Search

Summary: Background: This study aims to evaluate primary care providers' adherence to the standard of measuring blood pressure for people aged 35 or above during their initial visit, as per Chinese guidelines, and to identify factors affecting their practices. Methods: We developed 11 standardized patients (SP) cases as tracer conditions to evaluate primary care, and deployed trained SPs for unannounced visits to randomly selected providers in seven provinces of China. The SPs used a checklist based on guidelines to record whether and how blood pressure was measured. Data were analyzed descriptively and regression analysis was performed to examine the association between outcomes and factors such as provider, patient, facility, and clinical case characteristics. Findings: The SPs conducted 1201 visits and found that less than one-third of USPs ≥35 had their blood pressure measured. Only 26.9% of migraine and 15.4% of diabetes cases received blood pressure measurements. Additionally, these measurements did not follow the proper guidelines and recommended steps. On average, 55.6% of the steps were followed with few providers considering influencing factors before measurement and only 6.0% of patients received both-arm measurements. The use of wrist sphygmomanometers was associated with poor blood pressure measurement. Interpretation: In China, primary care hypertension screening practices fall short of guidelines, with infrequent initiation of blood pressure measurements and inadequate adherence to proper measurement steps. To address this, priority should be placed on adopting, implementing, and upholding guidelines for hypertension screening and measurement. Funding: National Natural Science Foundation of China, Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation, Doctoral Fund Project of Inner Mongolia Medical University, China Postdoctoral Science Foundation.

After more than two decades of national attention to quality improvement in US healthcare, significant gaps in quality remain. A fundamental problem is that current approaches to measure quality are indirect and therefore imprecise, focusing on clinical documentation of care rather than the actual delivery of care. The National Academy of Medicine (NAM) has identified six domains of quality that are essential to address to improve quality: patient-centeredness, equity, timeliness, efficiency, effectiveness, and safety. In this perspective, we describe how directly observed care—a recorded audit of clinical care delivery—may address problems with current quality measurement, providing a more holistic assessment of healthcare delivery. We further show how directly observed care has the potential to improve each NAM domain of quality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Unannounced standardized patients (USPs) have long been used to measure clinical performance in situ. These incognito actors capture data on clinician skills during an encounter, as well as patient experience more broadly. A robust USP program requires extensive preparation and standardization efforts. Given the widespread expansion of USPs for education, research, and improvement efforts, we conducted a systematic review with the goal of capturing the breadth of uses of USPs across settings, along with the standardization measures employed across studies., Methods: In collaboration with a medical librarian, we conducted systematic searches across six databases. Two independent researchers screened each report for inclusion. Three coders extracted and reviewed study characteristics and data from the studies deemed eligible for inclusion. We extracted data on: target population, setting, and assessed skills. We also captured the reliability and fidelity measures described in each study, including USP detection, USP training methods, and assessment measures., Results: 128 articles were included. Individual clinicians were the most frequently targeted population (n = 114, 89 %). Common clinician roles included physicians (n = 92, 72 %) and pharmacists (n = 12, 9 %). The collective care team was the target in two studies (2 %), and systems and larger healthcare facilities were targeted in only 1 (1 %) and 13 (10 %) studies, respectively. Studies were primarily conducted in ambulatory settings (n = 118, 92 %). History gathering (n = 76, 59 %), communication (n = 55, 43 %), counseling (n = 51, 40 %), and patient education (n = 49, 38 %) were commonly assessed, as were correct diagnosis (n = 34, 27 %), appropriate ordering of labs/tests (n = 30, 23 %), referrals (n = 35, 27 %), and prescriptions (n = 36, 28 %). USP detection reporting was variable across studies; however, no detection information was provided for 48 studies. 62 % of articles reported incorporating a measure of reliability or fidelity into their study, while the remainder either failed to provide adequate information on use of these measures., Conclusions: We explored USP use across settings and describe the scope and limitations of the literature. USPs capture a range of data domains but a lack uniform report of reliability measures can potentially undermine findings. Future studies should incorporate and uniformly report out on detection, training, and assessment., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Abstract Background Opioid use disorder (OUD) disproportionately impacts rural and American Indian communities and has quadrupled among pregnant individuals nationwide in the past two decades. Yet, limited data are available about access and quality of care available to pregnant individuals in rural areas, particularly among American Indians (AIs). Unannounced standardized patients (USPs), or “secret shoppers” with standardized characteristics, have been used to assess healthcare access and quality when outcomes cannot be measured by conventional methods or when differences may exist between actual versus reported care. While the USP approach has shown benefit in evaluating primary care and select specialties, its use to date for OUD and pregnancy is very limited. Methods We used literature review, current practice guidelines for perinatal OUD management, and stakeholder engagement to design a novel USP protocol to assess healthcare access and quality for OUD in pregnancy. We developed two USP profiles—one white and one AI—to reflect our target study area consisting of three rural, predominantly white and AI US counties. We partnered with a local community health center network providing care to a large AI population to define six priority outcomes for evaluation: (1) OUD treatment knowledge among clinical staff answering telephones; (2) primary care clinic facilitation and provision of prenatal care and buprenorphine treatment; (3) appropriate completion of evidence-based screening, symptom assessment, and initial steps in management; (4) appropriate completion of risk factor screening/probing about individual circumstances that may affect care; (5) patient-directed tone, stigma, and professionalism by clinic staff; and (6) disparities in care between whites and American Indians. Discussion The development of this USP protocol tailored to a specific environment and high-risk patient population establishes an innovative approach to evaluate healthcare access and quality for pregnant individuals with OUD. It is intended to serve as a roadmap for our own study and for future related work within the context of substance use disorders and pregnancy.

Background: Opioid use disorder (OUD) disproportionately impacts rural and American Indian communities and has quadrupled among pregnant individuals nationwide in the past two decades. Yet, limited data are available about access and quality of care available to pregnant individuals in rural areas, particularly among American Indians (AIs). Unannounced standardized patients (USPs), or "secret shoppers" with standardized characteristics, have been used to assess healthcare access and quality when outcomes cannot be measured by conventional methods or when differences may exist between actual versus reported care. While the USP approach has shown benefit in evaluating primary care and select specialties, its use to date for OUD and pregnancy is very limited. Methods: We used literature review, current practice guidelines for perinatal OUD management, and stakeholder engagement to design a novel USP protocol to assess healthcare access and quality for OUD in pregnancy. We developed two USP profiles—one white and one AI—to reflect our target study area consisting of three rural, predominantly white and AI US counties. We partnered with a local community health center network providing care to a large AI population to define six priority outcomes for evaluation: (1) OUD treatment knowledge among clinical staff answering telephones; (2) primary care clinic facilitation and provision of prenatal care and buprenorphine treatment; (3) appropriate completion of evidence-based screening, symptom assessment, and initial steps in management; (4) appropriate completion of risk factor screening/probing about individual circumstances that may affect care; (5) patient-directed tone, stigma, and professionalism by clinic staff; and (6) disparities in care between whites and American Indians. Discussion: The development of this USP protocol tailored to a specific environment and high-risk patient population establishes an innovative approach to evaluate healthcare access and quality for pregnant individuals with OUD. It is intended to serve as a roadmap for our own study and for future related work within the context of substance use disorders and pregnancy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Meaningful variations in physician performance are not always discernible from the medical record. Objective: We used unannounced standardized patients to measure and provide feedback on care quality and fidelity of documentation, and examined downstream effects on reimbursement claims. Design: Static group pre-post comparison study conducted between 2017 and 2019. Setting: Fourteen New Jersey primary care practice groups (22 practices) enrolled in Horizon BCBS's value-based program received the intervention. For claims analyses, we identified 14 additional comparison practice groups matched on county, practice size, and claims activity. Participants: Fifty-nine of 64 providers volunteered to participate. Intervention: Unannounced standardized patients (USPs) made 217 visits portraying patients with 1–2 focal conditions (diabetes, depression, back pain, smoking, or preventive cancer screening). After two baseline visits to a provider, we delivered feedback and conducted two follow-up visits. Measurements: USP-completed checklists of guideline-based provider care behaviors, visit audio recordings, and provider notes were used to measure behaviors performed and documentation errors pre- and post-feedback. We also compared changes in 3-month office-based claims by actual patients between the intervention and comparison practice groups before and after feedback. Results: Expected clinical behaviors increased from 46% to 56% (OR = 1.53, 95% CI 1.29–1.83, p < 0.0001), with significant improvements in smoking cessation, back pain, and depression screening. Providers were less likely to document unperformed tasks after (16%) than before feedback (18%; OR = 0.74, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.90, p = 0.002). Actual claim costs increased significantly less in the study than comparison group for diabetes and depression but significantly more for smoking cessation, cancer screening, and low back pain. Limitations: Self-selection of participating practices and lack of access to prescription claims. Conclusion: Direct observation of care identifies hidden deficits in practice and documentation, and with feedback can improve both, with concomitant effects on costs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Depression is substantially underdiagnosed in primary care, despite recommendations for screening at every visit. We report a secondary analysis focused on depression of a recently completed study using unannounced standardized patients (USPs) to measure and improve provider behaviors, documentation, and subsequent claims for real patients. Methods: Unannounced standardized patients presented incognito in 217 visits to 59 primary care providers in 22 New Jersey practices. We collected USP checklists, visit audio recordings, and provider notes after visits; provided feedback to practices and providers based on the first two visits per provider; and compared care and documentation behaviors in the visits before and after feedback. We obtained real patient claims from the study practices and a matched comparison group and compared the likelihood of visits including International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision (ICD-10) codes for depression before and after feedback between the study and comparison groups. Results: Providers significantly improved in their rate of depression screening following feedback [adjusted odds ratio (AOR), 3.41; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.52–7.65; p = 0.003]. Sometimes expected behaviors were documented when not performed. The proportion of claims by actual patients with depression-related ICD-10 codes increased significantly more from prefeedback to postfeedback in the study group than in matched control group (interaction AOR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.32–1.50; p < 0.001). Conclusions: Using USPs, we found significant performance issues in diagnosis of depression, as well as discrepancies in documentation that may reduce future diagnostic accuracy. Providing feedback based on a small number of USP encounters led to some improvements in clinical performance observed both directly and indirectly via claims. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recent respiratory infectious disease (RID) outbreaks of influenza and the novel coronavirus have resulted in global pandemics. RIDs can trigger nosocomial infections if not adequately prevented. The objective of this study was to rate the adequacy of healthcare workers (HCWs) and hospital settings on RID prevention using unannounced standardized patients (USP) in clinical settings of hospital gateways. Trained USPs visited 5 clinical settings: information desks, registration desks, two outpatient departments and the emergency departments in 10 hospitals across 3 cities of Inner Mongolia, China. USPs observed the hospital air ventilation and distance from the nearest hand-washing facilities to each clinical setting, then mimicked symptoms of either tuberculosis or influenza before observing the HCW's behavior. A total of 480 clinical-setting assessments were made by 19 USPs. The overall adequacy of triage services was 86.7% and for prevention of the spread of airborne droplets was 83.5%. Almost all hospitals offered adequate air ventilation. Compared to the information desk, adequacy of triage and preventing the spread of airborne droplets by physicians in the three clinical departments was less likely to be adequate. Triage services for USPs simulating symptoms of influenza were 2.6 times more likely to be adequate than for those simulating symptoms of tuberculosis but there was no significant difference in the prevention of the spread of airborne droplets. There is a need to improve respiratory infectious disease procedures in our study hospitals, especially in outpatient and emergency departments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Accurate documentation in the medical record is essential for quality care; extensive documentation is required for reimbursement. At times, these 2 imperatives conflict. We explored the concordance of information documented in the medical record with a gold standard measure.Materials and Methods: We compared 105 encounter notes to audio recordings covertly collected by unannounced standardized patients from 36 physicians, to identify discrepancies and estimate the reimbursement implications of billing the visit based on the note vs the care actually delivered.Results: There were 636 documentation errors, including 181 charted findings that did not take place, and 455 findings that were not charted. Ninety percent of notes contained at least 1 error. In 21 instances, the note justified a higher billing level than the gold standard audio recording, and in 4, it underrepresented the level of service (P = .005), resulting in 40 level 4 notes instead of the 23 justified based on the audio, a 74% inflated misrepresentation.Discussion: While one cannot generalize about specific error rates based on a relatively small sample of physicians exclusively within the Department of Veterans Affairs Health System, the magnitude of the findings raise fundamental concerns about the integrity of the current medical record documentation process as an actual representation of care, with implications for determining both quality and resource utilization.Conclusion: The medical record should not be assumed to reflect care delivered. Furthermore, errors of commission-documentation of services not actually provided-may inflate estimates of resource utilization. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: This study aims to evaluate primary care providers' adherence to the standard of measuring blood pressure for people aged 35 or above during their initial visit, as per Chinese guidelines, and to identify factors affecting their practices., Methods: We developed 11 standardized patients (SP) cases as tracer conditions to evaluate primary care, and deployed trained SPs for unannounced visits to randomly selected providers in seven provinces of China. The SPs used a checklist based on guidelines to record whether and how blood pressure was measured. Data were analyzed descriptively and regression analysis was performed to examine the association between outcomes and factors such as provider, patient, facility, and clinical case characteristics., Findings: The SPs conducted 1201 visits and found that less than one-third of USPs ≥35 had their blood pressure measured. Only 26.9% of migraine and 15.4% of diabetes cases received blood pressure measurements. Additionally, these measurements did not follow the proper guidelines and recommended steps. On average, 55.6% of the steps were followed with few providers considering influencing factors before measurement and only 6.0% of patients received both-arm measurements. The use of wrist sphygmomanometers was associated with poor blood pressure measurement., Interpretation: In China, primary care hypertension screening practices fall short of guidelines, with infrequent initiation of blood pressure measurements and inadequate adherence to proper measurement steps. To address this, priority should be placed on adopting, implementing, and upholding guidelines for hypertension screening and measurement., Funding: National Natural Science Foundation of China, Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation, Doctoral Fund Project of Inner Mongolia Medical University, China Postdoctoral Science Foundation., Competing Interests: The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest., (© 2023 The Authors.)

Background While unannounced standardized patients (USPs) have been used to assess physicians' clinical skills in the ambulatory setting, they can also provide valuable information on patients' experience of the health care setting beyond the physician encounter. This paper explores the use of USPs as a methodology for evaluating patient-centered care in the health care system. Methods USPs were trained to complete a behaviorally-anchored assessment of core dimensions of patient-centered care delivered within the clinical microsystem, including: 1) Medical assistants' safe practices, quality of care, and responsiveness to patients; 2) ease of clinic navigation; and 3) the patient-centeredness of care provided by the physician. Descriptive data is provided on these three levels of patient-centeredness within the targeted clinical microsystem. Chi-square analyses were used to signal whether variations by teams within the clinical microsystem were likely to be due to chance or might reflect true differences in patient-centeredness of specific teams. Results Sixty USP visits to 11 Primary Care teams were performed over an eight-month period (mean 5 visits/team; range 2-8). No medical assistants reported detecting an USP during the study period. USPs found the clinic easy to navigate and that teams were functioning well in 60% of visits. In 30% to 47% of visits, the physicians could have been more patient-centered. Medical assistants' patient safety measures were poor: patient identity was confirmed in only 5% of visits and no USPs observed medical assistants wash their hands. Quality of care was relatively high for vital signs (e.g. blood pressure, weight and height), but low for depression screening, occurring in only 15% of visits. In most visits, medical assistants greeted the patient in a timely fashion but took time to fully explain matters in less than half of the visits and rarely introduced themselves. Physicians tried to help patients navigate the system in 62% of visits. Conclusions USP assessment captured actionable, critical, behaviorally-specific information on team and system performance in an urban community clinic. This methodology provides unique insight into the patient-centeredness and quality of care in medical settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Rationale and Objectives: Clinical and contextual information associated with images may influence how radiologists draw diagnostic inferences, highlighting the need to control multiple sources of bias in the methodologic design of investigations involving radiologic interpretation. In the past, manual control methods to mask review films presented in practice have been used to reduce potential interpretive bias associated with differences between viewing images for patient care and reviewing images for the purposes of research, education, and quality improvement. These manual precedents from the film era raise the question whether similar methods to reduce bias can be implemented in the modern digital environment. Materials and Methods: A prototype application, CreateAPatient, was built for masking review case presentations within one institution’s production radiology information system and picture archiving and communication system. To test whether CreateAPatient could be used to mask review images presented in practice, six board-certified radiologists participated in a pilot study. During pilot testing, seven digital chest radiographs, known to contain lung nodules and associated with fictitious patient identifiers, were mixed into the routine workloads of the participating radiologists while they covered general evening call shifts. The aim was to test whether it was possible to mask the presentation of these review cases, both by probing the interpreting radiologists to report detection and by conducting a forced-choice experiment on a separate cohort of 20 radiologists and information technology professionals. Results: None of the participating radiologists reported awareness of review activity, and forced-choice detection was less than predicted at chance, suggesting that radiologists were effectively blinded. In addition, no evidence was identified of review reports unsafely propagating beyond their intended scope or otherwise interfering with patient care, despite integration of these records within production electronic work flow systems. Conclusions: Information technology can facilitate the design of unbiased methods involving professional review of digital diagnostic images. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Introduction: Primary healthcare (PHC) serves as the cornerstone for the attainment of universal health coverage (UHC). Efforts to promote UHC should focus on the expansion of access and on healthcare quality. However, robust quality evidence has remained scarce in China. Common quality assessment methods such as chart abstraction, patient rating and clinical vignette use indirect information that may not represent real practice. This study will send standardised patients (SP or healthy person trained to consistently simulate the medical history, physical symptoms and emotional characteristics of a real patient) unannounced to PHC providers to collect quality information and represent real practice., Methods and Analysis: 1981 SP-clinician visits will be made to a random sample of PHC providers across seven provinces in China. SP cases will be developed for 10 tracer conditions in PHC. Each case will include a standard script for the SP to use and a quality checklist that the SP will complete after the clinical visit to indicate diagnostic and treatment activities performed by the clinician. Patient-centredness will be assessed according to the Patient Perception of Patient-Centeredness Rating Scale by the SP. SP cases and the checklist will be developed through a standard protocol and assessed for content, face and criterion validity, and test-retest and inter-rater reliability before its full use. Various descriptive analyses will be performed for the survey results, such as a tabulation of quality scores across geographies and provider types., Ethics and Dissemination: This study has been reviewed and approved by the Institutional Review Board of the School of Public Health of Sun Yat-sen University (#SYSU 2017-011). Results will be actively disseminated through print and social media, and SP tools will be made available for other researchers., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objective: We developed a series of orthopedic unannounced standardized patient (USP) encounters for the purpose of objective assessment of residents during clinic encounters., Design: Consecutive case-series., Setting: NYU-Langone Multi-center Academic University Hospital System., Participants: NYU-Langone/Hospital for Joint Diseases Orthopedic Surgery residents; 48 consecutive residents assessed., Methods: Four orthopedic cases were developed. USPs presented themselves as patients in outpatient clinics. Residents were evaluated on communication skills (information gathering, relationship development, and education and counseling). USPs globally rated whether they would recommend the resident., Results: Forty-eight USP encounters were completed over a 2-year period. Communication skills items were rated at 51% (±30) "well done." Education and counseling skills were rated as the lowest communication domain at 33% (±33). Residents were globally recommended based on communication skills in 63% of the encounters recommended in 70% of encounters based on both professionalism and medical competence., Conclusions: The USP program has been useful in assessing residents' clinical skills, interpersonal and communications skills, and professionalism. Use of USP in orthopedic surgery training programs can be an objective means for trainee assessment., (Copyright © 2017. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Purpose: Prostate cancer screening with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) is a controversial issue. The present study aimed to explore physician behaviors during an unannounced standardized patient encounter that was part of a randomized controlled trial to educate physicians using a prostate cancer screening, interactive, Web-based module., Methods: Participants included 118 internal medicine and family medicine physicians from 5 health systems in California, in 2007-2008. Control physicians received usual education about prostate cancer screening (brochures from the Center for Disease Control and Prevention). Intervention physicians participated in the prostate cancer screening module. Within 3 months, all physicians saw unannounced standardized patients who prompted prostate cancer screening discussions in clinic. The encounter was audio-recorded, and the recordings were transcribed. Authors analyzed physician behaviors around screening: (1) engagement after prompting, (2) degree of shared decision making, and (3) final recommendations for prostate cancer screening., Results: After prompting, 90% of physicians discussed prostate cancer screening. In comparison with control physicians, intervention physicians showed somewhat more shared decision making behaviors (intervention 14 items vs control 11 items, P <.05), were more likely to mention no screening as an option (intervention 63% vs control 26%, P <.05), to encourage patients to consider different screening options (intervention 62% vs control 39%, P <.05) and seeking input from others (intervention 25% vs control 7%, P<.05)., Conclusions: A brief Web-based interactive educational intervention can improve shared decision making, neutrality in recommendation, and reduce PSA test ordering. Engaging patients in discussion of the uses and limitations of tests with uncertain value can decrease utilization of the tests.