Dataset Information

Quality and efficiency in small practices transitioning to patient centered medical homes: a randomized trial.

ABSTRACT:

Background

There is growing evidence that even small and solo primary care practices can successfully transition to full Patient Centered Medical Home (PCMH) status when provided with support, including practice redesign, care managers, and a revised payment plan. Less is known about the quality and efficiency outcomes associated with this transition.

Objective

Test quality and efficiency outcomes associated with 2-year transition to PCMH status among physicians in intervention versus control practices.

Design

Randomized Controlled Trial.

Participants

Eighteen intervention practices with 43 physicians and 14 control practices with 24 physicians; all from adult primary care practices.

Interventions

Modeled on 2008 NCQA PPC®-PCMH™, intervention practices received 18 months of tailored practice redesign support; 2 years of revised payment, including up to $2.50 per member per month (PMPM) for achieving quality targets and up to $2.50 PMPM for PPC-PCMH recognition; and 18 months of embedded care management support. Controls received yearly participation payments.

Main measures

Eleven clinical quality indicators from the 2009 HEDIS process and health outcomes measures derived from patient claims data; Ten efficiency indicators based on Thomson Reuter efficiency indexes and Emergency Department (ED) Visit Ratios; and a panel of costs of care measures.

Key results

Compared to control physicians, intervention physicians significantly improved TWO of 11 quality indicators: hypertensive blood pressure control over 2 years (intervention +23 percentage points, control -2 percentage points, p =0.02) and breast cancer screening over 3 years (intervention +3.5 percentage points, control -0.4 percentage points, p =0.03). Compared to control physicians, intervention physicians significantly improved ONE of ten efficiency indicators: number of care episodes resulting in ED visits was reduced (intervention -0.7 percentage points, control + 0.5 percentage points, p = 0.002), with 3.8 fewer ED visits per year, saving approximately $1,900 in ED costs per physician, per year. There were no significant cost-savings on any of the pre-specified costs of care measures.

Conclusions

In a randomized trial, we observed that some indicators of quality and efficiency of care in general adult primary care practices transitioning to PCMH status can be significantly, but modestly, improved over 2 years, although most indicators did not improve and there were no cost-savings compared with control practices. For the most part, quality and efficiency of care provided in unsupported control practices remained unchanged or worsened during the trial.

SUBMITTER: Fifield J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3663935 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundNursing homes in the United States were devastated by COVID-19, with 710,000 cases and 138,000 deaths nationally through October 2021. Although facilities are required to have infection control staff, only 3% of designated infection preventionists have taken a basic infection control course prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. Most research has focused on infection control in the acute care setting. However, little is known about the implementation of infection control practices and effective interventions in nursing homes. This study utilizes Project ECHO (Extension for Community Health Outcomes), an evidence-based telementoring model, to connect Penn State University subject matter experts with nursing home staff and administrators to proactively support evidence-based infection control guideline implementation.ObjectiveOur study seeks to answer the research question of how evidence-based infection control guidelines can be implemented effectively in nursing homes, including comparing the effectiveness of two ECHO-delivered training interventions on key patient-centered outcomes such as reducing the number of residents with a COVID-19 diagnosis.MethodsA stratified cluster randomized design was utilized. Using a 1:1 ratio, we randomly assigned 136 nursing homes to ECHO or ECHO Plus arms. Randomization was stratified by geographic location, baseline COVID-19 infection rate, and facility capacity. The study had two phases. In phase one, completed in July 2021, nursing homes in both study arms received a 16-week infectious disease and quality improvement training intervention via real-time, interactive videoconferencing and the ECHO learning model. Phase one sessions were up to 90 minutes in duration. In phase two, completed in November 2021, the ECHO group was offered optional 60-minute office hours for 9 weeks and the ECHO Plus group received 9 weeks of 60-minute sessions on emerging topics and an additional 8-session refresher series on infection control.ResultsA total of 290 nursing home facilities were assessed for eligibility, with 136 nursing homes recruited and randomly assigned to ECHO or ECHO Plus. Guided by the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework, we will simultaneously evaluate the study's effectiveness and implementation outcomes at baseline (intervention start date), and at 4, 6, 12, and 18 months. The primary outcome is the COVID-19 infection rate in nursing homes. Secondary outcomes include COVID-19 hospitalizations and deaths, flu-like illness, and quality of life. Surveys and interviews with participants will also provide data as to the adoption, implementation, and maintenance of best practices taught throughout ECHO sessions.ConclusionsA multipronged approach to improving infection control and emergency preparedness in nursing homes is important, given the toll that the COVID-19 pandemic has taken on residents and staff. The ECHO model has significant strengths when compared to traditional training, as it allows for remote learning delivered by a multidisciplinary team of experts, and utilizes case discussions that match the context and capacity of nursing homes.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT04499391; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04499391.