Search

Background: Specialist physicians provide a large share of outpatient health care for children and adolescents in the United States, but little is known about the nature and content of these services in the ambulatory setting. Our objective was to quantify and characterize routine and co-managed pediatric healthcare as provided by specialists in community settings., Methods: Nationally representative data were obtained from the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey for the years 2002-2006. We included office based physicians (excluding family physicians, general internists and general pediatricians), and a representative sample of their patients aged 18 or less. Visits were classified into mutually exclusive categories based on the major reason for the visit, previous knowledge of the health problem, and whether the visit was the result of a referral. Primary diagnoses were classified using Expanded Diagnostic Clusters. Physician report of sharing care for the patient with another physician and frequency of reappointments were also collected., Results: Overall, 41.3% out of about 174 million visits were for routine follow up and preventive care of patients already known to the specialist. Psychiatry, immunology and allergy, and dermatology accounted for 54.5% of all routine and preventive care visits. Attention deficit disorder, allergic rhinitis and disorders of the sebaceous glands accounted for about a third of these visits. Overall, 73.2% of all visits resulted in a return appointment with the same physician, in half of all cases as a result of a routine or preventive care visit., Conclusion: Ambulatory office-based pediatric care provided by specialists includes a large share of non referred routine and preventive care for common problems for patients already known to the physician. It is likely that many of these services could be managed in primary care settings, lessening demand for specialists and improving coordination of care.

Comorbidity is associated with worse health outcomes, more complex clinical management, and increased health care costs. There is no agreement, however, on the meaning of the term, and related constructs, such as multimorbidity, morbidity burden, and patient complexity, are not well conceptualized. In this article, we review definitions of comorbidity and their relationship to related constructs. We show that the value of a given construct lies in its ability to explain a particular phenomenon of interest within the domains of (1) clinical care, (2) epidemiology, or (3) health services planning and financing. Mechanisms that may underlie the coexistence of 2 or more conditions in a patient (direct causation, associated risk factors, heterogeneity, independence) are examined, and the implications for clinical care considered. We conclude that the more precise use of constructs, as proposed in this article, would lead to improved research into the phenomenon of ill health in clinical care, epidemiology, and health services.

Objective: To assess the impact on the process and the outcomes of care of feeding back information on perceived health status to health care professionals in clinical practice., Design: Systematic review of controlled trials., Data Identification: Search in electronic databases (MEDLINE 1966-1997), manual searches, and requests to experts in the field., Data Analysis: Differences between intervention and control group were considered in process of care (use of health services, diagnosis, and treatment), patient outcomes (health status), and patient satisfaction. In a subgroup of 13 interventions that dealt with the provision of feedback about the patient's mental health, the impact on the process of care was subjected to meta-analysis., Results: We identified 21 studies that satisfied the selection criteria. Eleven of 20 (55%) found significant differences (P <0.05) in at least 1 of the process indicators in favor of the intervention group. Of 11 trials that assessed patient outcomes, only 4 (36%) detected significant improvements. A similar trend but lower percentages were observed among the 8 interventions that provided general health status information. Eleven interventions that evaluated feedback information about the patient's mental health status showed a higher rate of diagnosis in the intervention group (combined odds ratio [OR]=1.91; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.28 to 2.83). Seven of 9 studies evaluating treatment failed to show an effect on this indicator (combined OR=1.15; 95% CI 0.76 to 1.75)., Conclusions: The provision of feedback on perceived health status to health professionals seems to have an effect on the process of care but not on patient functional or health status. This is especially true with regard to mental health status information. Nevertheless, there is still need for a more through evaluation of this type of intervention.