Multilevel analysis of the chronic care model and 5A services for treating tobacco use in urban primary care clinics.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Hung DY
PROVIDER: S-EPMC2669639 | biostudies-literature | 2009 Feb
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Multilevel analysis of the chronic care model and 5A services for treating tobacco use in urban primary care clinics.
Hung Dorothy Y DY Shelley Donna R DR
Health services research 20080908 1
<h4>Objective</h4>To examine the chronic care model (CCM) as a framework for improving provider delivery of 5A tobacco cessation services.<h4>Methods</h4>Cross-sectional surveys were used to obtain data from 497 health care providers in 60 primary care clinics serving low-income patients in New York City. A hierarchical generalized linear modeling approach to ordinal regression was used to estimate the probability of full 5A service delivery, adjusting for provider covariates and clustering effe ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:BACKGROUND:The Urban Primary Health Care Project (UPHCP) was implemented by the Government of Bangladesh in response to rapid urbanization and growing inequalities in access to and quality of primary health care. The goal of the project was to improve health status of the urban poor living in city corporations and municipalities through the provision of health care services by NGOs that are contracted through public-private partnership. The first phase of the project started in 1998 and the project is currently in its fourth phase covering more urban areas than the first three phases. This study evaluates the impact of the second phase project (UPHCP-II) on health outcomes, mainly child diarrhea, acute respiratory infection, antenatal and postnatal care, skilled birth attendance, breastfeeding prevalence, contraceptive prevalence, sexually transmitted infections, and HIV/AIDS awareness. METHODS:The effect of the project was estimated through propensity score matching between project and non-project areas comparing baseline and endline surveys over a six-year period from 2006 to 2012. An innovation of this study is the recalibration of the sampling weights that allows the use of these two independent surveys in impact evaluation. RESULTS:Over the six-year period, UPHCP-II improved the health status of the population in project areas compared to non-project areas. The study found significant improvement in health outcomes in terms of reduced diarrhea and acute respiratory infection in children, which explains the downward trend in child mortality rate. Moreover, the project also improved antenatal care and skilled birth attendance. Contraceptive prevalence and HIV/AIDS awareness and avoidance increased, and sexually transmitted infections decreased. CONCLUSIONS:UPHCP-II was effective in achieving its health outcome targets, while previous studies show that it was efficient in the delivery of health care and clients were highly satisfied because health facilities were in close proximity, and doctors and staff were perceived as responsive in delivering high quality of care. The results of this study could help inform future design and implementation of urban health interventions that involve contracting primary health care service delivery in Bangladesh and other similar settings.
| S-EPMC6956513 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Controversy surrounds the role of the private sector in health service delivery, including primary care and population health services. China's recent health reforms call for non-discrimination against private providers and emphasize strengthening primary care, but formal contracting-out initiatives remain few, and the associated empirical evidence is very limited. This paper presents a case study of contracting with private providers for urban primary and preventive health services in Shandong Province, China. The case study draws on three primary sources of data: administrative records; a household survey of over 1600 community residents in Weifang and City Y; and a provider survey of over 1000 staff at community health stations (CHS) in both Weifang and City Y. We supplement the quantitative data with one-on-one, in-depth interviews with key informants, including local officials in charge of public health and government finance.We find significant differences in patient mix: Residents in the communities served by private community health stations are of lower socioeconomic status (more likely to be uninsured and to report poor health), compared to residents in communities served by a government-owned CHS. Analysis of a household survey of 1013 residents shows that they are more willing to do a routine health exam at their neighborhood CHS if they are of low socioeconomic status (as measured either by education or income). Government and private community health stations in Weifang did not statistically differ in their performance on contracted dimensions, after controlling for size and other CHS characteristics. In contrast, the comparison City Y had lower performance and a large gap between public and private providers. We discuss why these patterns arose and what policymakers and residents considered to be the main issues and concerns regarding primary care services.
| S-EPMC3599686 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceOpioid-prescribing policies and guidelines aimed at reducing inappropriate opioid prescribing may lead physicians to stop prescribing opioids. Patients may thus encounter difficulties finding primary care practitioners willing to care for them if they take opioids.ObjectivesTo assess practitioner willingness to accept and continue prescribing opioids to new patients with pain and whether this willingness differs across payer types.Design, setting, and participantsThis survey study used a simulated patient call audit method. A brief telephone survey was administered to all clinics followed by a call using a patient script simulating an adult patient with chronic pain who was taking long-term opioids. The patient had Medicaid or private insurance. Calls were made between June 22 and October 30, 2018, to 667 primary care clinics that served a general adult population in Michigan. Clinics that accepted both Medicaid and private insurance, took new patient appointments, and were successfully recontacted for the simulated call were eligible for the study.Main outcomes and measuresPrevalence of clinics' acceptance of new patients receiving prescription opioids overall and by clinic characteristics and insurance type.ResultsOf the 194 eligible clinics, 94 (48.4%) were randomized according to insurance type to receive calls from research assistants posing as children of patients with Medicaid and 100 (51.5%) to receive calls from those with private insurance. Overall, 79 (40.7%) stated that their practitioners would not prescribe opioids to the simulated patient. Thirty-three clinics (17.0%) requested more information before making a decision. Compared with single-practitioner clinics, clinics with more than 3 practitioners were more likely (odds ratio [OR], 2.99; 95% CI, 1.48-6.04) to accept new patients currently taking opioids. No difference was found in access based on insurance status (OR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.52-1.64) or whether the clinic offered medications for opioid use disorders (OR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.45-2.69).Conclusions and relevanceThe findings suggest that access to primary care may be reduced for patients taking prescription opioids, which could lead to unintended consequences, such as conversion to illicit substances or reduced management of other medical comorbidities.
| S-EPMC6628590 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe successful implementation of interventions targeted to improve kidney health requires early identification of CKD which involves screening at-risk populations as well as recognizing CKD. We aim to determine CKD screening and recognition rates, factors associated with these rates, and evaluate the effect of CKD awareness on delivery of care.MethodsA retrospective cohort study of veterans enrolled with Veterans Integrated Service Network 17 who had hypertension (HTN) and/or diabetes (DM) and were seen at least twice in primary care clinics within 18 months. The final cohort of 270,170 patients (52% HTN, 5% DM, and 44% both) was examined for serum creatinine/eGFR, urine protein/albumin, International Classification of Diseases (ICD) codes for CKD, and nephrology referral. CKD was defined as eGFR <60 ml/min per 1.73 m2 and/or urine albumin-creatinine ratio (uACR) >30 mg/g at least twice 90 days apart. Clinical covariates, HTN control, and prescription rates of renal prudent medications and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) were assessed.ResultsOverall, 254,831 (94%) patients had either eGFR, urine protein/albumin, or both. However, screening for protein/albuminuria was low (56%), particularly in patients with isolated HTN (35%). Of 254,831 patients, 92,900 (36%) had laboratory evidence of CKD and, of these, 40,586 (44%) were recognized to have CKD by ICD code and/or nephrology referral. CKD due to presence of uACR criteria alone had the lowest recognition (19%) as compared with CKD due to eGFR criteria (44%) or both (67%). Frequency of emergency room visits, hospitalization, and cardiac and endovascular procedures requiring contrast had the highest odds and races other than white had the lower odds of screening. In contrast, CKD recognition was high in races other than white and increased with worsening eGFR and increasing uACR. In screened and recognized CKD, prescription was higher for angiotensin inhibitors, statins, and diuretics, and was lower for NSAIDs.ConclusionsAlthough overall CKD screening rate was high, screening of protein/albuminuria in isolated HTN and overall recognition of CKD was low in at-risk veterans. Increased recognition was associated with a favorable prescription rate for renal prudent medications.
| S-EPMC8815593 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThere is a need for new strategies to improve the success of obesity treatment within the primary care setting.ObjectiveTo determine if patients offered low out-of-pocket cost weight management tools achieved more weight loss compared to usual care.DesignTwelve-month pragmatic clinical weight loss trial with a registry-based comparator group performed in primary care clinics of an urban safety-net hospital.ParticipantsFrom a large clinical registry, we randomly selected 428 patients to have the opportunity to receive the intervention.InterventionsMedical weight management tools-partial meal replacements, recreation center vouchers, pharmacotherapy, commercial weight loss program vouchers, and a group behavioral weight loss program-for $5 or $10 monthly. Patients chose their tools, could switch tools, and could add a second tool at 6 months.Main measuresThe primary outcome was the proportion of intervention-eligible patients who achieved ≥ 5% weight loss. The main secondary outcome was the proportion of on-treatment patients who achieved ≥ 5% weight loss.Key resultsOverall, 71.3% (305 of 428) had available weight measurement data/PCP visit data to observe the primary outcome. At 12 months, 23.3% (71 of 305) of intervention-eligible participants and 15.7% (415 of 2640) of registry-based comparators had achieved 5% weight loss (p < 0.001). Of the on-treatment participants, 34.5% (39 of 113) achieved 5% weight loss. Mean percentage weight loss was - 3.15% ± 6.41% for on-treatment participants and - 0.30% ± 6.10% for comparators (p < 0.001). The initially preferred tools were meal replacements, pharmacotherapy, and recreation center passes.ConclusionsAccess to a variety of low out-of-pocket cost weight management tools within primary care resulted in ≥ 5% body weight loss in approximately one quarter of low-income patients with obesity.Trial registrationhttps://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01922934.
| S-EPMC6848318 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionInappropriate medication use is a leading cause of avoidable harm in health systems and is particularly severe in primary care settings. Evidence has shown that the integration of pharmacists into primary care clinics has favourable satisfaction and effectiveness in health outcomes. However, barriers to and facilitators of pharmacist services in these settings have not been comprehensively reviewed. Therefore, this scoping review aims to map and examine the literature available on the barriers to and facilitators of the implementation of pharmacist services in primary care clinics to guide future implementation research.Methods and analysisThis scoping review will be undertaken following the six-stage framework developed by Arksey and O'Malley and be guided by recommendations by Levac et al. Eight electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, CINAHL, PsycINFO, CNKI and Wanfang) will be searched. Reference lists and related citations, and grey literature from websites will be searched manually. Available information that has been reported in Chinese or English up to 31 August 2021 will be included. Studies will be selected and screened by two reviewers independently. Findings from the included studies will be extracted by two independent reviewers and supervised by a third reviewer. A content analysis of the findings will be performed using MAXQDA 2020.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval will not be required for this scoping review, as all data and information will be obtained from publicly available literature. The findings of this scoping review will be shared with healthcare managers in primary care institutions and health authorities as well as disseminated via publication in a peer-reviewed journal.
| S-EPMC8753389 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Large and increasing numbers of rural-to-urban migrants provided new challenges for tuberculosis control in large cities in China and increased the need for high quality tuberculosis care delivered by clinics in urban migrant communities. Based on a household survey in migrant communities, we selected and separated clinics into those that mainly serve migrants and those that mainly serve local residents. Using standardized patients, this study provided an objective comparison of the quality of tuberculosis care delivered by both types of clinics and examined factors related to quality care. Only 27% (95% confidence interval (CI) 14⁻46) of cases were correctly managed in migrant clinics, which is significantly worse than it in local clinics (50%, 95% CI 28⁻72). Clinicians with a base salary were 41 percentage points more likely to demonstrate better case management. Furthermore, clinicians with upper secondary or higher education level charged 20 RMB lower out of pocket fees than less-educated clinicians. In conclusion, the quality of tuberculosis care accessed by migrants was very poor and policies to improve the quality should be prioritized in current health reforms. Providing a base salary was a possible way to improve quality of care and increasing the education attainment of urban community clinicians might reduce the heavy barrier of medical expenses for migrants.
| S-EPMC6163912 | biostudies-other
Project description:SignificanceGuidelines urge primary care practices to routinely provide tobacco cessation care (i.e., assess tobacco use, provide brief cessation advice, and refer to cessation support). This study evaluates the impact of a systems-based strategy to provide tobacco cessation care in eight primary care clinics serving low-income patients.MethodsA non-randomized stepped wedge study design was used to implement an intervention consisting of (1) changes to the electronic health record (EHR) referral functionality and (2) expansion of staff roles to provide brief advice to quit; assess readiness to quit; offer a referral to tobacco cessation counseling; and sign the referral order. Outcomes assessed from the EHR include performance of tobacco cessation care tasks, referral contact, and enrollment rates for the quitline (QL) and in-house Freedom from Smoking (FFS) program. Generalized estimating equations (GEE) methods were used to compute odds ratios contrasting the pre-implementation vs. 1-, 3-, 6-, and 12-month post-implementation periods.ResultsOf the 176,061 visits, 26.1% were by identified tobacco users. All indicators significantly increased at each time period evaluated post-implementation. In comparison with the pre-intervention period, assessing smoking status (26.6% vs. 55.7%; OR = 3.7, CI = 3.6-3.9), providing advice (44.8% vs. 88.7%; OR = 7.8, CI = 6.6-9.1), assessing readiness to quit (15.8% vs. 55.0%; OR = 6.2, CI = 5.4-7.0), and acceptance of a referral to tobacco cessation counseling (0.5% vs. 30.9%; OR = 81.0, CI = 11.4-575.8) remained significantly higher 12 months post-intervention. For the QL and FFS, respectively, there were 1223 and 532 referrals; 324 (31.1%) and 103 (24.7%) were contacted; 241 (74.4%) and 72 (69.6%) enrolled; and 195 (80.9%) and 14 (19.4%) received at least one counseling session.ConclusionsThis system change intervention that includes an EHR-supported role expansion substantially increased the provision of tobacco cessation care and improvements were sustained beyond 1 year. This approach has the potential to greatly increase the number of individuals referred for tobacco cessation counseling.
| S-EPMC7661631 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundHealthcare accessibility and utilization are important social determinants of health. Lack of access to healthcare, including missed or no-show appointments, can have negative health effects and be costly to patients and providers. Various office-based approaches and community partnerships can address patient access barriers.Objectives(1) To understand provider perceptions of patient barriers; (2) to describe the policies and practices used to address late or missed appointments, and (3) to evaluate access to patient support services, both in-clinic and with community partners.MethodsMailed cross-sectional survey with online response option, sent to all Nebraska primary care clinics (n = 577) conducted April 2020 and January through April 2021. Chi-square tests compared rural-urban differences; logistic regression of clinical factors associated with policies and support services computed odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI).ResultsResponse rate was 20.3% (n = 117), with 49 returns in 2020. Perceived patient barriers included finances, higher among rural versus urban clinics (81.6% vs. 56.1%, p =.009), and time (overall 52.3%). Welcoming environment (95.5%), telephone appointment reminders (74.8%) and streamlined admissions (69.4%) were the top three clinic practices to reduce missed appointments. Telehealth was the most commonly available patient support service in rural (79.6%) and urban (81.8%, p =.90) clinics. Number of providers was positively associated with having a patient navigator/care coordinator (OR = 1.20, CI = 1.02-1.40). For each percent increase in the number of privately insured patients, the odds of providing legal aid decreased by 4% (OR = 0.96, CI = 0.92-1.00). Urban clinics were less likely than rural clinics to provide social work services (OR = 0.16, CI = 0.04-0.67) or assist with applications for government aid (OR = 0.22, CI = 0.06-0.90).ConclusionsPractices to reduce missed appointments included a variety of reminders. Although finances and inability to take time off work were the most frequently reported perceived barriers for patients' access to timely healthcare, most clinics did not directly address them. Rural clinics appeared to have more community partnerships to address underlying social determinants of health, such as transportation and assistance applying for government aid. Taking such a wholistic partnership approach is an area for future study to improve patient access.
| S-EPMC10916250 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The increasing number of patients with chronic diseases represents a challenge for health care systems. The Chronic Care Model suggests a multi-component remodelling of chronic disease services to improve patient outcomes. To meet the complex and ongoing needs of patients, chronic disease prevention and management (CDPM) has been advocated as a key feature of primary care producing better outcomes, greater effectiveness and improved access to services compared to other sectors. The objective of this study is to evaluate the adaptation and implementation of an intervention involving the integration of chronic disease prevention and management (CDPM) services into primary health care.The implementation of the intervention will be evaluated using descriptive qualitative methods to collect data from various stakeholders (decision-makers, primary care professionals, CDPM professionals and patients) before, during and after the implementation. The evaluation of the effects will be based on a combination of experimental designs: a randomized trial using a delayed intervention arm (n = 326), a before-and-after design with repeated measures (n = 163), and a quasi-experimental design using a comparative cohort (n = 326). This evaluation will utilize self-report questionnaires measuring self-efficacy, empowerment, comorbidity, health behaviour, functional health status, quality of life, psychological well-being, patient characteristics and co-interventions. The study will take place in eight primary care practices of the Saguenay region of Quebec (Canada). To be included, patients will have to be referred by their primary care provider and present at least one of the following conditions (or their risk factors): diabetes, cardiovascular diseases, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, asthma. Patients presenting serious cognitive problems will be excluded.In the short-term, improved patient self-efficacy and empowerment are expected. In the mid-term, we expect to observe an improvement in health behaviour, functional health status, quality of life and psychological well-being. At the organizational level, the project should lead to coordinated service delivery, improved patient follow-up mechanisms and enhanced interprofessional collaboration. Integration of CDPM services at the point of care in primary care practices is a promising innovation in care delivery that needs to be thoroughly evaluated.ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01319656.
| S-EPMC3637600 | biostudies-literature