Dataset Information

Who Will Show? Predicting Missed Visits Among Patients in Routine HIV Primary Care in the United States.

ABSTRACT: Missed HIV medical visits predict poor clinical outcomes. We sought to identify patients at high risk of missing visits. We analyzed 2002-2014 data from six large US HIV clinics. At each visit, we predicted the likelihood of missing the next scheduled visit using demographic, clinical, and patient-reported psychosocial variables. Overall, 10,374 participants contributed 105,628 HIV visits. For 17% of visits, the next scheduled appointment was missed. The strongest predictor of a future missed visit was past-year missed visits. A model with only this predictor had area under the receiver operator curve?=?0.65; defining "high risk" as those with any past-year missed visits had 73% sensitivity and 51% specificity in correctly identifying a future missed visit. Inclusion of other clinical and psychosocial predictors only slightly improved performance. Past visit attendance can identify those at increased risk for future missed visits, allowing for proactive allocation of resources to those at greatest risk.

SUBMITTER: Pence BW

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6330260 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Who Will Show? Predicting Missed Visits Among Patients in Routine HIV Primary Care in the United States.

Pence Brian W BW Bengtson Angela M AM Boswell Stephen S Christopoulos Katerina A KA Crane Heidi M HM Geng Elvin E Keruly Jeanne C JC Mathews W Christopher WC Mugavero Michael J MJ

AIDS and behavior 20190201 2

Missed HIV medical visits predict poor clinical outcomes. We sought to identify patients at high risk of missing visits. We analyzed 2002-2014 data from six large US HIV clinics. At each visit, we predicted the likelihood of missing the next scheduled visit using demographic, clinical, and patient-reported psychosocial variables. Overall, 10,374 participants contributed 105,628 HIV visits. For 17% of visits, the next scheduled appointment was missed. The strongest predictor of a future missed vi ...[more]

PMID: 30006790

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends routine HIV testing in all healthcare settings, but it is unclear how consistently physicians adopt the recommendation. Making the most of each interaction between black physicians and their patients is extremely important to address the HIV health disparities that disproportionately afflict the black community. The goal of this survey-based study was to evaluate the perceptions and practices of black, primary care physicians regarding HIV testing.MethodsA physician survey was administered at the 2010 National Medical Association Annual Convention, via online physician panels, and by email. Physician eligibility criteria: black race; practicing at least 1 year in the US; practice comprised of at least 60% adults and 20% black patients. Contingency tables and ordinary least squares regression were used for comparisons and statistical analyses. A Chi-square test compared percentages of physicians who gave a particular response and a t-test compared the means of values provided by physicians.ResultsPhysicians over-estimated HIV prevalence and believed that HIV is a crisis in the black community, yet reported that only 34% of patients were HIV tested in the past year. Physicians reported that 67% of those patients tested did so due to a physician recommendation. Physicians who were younger, female, obstetricians/gynecologists, and had a higher proportion of black, low-socioeconomic status, and Medicaid patients reported higher testing rates. Most testing was risk-based rather than routine, and three of the five most commonly reported barriers to testing were related to disease stigma and perceived value judgments. Physicians reported that in-office patient informational materials, increased media attention, additional education and training on HIV testing, government mandates requiring routine testing, and accurate pre-packed tests would most help them test more frequently for HIV.ConclusionsIn this sample of black, primary care physicians, HIV testing practices differed according to physician characteristics and practice demographics, and overall reported testing rates were low. More physician education and training around testing guidelines is needed to enable more routine testing, treatment, and long-term management of patients with HIV.

Project description:OBJECTIVES:Policymakers have increasingly focused on emergency department (ED) utilization for primary care-treatable conditions as a potentially avoidable source of rising health care costs. The objective was to determine the association of health insurance type and arrival time, as indicators of limited availability of primary care, with primary care-treatable classification of ED visits. METHODS:This was a retrospective analysis of a nationally representative sample of 241,167 ED visits from the 1997 to 2009 National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Surveys (NHAMCS). Probabilities of ED visits being primary care-treatable were categorized based on the primary International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) code. The association of health insurance type and arrival time was determined with the average probability of the primary diagnosis being primary care-treatable using multivariable linear regression. RESULTS:Compared to privately insured visits, Medicaid visits had a 1.7% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.2% to 2.2%) and uninsured visits a 2.4% (95% CI = 1.9% to 3.0%) higher probability of primary care-treatable classification, while Medicare visits had a 1.4% (95% CI = 0.7% to 2.0%) lower probability during the overall study period. Compared to business hours, weekend visits had a 1.5% (95% CI = 1.0% to 2.0%) higher probability of being primary care-treatable during the overall study period. From 1997 to 2009, the overall adjusted probability of ED visits being primary care-treatable increased by 0.19% (95% CI = 0.10 to 0.28) per year. This probability increased at a rate of 0.52% per year for Medicare visits (95% CI = 0.38% to 0.65%), more than double that of Medicaid visits (0.25% per year, 95% CI = 0.13% to 0.37%). By contrast, there was no significant change from 1997 to 2009 in the average probability of ED visits being primary care-treatable by privately insured (0.05% per year, 95% CI = -0.07 to 0.16) or uninsured (0.00% per year, 95% CI = -0.12 to 0.13) individuals. CONCLUSIONS:These findings add to prior work that implicates insurance type and arrival time in the variation of primary care-treatable ED visits. Although primary care-treatable classification of ED visits was most associated with uninsured or Medicaid visits, this classification increased most rapidly among Medicare visits during the study period.

Project description:BackgroundAlthough many specialists serve as primary care physicians (PCPs), the type of patients they serve, the range of services they provide, and the quality of care they deliver is uncertain.ObjectiveTo describe trends in patient, physician, and visit characteristics, and compare visit-based quality for visits to generalists and specialists self-identified as PCPs.DesignCross-sectional study and time trend analysis.DataNationally representative sample of visits to office-based physicians from the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey, 1997-2010.Main measuresProportions of primary care visits to generalist and specialists, patient characteristics, principal diagnoses, and quality.Key resultsAmong 84,041 visits to self-identified PCPs representing an estimated 4.0 billion visits, 91.5 % were to generalists, 5.9 % were to medical specialists and 2.6 % were to obstetrician/gynecologists. The proportion of PCP visits to generalists increased from 88.4 % in 1997 to 92.4 % in 2010, but decreased for medical specialists from 8.0 % to 4.8 %, p?=?0.04). The proportion of medical specialist visits in which the physician self-identified as the patient's PCP decreased from 30.6 % in 1997 to 9.8 % in 2010 (p?<?0.01). Medical specialist PCPs take care of older patients (mean age 61 years), and dedicate most of their visits to chronic disease management (51.0 %), while generalist PCPs see younger patients (mean age 55.4 years) most commonly for new problems (40.5 %). Obstetrician/gynecologists self-identified as PCPs see younger patients (mean age 38.3 p?<?0.01), primarily for preventive care (54.0 %, p?<?0.01). Quality of care for cardiovascular disease was better in visits to cardiologists than in visits to generalists, but was similar or better in visits to generalists compared to visits to other medical specialists.ConclusionsMedical specialists are less frequently serving as PCPs for their patients over time. Generalist, medical specialist, and obstetrician/gynecologist PCPs serve different primary care roles for different populations. Delivery redesign efforts must account for the evolving role of generalist and specialist PCPs in the delivery of primary care.

Dataset Information

Who Will Show? Predicting Missed Visits Among Patients in Routine HIV Primary Care in the United States.

Publications

Who Will Show? Predicting Missed Visits Among Patients in Routine HIV Primary Care in the United States.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets