Search

Background: Respiratory tract infections are readily transmitted in care homes. Airborne transmission of pathogens causing respiratory tract illness is largely unmitigated. Portable high-efficiency-particulate-air (HEPA) filtration units capture microbial particles from the air, but it is unclear whether this is sufficient to reduce infections in care home residents. The Air Filtration to prevent symptomatic winter Respiratory Infections (including COVID-19) in care homes (AFRI-c) randomized controlled trial will determine whether using HEPA filtration units reduces respiratory infection episodes in care home residents. Methods: AFRI-c is a cluster randomized controlled trial that will be delivered in residential care homes for older people in England. Ninety-one care homes will be randomised to take part for one winter period. The intervention care homes will receive HEPA filtration units for use in communal areas and private bedrooms. Normal infection control measures will continue in all care homes. Anonymised daily data on symptoms will be collected for up to 30 residents. Ten to 12 of these residents will be invited to consent to a primary care medical notes review and (in intervention homes) to having an air filter switched on in their private room. The primary outcome will be number of symptomatic winter respiratory infection episodes. Secondary outcomes include specific clinical measures of infection, number of falls / near falls, number of laboratory confirmed infections, hospitalisations, staff sickness and cost-effectiveness. A mixed methods process evaluation will assess intervention acceptability and implementation. Discussion: The results of AFRI-c will provide vital information about whether portable HEPA filtration units reduce symptomatic winter respiratory infections in older care home residents. Findings about effectiveness, fidelity, acceptability and cost-effectiveness will support stakeholders to determine the use of HEPA filtration units as part of infection control policies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: To synthesize the impact of improvement interventions related to care coordination, discharge support and care transitions on patient experience measures. Method: Systematic review. Searches were completed in six scientific databases, five specialty journals, and through snowballing. Eligibility included studies published in English (2015–2023) focused on improving care coordination, discharge support, or transitional care assessed by standardized patient experience measures as a primary outcome. Two independent reviewers made eligibility decisions and performed quality appraisals. Results: Of 1240 papers initially screened, 16 were included. Seven studies focused on care coordination activities, including three randomized controlled trials [RCTs]. These studies used enhanced supports such as improvement coaching or tailoring for vulnerable populations within Patient-Centered Medical Homes or other primary care sites. Intervention effectiveness was mixed or neutral relative to standard or models of care or simpler supports (e.g., improvement tool). Eight studies, including three RCTs, focused on enhanced discharge support, including patient education (e.g., teach back) and telephone follow-up; mixed or neutral results on the patient experience were also found and with more substantive risks of bias. One pragmatic trial on a transitional care intervention, using a navigator support, found significant changes only for the subset of uninsured patients and in one patient experience outcome, and had challenges with implementation fidelity. Conclusion: Enhanced supports for improving care coordination, discharge education, and post-discharge follow-up had mixed or neutral effectiveness for improving the patient experience with care, compared to standard care or simpler improvement approaches. There is a need to advance the body of evidence on how to improve the patient experience with discharge support and transitional approaches. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Little is known about patient preferences and the value of pharmacy-collaborative disease management with primary care using technology-driven interprofessional communication under real-world conditions. Discrete Choice Experiments (DCEs) are useful for quantifying preferences for non-market services. Objectives: 1) To explore variation in patient preferences and estimate willingness-to-accept annual cost to the National Health Service (NHS) for attributes of a collaborative intervention trial between pharmacies and primary care using a trial exit DCE interview; 2) to incorporate a DCE into an economic evaluation using cost-benefit analysis (CBA). Methods: We performed a DCE telephone interview with a sample of hypertension and hyperlipidemia trial patients 12 months after trial onset. We used five attributes (levels): waiting time to get urgent/not urgent medical appointment (7 days/45 days; 48 hrs./30 days; same day/15 days), model of pharmacy intervention (5-min. counter basic check; 15-min. office every 3 months for BP and medication review of selected medicines; 30-min. office every 6 months for comprehensive measurements and medication review of all medicines), integration with primary care (weak; partial; full), chance of having a stroke in 5 years (same; slightly lower; much lower), and annual cost to the NHS (0€; 30€; 51€; 76€). We used an experimental orthogonal fractional factorial design. Data were analyzed using conditional logit. We subtracted the estimated annual incremental trial costs from the mean WTA (Net Benefit) for CBA. Results: A total of 122 patients completed the survey. Waiting time to get medical appointment—on the same day (urgent) and within 15 days (non-urgent)—was the most important attribute, followed by 30-minute pharmacy intervention in private office every 6 months for point-of-care measurements and medication review of all medicines, and full integration with primary care. The cost attribute was not significant. Intervention patients were willing to accept the NHS annual cost of €877 for their preferred scenario. The annual net benefit per patient is €788.20 and represents the monetary value of patients' welfare surplus for this model. Conclusions: This study is the first conducted in Portugal alongside a pharmacy collaborative trial, incorporating DCE into CBA. The findings can be used to guide the design of pharmacy collaborative interventions with primary care with the potential for reimbursement for uncontrolled or at-risk chronic disease patients informed by patient preferences. Future DCE studies conducted in community pharmacy may provide additional contributions. Trial registration: Current Controlled Trials (ISRCTN): ISRCTN13410498, retrospectively registered on 12 December 2018. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Functional status, or the ability to perform activities of daily living, is central to older adults' health and quality of life. However, health systems have been slow to incorporate routine measurement of function into patient care. We used multiple qualitative methods to develop a patient-centered, interprofessional intervention to improve measurement of functional status for older veterans in primary care settings. We conducted semi-structured interviews with patients, clinicians, and operations staff (n = 123) from 7 Veterans Health Administration (VHA) Medical Centers. Interviews focused on barriers and facilitators to measuring function. We used concepts from the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Science and sociotechnical analysis to inform rapid qualitative analyses and a hybrid deductive/inductive approach to thematic analysis. We mapped qualitative findings to intervention components. Barriers to measurement included time pressures, cumbersome electronic tools, and the perception that measurement would not be used to improve patient care. Facilitators included a strong interprofessional environment and flexible workflows. Findings informed the development of five intervention components, including (1) an interprofessional educational session; (2) routine, standardized functional status measurement among older patients; (3) annual screening by nurses using a standardized instrument and follow-up assessment by primary care providers; (4) electronic tools and templates to facilitate increased identification and improved management of functional impairment; and (5) tailored reports on functional status for clinicians and operations leaders. These findings show how qualitative methods can be used to develop interventions that are more responsive to real-world contexts, increasing the chances of successful implementation. Using a conceptually-grounded approach to intervention development has the potential to improve patient and clinician experience with measuring function in primary care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The largest nationally integrated health system in the United States, the Veterans Health Administration (VHA), has been undergoing a transformation toward a Whole Health (WH) System of Care. WH Clinical Care, a component of this system, includes holistically assessing the Veteran's life context, identifying what really matters to the Veteran, collaboratively setting and monitoring personal health and well-being goals, and equipping the Veteran with access to conventional and complementary and integrative health resources. Implementation of WH Clinical Care has been challenging. Understanding healthcare professionals' perspectives on the value of and barriers and facilitators to practicing WH Clinical Care holds relevance for not only VHA's efforts but also other health systems, in the U.S. and internationally, that are engaged in person-centered care implementation. Objectives: We sought to understand perspectives of healthcare professionals at VHA on providing WH Clinical Care to Veterans with COPD, as a lens to understand the broader issue of WH Clinical Care for Veterans living with complex chronic conditions. Design: We interviewed 25 healthcare professionals across disciplines and services at a VA Medical Center in 2020–2021, including primary care providers, pulmonologists, palliative care providers, and chaplains. Interview transcripts were analyzed using qualitative content analysis. Key results: Each element of WH Clinical Care raised complex questions and/or concerns, including: (1) the appropriate depth/breadth of inquiry in person-centered assessment; (2) the rationale for elicitation of what really matters; (3) the feasibility and appropriate division of labor in personal health goal setting and planning; and (4) challenges related to referring Veterans to a broad spectrum of supportive services. Conclusions: Efforts to promote person-centered care must account for healthcare professionals' existing comfort with its elements, advocate for a team-based approach, and continue to grapple with the conflicting structural conditions and organizational imperatives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A large proportion of the global workforce migrated home during the COVID-19 pandemic and subsequent lockdowns. It remains unclear what the exact differences between home workers and non-home workers were, especially during the pandemic when a return to work was imminent. How were building, workplace, and related facilities associated with workers' perceptions and health? What are the lessons to be learned? Lifelines Corona Research Initiative was used to compare employees' workplaces and related concerns, facilities, work quality, and health in a complete case analysis (N = 12,776) when return to work was imminent. Mann-Whitney U, logistic regression, and Wilcoxon matched-pairs were used for analyses. Notwithstanding small differences, the results show that home workers had less favourable scores for concerns about and facilities of on-site buildings and workplaces upon return to work, but better scores for work quality and health than non-home workers. However, additional analyses also suggest that building, workplace, and related facilities may have had the capacity to positively influence employees' affective responses and work quality, but not always their health. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: This nationwide study builds on prior research, which suggests that Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs) and other primary care providers are associated with increased access to opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment. We compare health care utilization, spending, and quality for Medicaid patients diagnosed with OUD who receive primary care at FQHCs and Medicaid patients who receive most primary care in other settings, such as physician offices (non-FQHCs). We hypothesized that the integrated care model of FQHCs would be associated with greater access to medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) and/or behavioral health therapy and lower rates of potentially inappropriate co-prescribing. Methods: This cross-sectional study examined 2012 Medicaid Analytic eXtract files for patients diagnosed with OUD receiving most (>50%) primary care at FQHCs (N = 37,142) versus non-FQHCs (N = 196,712) in all 50 states and Washington DC. We used propensity score overlap weighting to adjust for measurable confounding between patients who received care at FQHCs versus non-FQHCs and increase generalizability of findings given variation in Medicaid programs and substance use policies across states. Results: FQHC patients displayed higher primary care utilization and fee-for-service spending, and similar or lower utilization and fee-for-service spending for other health service categories. Contrary to our hypotheses, non-FQHC patients were more likely to receive timely (≤90 days) MOUD (buprenorphine, methadone, naltrexone, or suboxone) (Relative Risk [RR] = 1.10, 95% CI: 1.07, 1.12) and more likely be retained in medication treatment (>180 days) (RR = 1.12, 95% CI: 1.09, 1.14). However, non-FQHC patients were less likely to receive behavioral health therapy (mental health or substance use therapy) (RR = 0.90, 95% CI: 0.88, 0.92) and less likely to remain in behavioral health treatment (RR = 0.92, 95% CI: 0.89, 0.94). Non-FQHC patients were more likely to fill potentially inappropriate prescriptions of benzodiazepines and opioids after OUD diagnosis (RR = 1.35, 95% CI: 1.30, 1.40). Conclusions: Observed patterns suggest that Medicaid patients diagnosed with OUD who obtained primary care at FQHCs received more integrated care compared to non-FQHC patients. Greater care integration may be associated with increased access to behavioral health therapy and quality of care (lower potentially inappropriate co-prescribing) but not necessarily greater access to MOUD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Importance: Previous studies have found a mixed association between Patient-Centered Medical Home (PCMH) designation and improvements in primary care quality indicators, including avoidable pediatric emergency department (ED) encounters. Whether these associations persist after accounting for the geographic locations of providers relative to where patients reside is unknown. Objective: To examine the association between geographic proximity to primary care providers versus hospitals and risk of avoidable and potentially avoidable ED visits among children with pre-existing diagnosis of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder or asthma. Methods: Retrospective cohort study of a panel of pediatric Medicaid claims data from the South Carolina from 2016–2018 for 2,959 beneficiaries having a pre-existing diagnosis of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADD, ages 6–12) and 6,390 beneficiaries with asthma (MMA, ages 5–18), as defined using Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set (HEDIS) performance measures. We calculated differences in avoidable and potentially avoidable ED visits by the beneficiary's PCMH attribution type and in relation to differences in proximity to their primary care providers versus hospitals. Outcomes were defined using the New York University Emergency Department Algorithm (NYU-EDA). Differences in ED visit risk were assessed using generalized estimation equations and compared using marginal effects models. Results: The 2.4 percentage point reduction in risk of avoidable ED visits among children in the ADD cohort who attended a PCMH versus those who did not increased to 3.9 to 7.2 percentage points as relative proximity to primary care providers versus hospitals improved (p < 0.01). Children in the ADD and MMA cohorts that were enrolled in a medical home, but did not attend one for primary care services exhibited a 5.4 and 3.0 percentage point increase in avoidable ED visit compared to children who were unenrolled and did not attend medical homes (p < 0.05), but these differences were only observed when geographic proximity to hospitals was more convenient than primary care providers. Mixed findings were observed for potentially avoidable visits. Conclusions: In several health care performance evaluations, patient-centered medical homes have not been found to reduce differences in hospital utilization for conditions that are treatable in primary care settings among children with chronic illnesses. Analytical approaches that also consider geographic proximity to health care services can identify performance benefits of medical homes. Expanding risk-adjustment models to also include geographic data would benefit ongoing quality improvement initiatives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: To facilitate implementation of home-based care following an elective total knee or hip replacement in a private hospital, we explored patient and caregiver barriers and enablers and components of care that may increase its acceptability. Method: Thirty-one patients (mean age 71 years, 77% female) and 14 caregivers (mean age 69 years, 57% female) were interviewed. All themes were developed using thematic analysis, then categorised as barriers or enablers to uptake of home-based care or acceptable components of care. Barrier and enabler themes were mapped to the Theoretical Domains Framework. Results: Eight themes emerged as barriers or enablers: feeling unsafe versus confident; caregivers' willingness to provide support and patients' unwillingness to seek help; less support and opportunity to rest; positive feelings about home over the hospital; certainty about anticipated recovery; trusting specialist advice over family and friends; length of hospital stay; paying for health insurance. Five themes emerged as acceptable components: home visits prior to discharge; specific information about recovery at home; one-to-one physiotherapy and occupational therapy perceived as first-line care; medical, nursing and a 24/7 direct-line perceived as second-line care for complications; no one-size-fits-all model for domestic support. Theoretical domains relating to barriers included emotion (e.g., feeling unsafe), environmental context and resources (e.g., perceived lack of physiotherapy) and beliefs about consequences (e.g., unwillingness to burden their caregiver). Theoretical domains relating to enablers included beliefs about capabilities (e.g., feeling strong), skills (e.g., practising stairs), procedural knowledge (e.g., receiving advice about early mobility) and social influences (e.g., caregivers' willingness to provide support). Conclusions: Multiple factors, such as feeling unsafe and caregivers' willingness to provide support, may influence implementation of home-based care from the perspectives of privately insured patients and caregivers. Our findings provide insights to inform design of suitable home-based care following joint replacement in a private setting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: During the COVID-19 pandemic, stay-at-home orders as well as shortages of personal protective equipment forced primary care physicians (PCPs) to transition rapidly from in-person visits to telehealth. While telehealth expanded extensively in a short period of time, research about the consequences of the shift to remote care is lacking. The objective of this qualitative study was to examine how telehealth benefited PCPs and their patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: From July to August 2020, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 20 PCPs associated with a single academic medical center to examine their perspectives about delivering care remotely during the COVID-19 pandemic. All interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim, coded, and analyzed using deductive thematic analysis. Results: PCPs identified several benefits of remote care delivery for both physicians and patients. They indicated that (1) patients were reassured that they could receive safe and timely care, (2) remote visits were convenient for patients, (3) patients were comfortable receiving care at home, and (4) video visits enhanced patient- and family-centered care during the COVID-19 pandemic. Participants also noted that (1) telehealth accommodated working from home, (2) physicians were equitably reimbursed for telehealth visits, and that (3) telehealth promoted physician work-life balance. Conclusions: Our data provides preliminary evidence that PCPs and their patients had positive experiences with remote care during the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic. Physicians identified opportunities by which telehealth could enhance the delivery of patient-centered care by allowing them to see patients' home environments and to engage family members and caregivers during telehealth visits. More research is needed to understand how to sustain these benefits beyond the global COVID-19 pandemic and ensure patients' needs are met. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: After stratifying for age, sex and multimorbidity at baseline, our aim is to analyse time trends in incident multimorbidity and polypharmacy in the 15-year clinical trajectories of individual patients in a family medicine setting. Methods: This study was carried out using data from the Registration Network Family Medicine in the South of the Netherlands. The clinical trajectories of 10037 subjects during the 15-year period (2000–2014) were analyzed in a repeated measurement of using a generalized estimating equations model as well as a multilevel random intercept model with repeated measurements to determine patterns of incident multimorbidity and polypharmacy. Hierarchical age-period-cohort models were used to generate age and cohort trajectories for comparison with prevalence trends in multimorbidity literature. Results: Multimorbidity was more common in females than in males throughout the duration of the 15-year trajectory (females: 39.6%; males: 33.5%). With respective ratios of 11.7 and 5.9 between the end and the beginning of the 15-year period, the youngest female and male groups showed a substantial increase in multimorbidity prevalence. Ratios in the oldest female and male groups were 2.2 and 1.9 respectively. Females had higher levels of multimorbidity than males in the 0-24-year and 25-44-year age groups, but the levels converged to a prevalence of 92.2% in the oldest male and 90.7% in the oldest female group. Similar, albeit, moderate differences were found in polypharmacy patterns. Conclusions: We sought to specify the progression of multimorbidity from an early age. As a result, our study adds to the multimorbidity literature by specifying changes in chronic disease accumulation with relation to polypharmacy, and by tracking differences in patient trajectories according to age and sex. Multimorbidity and polypharmacy are common and their prevalence is accelerating, with a relatively rapid increase in younger groups. From the point of view of family medicine, this underlines the need for a longitudinal approach and a life course perspective in patient care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Patient-centered medical homes (PCMH) are primary care delivery models that improve care access and population-level health outcomes, yet they have not been observed to narrow racial-ethnic disparities in the Veteran Health Administration (VHA) or other health systems. We aimed to identify and compare underlying drivers of persistent hypertension and diabetes control differences between non-Hispanic Black (Black) and Hispanic versus non-Hispanic White (White) patients before and after PCMH implementation in the VHA. Among Black and Hispanic versus White VHA primary care patients in 2009 (nhypertension = 26,906; ndiabetes = 21,141) and 2014 (nhypertension = 83,809; ndiabetes = 38,887), we retrospectively examined hypertension control (blood pressure<140/90) and diabetes control (hemoglobin A1c <9) obtained through random chart abstraction of patient health records nationally via VHA's quality monitoring program. We fit linear probability regression models, adjusting for age, gender, comorbidity, and socioeconomic status (SES). Blinder-Oaxaca and Smith-Welch decomposition methods were used to parse out explained and unexplained contributors to health disparity between racial-ethnic groups pre- and post-PCMH implementation. Compared to White patients, hypertension and diabetes control remained significantly lower for Black (-6.2%[0.4%] and -3.1%[0.6%], respectively; p's<0.001) and Hispanic (-1.4%[0.8%] and -4.0%[1.0%], respectively; p's<0.001) patients following VHA PCMH implementation. Most racial-ethnic differences (55.7–92.3%; all p<0.05) were not attributed to age, gender, comorbidity, and SES. The contribution of explained versus unexplained factors did not significantly change over time. While many explanations for persistent racial-ethnic disparities in disease control among veterans exist, our study did not find that it was due to an influx of "sick" or "socioeconomically vulnerable" patients into the VHA following PCMH implementation. Instead, unexplained differences may be due to differential healthcare and community experiences (e.g., discrimination). Understanding underlying pathways leading to health disparities will better inform policy and clinical interventions to improve PCMH care delivery to racial-ethnic minority patients in health systems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Breast cancer early detection is the major strategy for mortality rates reduction. In Brazil, Primary Health Care is an important strategy for public health promotion. To analyse the association between breast cancer mortality and primary health care indicators in Brazilian municipalities, data on breast cancer mortality and primary healthcare coverage of the 5,700 Brazilian municipalities were collected from the Department of Informatics of the Brazilian Unified Health System. We collected data on the deaths of women living in Brazil in 2010 with breast cancer. Breast cancer mortality was calculated by 100,000 women and age-standardised from the World Health Organisation population. We studied the coverage of primary health care, family health team and community health agents. We found that increase of both primary care indexes was related to increasing of the breast cancer mortality. Additionally, improving the scholarly and reducing the income inequality was related to reducing the breast cancer mortality. Strategies to improve the quality of primary care, reduce the income inequality and improve elementary scholarly should be taken into account in the development of public policies in the Brazilian municipalities to reduce breast cancer in Brazilian municipalities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Increasingly, patients with multiple chronic conditions are being managed in patient-centered medical homes (PCMH) that coordinate primary and specialty care. However, little is known about the types of providers treating complex patients with diabetes and compensated cirrhosis. Objective: We examined the mix of physician specialties who see patients dually-diagnosed with diabetes and compensated cirrhosis. Design: Retrospective cross-sectional study using 2000–2013 MarketScan® Commercial Claims and Encounters and Medicare Supplemental Databases. Patients: We identified 22,516 adults (≥ 18 years) dually-diagnosed with diabetes and compensated cirrhosis. Patients with decompensated cirrhosis, HIV/AIDS, or liver transplantation prior to dual diagnosis were excluded. Main Measures: Physician mix categories: patients were assigned to one of four physician mix categories: primary care physicians (PCP) with no gastroenterologists (GI) or endocrinologists (ENDO); GI/ENDO with no PCP; PCP and GI/ENDO; and neither PCP nor GI/ENDO. Health care utilization: annual physician visits and health care expenditures were assessed by four physician mix categories. Key Results: Throughout the 14 years of study, 92% of patients visited PCPs (54% with GI/ENDO and 39% with no GI/ENDO). The percentage who visited PCPs without GI/ENDO decreased 22% (from 63% to 49%), while patients who also visited GI/ENDO increased 71% (from 25% to 42%). Conclusions: This is the first large nationally representative study to document the types of physicians seen by patients dually-diagnosed with diabetes and cirrhosis. A large proportion of these complex patients only visited PCPs, but there was a trend toward greater specialty care. The trend toward co-management by both PCPs and GI/ENDOs suggests that PCMH initiatives will be important for these complex patients. Documenting patterns of primary and specialty care is the first step toward improved care coordination. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]