful in reaching LDL cholesterol targets showed subsequent increases in LDL cholesterol. Conversely, 60% of patients who initially failed to reach targets had subsequent reductions in LDL cholesterol, with nearly 1/3 eventually attaining their LDL cholesterol goals.

Background: Statins have become a mainstay in the treatment of hyperlipidemia, based on their potency and favorable side-effect profile. Drug choice is presumed to be guided by the estimated degree of low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol lowering required in a particular patient and the projected efficacy of any drug-dose combination, as contained in the package inserts for each medication. We investigated whether these expectations were met in a clinical practice., Methods: Data were analyzed for 367 hyperlipidemic patients in a preventive cardiology practice who were not taking statins at entry, who were given a standard statin dose at their first visit, and who had at least one follow-up visit on the same drug/dose. Expected LDL cholesterol reductions were calculated for each patient based on guidelines in the package inserts for each drug., Results: The mean (+/-SD) observed LDL cholesterol reduction of 26% +/- 20% was significantly less than expected (34% +/- 7%, P < 0.001). The ratio of observed to expected reduction was not different for the three statins used (atorvastatin, 0.79 +/- 0.48; simvastatin, 0.88 +/- 0.61; pravastatin, 0.75 +/- 0.69; P = 0.39)., Conclusions: The use of statins in a clinical practice led to observed reductions in LDL cholesterol level that were significantly less than those projected by package insert guidelines. We believe this gap reflects the reduced patient compliance frequently observed in clinical practice settings, rather than any inherent difference in statin responsiveness of a practice versus a trial population. Physicians should be aware of this disparity when using statins in the clinical setting.

The third Adult Treatment Panel guidelines from the National Cholesterol Education Program, released in May 2001, depart from previous guidelines in several ways. As in previous guidelines, treatment and treatment goals are based not only on lipid levels but also on the patient's risk status. The method for calculating risk, however, has been refined considerably. Patients are classified in the highest-risk group if they have any of these disorders: known coronary artery disease, diabetes mellitus, peripheral vascular disease, abdominal aortic aneurysm, carotid artery disease, or a 10-year risk of a coronary event of more than 20% (as determined by use of a scoring method).

CVD in the United States is prevalent, costly, and disabling. Wherever in the arterial tree atherosclerosis occurs, the process appears to begin in youth, to develop under the influence of the same risk factors, and to be amenable to the same interventions. The relationship between CVD and its associated risk factors is continuous, is graded, and extends below thresholds previously defined as normal. This observation, in turn, is based on an appreciation that in our society, the gap between normal and optimal can be considerable. CVD is a multifactorial process, often related to modifiable lifestyle choices; we focus on any single risk factor to the exclusion of others puts patients in danger. Because risk factors rarely occur in isolation, risk assessment must be as multifactorial as the underlying disease process. By understanding differences between risk factors in terms of the impact of their modification on the underlying disease, targeted interventions become possible that are tailored to the likelihood of an individual patient acquiring CVD. To change the overall prevalence of an epidemic disease such as CVD, however, such a high-risk approach must be applied in concert with a population strategy that seeks to effect smaller degrees of change in the large segment of society that may be at only moderate risk but--because of their great numbers--bears most of the morbidity and mortality of CVD. Finally, despite the remarkable progress that has been made in our understanding of the pathophysiology of CVD and the effectiveness of risk factor modification, significant gaps remain between knowledge and behavior. Fewer than 50% of diabetics are even aware that they have the disease. Only a third of those whose lipid levels qualify them for treatment receive intervention of any kind, including dietary advice. Only 27% of hypertensives have their blood pressure adequately controlled. The potential impact of more vigorous screening practices in the primary care setting on the health of individuals and communities cannot be overstated.

Background: We sought to determine the frequency with which physicians follow National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP-ATPII) guidelines in screening for cardiovascular risk factors and treating hyperlipidemia., Methods and Results: We conducted a retrospective chart review on randomly sampled charts of 225 patients admitted to the coronary care unit between January and June 1996. The main outcome measures were rates of physician screening for coronary heart disease risk factors; rates of counseling for cigarette cessation, diet, and exercise; and extent of use of NCEP algorithms for obtaining LDL cholesterol values and treating hypercholesterolemia. Screening rates for interns (who performed best) were: cigarette use (89%), known coronary heart disease (74%), hypertension (68%), hyperlipidemia (59%), family history (56%), diabetes (37%), postmenopausal hormone therapy (11%), and premature menopause (1%). Four percent of smokers were counseled to quit, 14% of patients were referred to dietitians, and 1% were encouraged to exercise. A full lipid panel was obtained in 50% of patients in whom it was indicated on the basis of NCEP criteria. Patients were more likely to receive lipid-lowering treatment if NCEP criteria indicated that they should, but 36% of hospitalized patients and 46% of patients who should have been treated on discharge were not., Conclusions: Physicians are poorly compliant with NCEP guidelines for risk factor assessment and counseling, even in patients at high risk for coronary heart disease. Physicians follow NCEP-ATPII algorithms for obtaining an LDL value, a key step in evaluating the need for treatment, only 50% of the time. NCEP criteria seem to influence the decision to initiate lipid-lowering therapy, but significant numbers of eligible patients remain untreated.