Dataset Information

Identification, summary and comparison of tools used to measure organizational attributes associated with chronic disease management within primary care settings.

ABSTRACT:

Rationale, aims and objectives

Given the increasing emphasis being placed on managing patients with chronic diseases within primary care, there is a need to better understand which primary care organizational attributes affect the quality of care that patients with chronic diseases receive. This study aimed to identify, summarize and compare data collection tools that describe and measure organizational attributes used within the primary care setting worldwide.

Methods

Systematic search and review methodology consisting of a comprehensive and exhaustive search that is based on a broad question to identify the best available evidence was employed.

Results

A total of 30 organizational attribute data collection tools that have been used within the primary care setting were identified. The tools varied with respect to overall focus and level of organizational detail captured, theoretical foundations, administration and completion methods, types of questions asked, and the extent to which psychometric property testing had been performed. The tools utilized within the Quality and Costs of Primary Care in Europe study and the Canadian Primary Health Care Practice-Based Surveys were the most recently developed tools. Furthermore, of the 30 tools reviewed, the Canadian Primary Health Care Practice-Based Surveys collected the most information on organizational attributes.

Conclusions

There is a need to collect primary care organizational attribute information at a national level to better understand factors affecting the quality of chronic disease prevention and management across a given country. The data collection tools identified in this review can be used to establish data collection strategies to collect this important information.

SUBMITTER: Lukewich J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4342765 | biostudies-literature | 2014 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Identification, summary and comparison of tools used to measure organizational attributes associated with chronic disease management within primary care settings.

Lukewich Julia J Corbin Renée R VanDenKerkhof Elizabeth G EG Edge Dana S DS Williamson Tyler T Tranmer Joan E JE

Journal of evaluation in clinical practice 20140520 6

<h4>Rationale, aims and objectives</h4>Given the increasing emphasis being placed on managing patients with chronic diseases within primary care, there is a need to better understand which primary care organizational attributes affect the quality of care that patients with chronic diseases receive. This study aimed to identify, summarize and compare data collection tools that describe and measure organizational attributes used within the primary care setting worldwide.<h4>Methods</h4>Systematic ...[more]

PMID: 24840066

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundEvidence-based quality improvement models for depression have not been fully implemented in routine primary care settings. To date, few studies have examined the organizational factors associated with depression management in real-world primary care practice. To successfully implement quality improvement models for depression, there must be a better understanding of the relevant organizational structure and processes of the primary care setting. The objective of this study is to describe these organizational features of routine primary care practice, and the organization of depression care, using survey questions derived from an evidence-based framework.MethodsWe used this framework to implement a survey of 27 practices comprised of 49 unique offices within a large primary care practice network in western Pennsylvania. Survey questions addressed practice structure (e.g., human resources, leadership, information technology (IT) infrastructure, and external incentives) and process features (e.g., staff performance, degree of integrated depression care, and IT performance).ResultsThe results of our survey demonstrated substantial variation across the practice network of organizational factors pertinent to implementation of evidence-based depression management. Notably, quality improvement capability and IT infrastructure were widespread, but specific application to depression care differed between practices, as did coordination and communication tasks surrounding depression treatment.ConclusionsThe primary care practices in the network that we surveyed are at differing stages in their organization and implementation of evidence-based depression management. Practical surveys such as this may serve to better direct implementation of these quality improvement strategies for depression by improving understanding of the organizational barriers and facilitators that exist within both practices and practice networks. In addition, survey information can inform efforts of individual primary care practices in customizing intervention strategies to improve depression management.

Project description:BackgroundThis study compared TB diagnostic tools and estimated levels of misdiagnosis in a resource-limited setting. Furthermore, we estimated the diagnostic utility of three-TB-associated predictors in an algorithm with and without Direct Ziehl-Neelsen (DZM).Materials and methodsData was obtained from a cross-sectional study in 2011 conducted at Mubende regional referral hospital in Uganda. An individual was included if they presented with a two weeks persistent cough and or lymphadenitis/abscess. 344 samples were analyzed on DZM in Mubende and compared to duplicates analyzed on direct fluorescent microscopy (DFM), growth on solid and liquid media at Makerere University. Clinical variables from a questionnaire and DZM were used to predict TB status in multivariable logistic and Cox proportional hazard models, while optimization and visualization was done with receiver operating characteristics curve and algorithm-charts in Stata, R and Lucid-Charts respectively.ResultsDZM had a sensitivity and specificity of 36.4% (95% CI = 24.9-49.1) and 97.1%(95% CI = 94.4-98.7) compared to DFM which had a sensitivity and specificity of 80.3%(95% CI = 68.7-89.1) and 97.1%(95% CI = 94.4-98.7) respectively. DZM false negative results were associated with patient's HIV status, tobacco smoking and extra-pulmonary tuberculosis. One of the false negative cases was infected with multi drug resistant TB (MDR). The three-predictor screening algorithm with and without DZM classified 50% and 33% of the true cases respectively, while the adjusted algorithm with DZM classified 78% of the true cases.ConclusionThe study supports the concern that using DZM alone risks missing majority of TB cases, in this case we found nearly 60%, of who one was an MDR case. Although adopting DFM would reduce this proportion to 19%, the use of a three-predictor screening algorithm together with DZM was almost as good as DFM alone. It's utility is whoever subject to HIV screening all TB suspects.

Project description:Background and aimsIn our current healthcare situation, burden on healthcare services is increasing, with higher costs and increased utilization. Structured population health management has been developed as an approach to balance quality with increasing costs. This approach identifies sub-populations with comparable health risks, to tailor interventions for those that will benefit the most. Worldwide, the use of routine healthcare data extracted from electronic health registries for risk stratification approaches is increasing. Different risk stratification tools are used on different levels of the healthcare continuum. In this systematic literature review, we aimed to explore which tools are used in primary healthcare settings and assess their performance.MethodsWe performed a systematic literature review of studies applying risk stratification tools with health outcomes in primary care populations. Studies in Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries published in English-language journals were included. Search engines were utilized with keywords, for example, "primary care," "risk stratification," and "model." Risk stratification tools were compared based on different measures: area under the curve (AUC) and C-statistics for dichotomous outcomes and R 2 for continuous outcomes.ResultsThe search provided 4718 articles. Specific election criteria such as primary care populations, generic health utilization outcomes, and routinely collected data sources identified 61 articles, reporting on 31 different models. The three most frequently applied models were the Adjusted Clinical Groups (ACG, n = 23), the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI, n = 19), and the Hierarchical Condition Categories (HCC, n = 7). Most AUC and C-statistic values were above 0.7, with ACG showing slightly improved scores compared with the CCI and HCC (typically between 0.6 and 0.7).ConclusionBased on statistical performance, the validity of the ACG was the highest, followed by the CCI and the HCC. The ACG also appeared to be the most flexible, with the use of different international coding systems and measuring a wider variety of health outcomes.

Dataset Information

Identification, summary and comparison of tools used to measure organizational attributes associated with chronic disease management within primary care settings.

Rationale, aims and objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Identification, summary and comparison of tools used to measure organizational attributes associated with chronic disease management within primary care settings.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets