Dataset Information

Organizational cost of quality improvement for depression care.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

We documented organizational costs for depression care quality improvement (QI) to develop an evidence-based, Veterans Health Administration (VA) adapted depression care model for primary care practices that performed well for patients, was sustained over time, and could be spread nationally in VA.

Data sources and study setting

Project records and surveys from three multistate VA administrative regions and seven of their primary care practices.

Study design

Descriptive analysis.

Data collection

We documented project time commitments and expenses for 86 clinical QI and 42 technical expert support team participants for 4 years from initial contact through care model design, Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles, and achievement of stable workloads in which models functioned as routine care. We assessed time, salary costs, and costs for conference calls, meetings, e-mails, and other activities.

Principle findings

Over an average of 27 months, all clinics began referring patients to care managers. Clinical participants spent 1,086 hours at a cost of $84,438. Technical experts spent 2,147 hours costing $197,787. Eighty-five percent of costs derived from initial regional engagement activities and care model design.

Conclusions

Organizational costs of the QI process for depression care in a large health care system were significant, and should be accounted for when planning for implementation of evidence-based depression care.

SUBMITTER: Liu CF

PROVIDER: S-EPMC2669623 | biostudies-literature | 2009 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Organizational cost of quality improvement for depression care.

Liu Chuan-Fen CF Rubenstein Lisa V LV Kirchner JoAnn E JE Fortney John C JC Perkins Mark W MW Ober Scott K SK Pyne Jeffrey M JM Chaney Edmund F EF

Health services research 20090201 1

<h4>Objective</h4>We documented organizational costs for depression care quality improvement (QI) to develop an evidence-based, Veterans Health Administration (VA) adapted depression care model for primary care practices that performed well for patients, was sustained over time, and could be spread nationally in VA.<h4>Data sources and study setting</h4>Project records and surveys from three multistate VA administrative regions and seven of their primary care practices.<h4>Study design</h4>Descr ...[more]

PMID: 19146566

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionWith the growing prevalence of value-based contracts, health systems are incentivized to consider population approaches to service delivery, particularly for chronic conditions like depression. To this end, UW Medicine implemented the Depression-Population Approach to Health (PATH) program in primary care (PC) as part of a system-wide Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation (CMMI) quality improvement (QI) initiative.AimTo examine the feasibility of a pilot PATH program and its impact on clinical and process-of-care outcomes.SettingA large, diverse, geographically disparate academic health system in Western Washington State including 28 PC clinics across five networks.Program descriptionThe PATH program was a population-level, centralized, measurement-based care intervention that utilized a clinician to provide remote monitoring of treatment progress via chart review and facilitate patient engagement when appropriate. The primary goals of the program were to improve care engagement and increase follow-up PHQ-9 assessments for patients with depression and elevated initial PHQ-9 scores.Program evaluationWe employed a prospective, observational study design, including commercially insured adult patients with new depression diagnoses and elevated initial PHQ-9 scores. The pilot intervention group, consisting of accountable care network (ACN) self-enrollees (N = 262), was compared with a similar commercially insured cohort (N = 2527) using difference-in-differences analyses adjusted for patient comorbidities, initial PHQ-9 score, and time trends. The PATH program was associated with three times the odds of PHQ-9 follow-up (OR 3.28, 95% CI 1.79-5.99), twice the odds of a follow-up PC clinic visit (OR 1.74, 95% CI 0.99-3.08), and twice the odds of treatment response, defined as reduction in PHQ-9 score by ≥ 50% (OR 2.02, 95% CI 0.97-4.21).DiscussionOur results demonstrate that a centralized, remote care management initiative is both feasible and effective for large academic health systems aiming to improve depression outcome ascertainment, treatment engagement, and clinical care.

Project description:BACKGROUND: Continuous quality improvement (CQI) methods are widely used in healthcare; however, the effectiveness of the methods is variable, and evidence about the extent to which contextual and other factors modify effects is limited. Investigating the relationship between these factors and CQI outcomes poses challenges for those evaluating CQI, among the most complex of which relate to the measurement of modifying factors. We aimed to provide guidance to support the selection of measurement instruments by systematically collating, categorising, and reviewing quantitative self-report instruments. METHODS: DATA SOURCES: We searched MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Health and Psychosocial Instruments, reference lists of systematic reviews, and citations and references of the main report of instruments. STUDY SELECTION: The scope of the review was determined by a conceptual framework developed to capture factors relevant to evaluating CQI in primary care (the InQuIRe framework). Papers reporting development or use of an instrument measuring a construct encompassed by the framework were included. Data extracted included instrument purpose; theoretical basis, constructs measured and definitions; development methods and assessment of measurement properties. Analysis and synthesis: We used qualitative analysis of instrument content and our initial framework to develop a taxonomy for summarising and comparing instruments. Instrument content was categorised using the taxonomy, illustrating coverage of the InQuIRe framework. Methods of development and evidence of measurement properties were reviewed for instruments with potential for use in primary care. RESULTS: We identified 186 potentially relevant instruments, 152 of which were analysed to develop the taxonomy. Eighty-four instruments measured constructs relevant to primary care, with content measuring CQI implementation and use (19 instruments), organizational context (51 instruments), and individual factors (21 instruments). Forty-one instruments were included for full review. Development methods were often pragmatic, rather than systematic and theory-based, and evidence supporting measurement properties was limited. CONCLUSIONS: Many instruments are available for evaluating CQI, but most require further use and testing to establish their measurement properties. Further development and use of these measures in evaluations should increase the contribution made by individual studies to our understanding of CQI and enhance our ability to synthesise evidence for informing policy and practice.

Project description:ObjectivesAssess patient outcomes in patients with suspected infection and the cost-effectiveness of implementing a quality improvement program.Design, setting, and participantsWe conducted an observational single-center study of 13,877 adults with suspected infection between March 1, 2014, and July 31, 2017. The 18-month period before and after the effective date for mandated reporting of the sepsis bundle was examined. The Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score and culture and antibiotic orders were used to identify patients meeting Sepsis-3 criteria from the electronic health record.InterventionsThe following interventions were performed as follows: 1) multidisciplinary sepsis committee with sepsis coordinator and data abstractor; 2) education campaign; 3) electronic health record tools; and 4) a Modified Early Warning System.Main outcomes and measuresPrimary health outcomes were in-hospital death and length of stay. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was calculated and the empirical 95% CI for the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was estimated from 5,000 bootstrap samples.ResultsIn multivariable analysis, the odds ratio for in-hospital death in the post- versus pre-implementation periods was 0.70 (95% CI, 0.57-0.86) in those with suspected infection, and the hazard ratio for time to discharge was 1.25 (95% CI, 1.20-1.29). Similarly, a decrease in the odds for in-hospital death and an increase in the speed to discharge was observed for the subset that met Sepsis-3 criteria. The program was cost saving in patients with suspected infection (-$272,645.7; 95% CI, -$757,970.3 to -$79,667.7). Cost savings were also observed in the Sepsis-3 group.Conclusions and relevanceOur health system's program designed to adhere to the sepsis bundle metrics led to decreased mortality and length of stay in a cost-effective manner in a much larger catchment than just the cohort meeting the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services measures. Our single-center model of interventions may serve as a practice-based benchmark for hospitalized patients with suspected infection.

Project description:Meta-analyses show collaborative care models (CCMs) with nurse care management are effective for improving primary care for depression. This study aimed to develop CCM approaches that could be sustained and spread within Veterans Affairs (VA). Evidence-based quality improvement (EBQI) uses QI approaches within a research/clinical partnership to redesign care. The study used EBQI methods for CCM redesign, tested the effectiveness of the locally adapted model as implemented, and assessed the contextual factors shaping intervention effectiveness.The study intervention is EBQI as applied to CCM implementation. The study uses a cluster randomized design as a formative evaluation tool to test and improve the effectiveness of the redesign process, with seven intervention and three non-intervention VA primary care practices in five different states. The primary study outcome is patient antidepressant use. The context evaluation is descriptive and uses subgroup analysis. The primary context evaluation measure is naturalistic primary care clinician (PCC) predilection to adopt CCM.For the randomized evaluation, trained telephone research interviewers enrolled consecutive primary care patients with major depression in the evaluation, referred enrolled patients in intervention practices to the implemented CCM, and re-surveyed at seven months.Interviewers enrolled 288 CCM site and 258 non-CCM site patients. Enrolled intervention site patients were more likely to receive appropriate antidepressant care (66% versus 43%, p = 0.01), but showed no significant difference in symptom improvement compared to usual care. In terms of context, only 40% of enrolled patients received complete care management per protocol. PCC predilection to adopt CCM had substantial effects on patient participation, with patients belonging to early adopter clinicians completing adequate care manager follow-up significantly more often than patients of clinicians with low predilection to adopt CCM (74% versus 48%%, p = 0.003).Depression CCM designed and implemented by primary care practices using EBQI improved antidepressant initiation. Combining QI methods with a randomized evaluation proved challenging, but enabled new insights into the process of translating research-based CCM into practice. Future research on the effects of PCC attitudes and skills on CCM results, as well as on enhancing the link between improved antidepressant use and symptom outcomes, is needed.ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00105820.

Dataset Information

Organizational cost of quality improvement for depression care.

Objective

Data sources and study setting

Study design

Data collection

Principle findings

Conclusions

Publications

Organizational cost of quality improvement for depression care.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets