Dataset Information

Association of physician payment model and team-based care with timely access in primary care: a population-based cross-sectional study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

It is unclear how patient-reported access to primary care differs by physician payment model and participation in team-based care. We examined the association between timely and after-hours access to primary care and physician payment model and participation in team-based care, and sought to assess how access varied by patient characteristics.

Methods

We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of adult (age ? 16 yr) Ontarians who responded to the Ontario Health Care Experience Survey between January 2013 and September 2015, reported having a primary care provider and agreed to have their responses linked to health administrative data. Access measures included the proportion of respondents who reported same-day or next-day access when sick, satisfaction with time to appointment when sick, telephone access and knowledge of an after-hours clinic. We tested the association between practice model and measures of access using logistic regression after stratifying for rurality.

Results

A total of 33 665 respondents met our inclusion criteria. In big cities, respondents in team and nonteam capitation models were less likely to report same-day or next-day access when sick than respondents in enhanced fee-for-service models (team capitation 43%, adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.88, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.79-0.98; nonteam capitation 39%, adjusted OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.70-0.87; enhanced fee-for-service 46% [reference]). Respondents in team and nonteam capitation models were more likely than those in enhanced fee-for-service models to report that their provider had an after-hours clinic (team capitation 59%, adjusted OR 2.59, 95% CI 2.39-2.81; nonteam capitation 51%, adjusted OR 1.90, 95% CI 1.76-2.04; enhanced fee-for service 34% [reference]). Patterns were similar for respondents in small towns. There was minimal to no difference by model for satisfaction with time to appointment or telephone access.

Interpretation

In our setting, there was an association between some types of access to primary care and physician payment model and team-based care, but the direction was not consistent. Different measures of timely access are needed to understand health care system performance.

SUBMITTER: Kiran T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7207031 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Apr-Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Association of physician payment model and team-based care with timely access in primary care: a population-based cross-sectional study.

Kiran Tara T Green Michael E ME DeWit Yvonne Y Khan Shahriar S Schultz Sue S Kopp Alexander A Yeritsyan Naira N Wissam Haj Ali HA Glazier Richard H RH

CMAJ open 20200401 2

<h4>Background</h4>It is unclear how patient-reported access to primary care differs by physician payment model and participation in team-based care. We examined the association between timely and after-hours access to primary care and physician payment model and participation in team-based care, and sought to assess how access varied by patient characteristics.<h4>Methods</h4>We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of adult (age ≥ 16 yr) Ontarians who responded to the Ontario Health Care Experi ...[more]

PMID: 32381684

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundOutpatient follow-up has been a key intervention point in addressing gaps in care after hospital discharge. We sought to estimate the association between enrolment in new team-based primary care practices and 30-day postdischarge physician follow-up among older patients and patients with chronic illnesses who were admitted to hospital in Quebec, Canada.MethodsPatients were selected into this cohort if a primary care physician enrolled them as a "vulnerable patient" between November 2002 and January 2005. Data for this analysis included province-wide health insurance claims for inpatient and outpatient services delivered between November 2002 and January 2009 in Quebec. The primary analysis examined time to the first outpatient postdischarge follow-up service provided by either a primary care physician or a medical specialist. We used marginal structural models to estimate adjusted rates of follow-up with a primary care physician or with a medical specialist by primary care delivery models.ResultsWe extracted billing data for 312 377 patients that represented 620 656 index admissions for any cause from 2002 to 2009. Rates of 30-day follow-up were 374 visits to primary care physicians and 422 visits to medical specialists per 1000 discharges. Rates of primary care physician follow-up were similar across primary care delivery models, except for patients with very high morbidity; these patients had significantly higher rates of follow-up with a primary care physician if they were enrolled in team-based primary care practices (30-d rate difference [RD] 13.3 more follow-up visits per 1000 discharges, 95% confidence interval [CI] 6.8 to 19.8). Rates of follow-up with a medical specialist were lower among patients enrolled in team-based practices, particularly within 15 days of hospital discharge (15-d RD 25.1 fewer follow-up visits per 1000 discharges, 95% CI 21.1 to 29.1).InterpretationOur study found lower rates of postdischarge follow-up with a medical specialist among older patients and patients with chronic illness who were enrolled in team-based primary care practices compared with those enrolled in traditional primary care practices. Future research is needed to better understand the role of primary health care service organization in improving acute postdischarge care.

Project description:BackgroundThe province of British Columbia is facing a family physician shortage despite consistent increases in the number of physicians per capita and ongoing reforms to address the shortage. We identify physicians' priorities for structural reform, describe the alignment of those priorities with BC's suite of reforms and compare responses between established physicians and those new to practice; we also assessed rates of burnout.MethodsAll family physicians credentialed within Vancouver Coastal Health in 2018 were invited to participate in a cross-sectional survey. Respondents were asked about their practice model and characteristics, demographics, level of burnout and reform priorities. We used χ2 tests and multivariable logistic regression to investigate associations between personal and practice characteristics, burnout and reform priorities.ResultsOf the 1017 family physicians invited to participate, 525 (51.6%) responded. Of these, 399 (76.0%) indicated a need for fundamental change to how primary care is delivered; 244 (46.4%) would prefer to be a clinic employee rather than a small business owner. Other reform priorities included options to practise in a team (stated as very important by 69.6% of respondents), direct funding for team roles (66.7%), direct clinic funding (59.8%), part-time work options (64.7%), and ability to take planned vacations and parental leave (81.1%). The importance of individual reform priorities varied based on the participants' model of practice, location and years in practice. Of respondents, 108 (21.1%) had experienced a high level of burnout.InterpretationAlmost half of family physicians would prefer to be employees rather than small business owners and over 20% reported a high level of burnout. Practice models offering direct employment model have very limited availability and are not included in the current suite of reforms in BC, potentially pulling physicians away from community-based family medicine and into other models or specialties.

Project description:BACKGROUND:The quality of patient-physician discussions about chronic kidney disease (CKD) in primary care has not been studied previously. STUDY DESIGN:Cross-sectional study. SETTINGS & PARTICIPANTS:We audiotaped encounters between 236 patients with hypertension and their primary care physicians (n = 40). PREDICTORS:Patient, physician, and encounter characteristics. OUTCOMES & MEASUREMENTS:We described the occurrence and characteristics (content, use of technical terms, and physician assessment of patient comprehension of new concepts) of CKD discussions. We assessed patient and physician characteristics associated with CKD discussion occurrence. RESULTS:Many patients (mean age, 59 years) had uncontrolled hypertension (51%), diabetes (44%), and/or 3 or more comorbid conditions (51%). Most primary care physicians practiced (52%) fewer than 10 years. CKD discussions occurred in few (26%; n = 61) encounters, with content focused on laboratory assessment (89%), risk-factor treatment (28%), and causes (26%) of CKD. In encounters that included a CKD discussion, physicians used technical terms (28%; n = 17) and rarely assessed patients' comprehension (2%; n = 1). CKD discussions were statistically significantly less common in visits of patients with some (vs no) college education (OR, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.09-0.56), with 3 or more (vs fewer) comorbid conditions (OR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.25-0.96), and who saw physicians with more (vs fewer) than 10 years of practice experience (OR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.21-0.80). CKD discussions were more common during longer encounters (OR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.04-1.65) and encounters in which diabetes was (vs was not) discussed (OR, 2.87; 95% CI, 1.22-6.77). LIMITATIONS:Generalizability of our findings may be limited. CONCLUSIONS:Patient-physician discussions about CKD in high-risk primary care patients were infrequent. Physicians used technical terms and infrequently assessed patients' understanding of new CKD concepts. Efforts to improve the frequency and content of patient-physician CKD discussions in primary care could improve patients' clinical outcomes.

Project description:BackgroundPrimary care physician (PCP) burnout is prevalent and on the rise. Physician burnout may negatively affect patient experience of care.ObjectiveTo identify the direct impact of PCP burnout on patient experience in various domains of care.DesignA cross-sectional observational study using physician well-being (PWB) surveys collected in 2016-2017, linked to responses from patient experience of care surveys. Patient demographics and practice characteristics were derived from the electronic health record. Linked data were analyzed at the physician level.SettingA large non-profit multi-specialty ambulatory healthcare organization in northern California.ParticipantsA total of 244 physicians practicing internal medicine or family medicine who responded to the PWB survey (response rate 72%), and 30,701 completed experience surveys from patients seeing these physicians.MeasurementsBurnout was measured with a validated single-item question with a 5-point scale ranging from (1) enjoy work to (5) completely burned out and seeking help. Patient experience of patient-provider communication, access, and overall rating of provider was measured with Clinician & Group Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers & Systems (CG-CAHPS) survey. Patient experience scores (0-100 scale) were adjusted for age, gender, race/ethnicity, and English proficiency.ResultsPhysician burnout had a negative impact on patient-reported experience of patient-provider communication but not on access or overall rating of providers. A one-level increase in burnout was associated with 0.43 decrease in adjusted patient-provider communication experience score (P < 0.01).LimitationsData came from a single large healthcare organization. Patterns may differ for small- and mid-sized practices.ConclusionPhysician burnout adversely affects patient-provider communication in primary care visits. Efforts to improve physician work environments could have a meaningful positive impact on patient experience as well as physician well-being.

Project description:ImportanceThe Medicare Merit-based Incentive Payment System (MIPS) influences reimbursement for hundreds of thousands of US physicians, but little is known about whether program performance accurately captures the quality of care they provide.ObjectiveTo examine whether primary care physicians' MIPS scores are associated with performance on process and outcome measures.Design, setting, and participantsCross-sectional study of 80 246 US primary care physicians participating in the MIPS program in 2019.ExposuresMIPS score.Main outcomes and measuresThe association between physician MIPS scores and performance on 5 unadjusted process measures, 6 adjusted outcome measures, and a composite outcome measure.ResultsThe study population included 3.4 million patients attributed to 80 246 primary care physicians, including 4773 physicians with low MIPS scores (≤30), 6151 physicians with medium MIPS scores (>30-75), and 69 322 physicians with high MIPS scores (>75). Compared with physicians with high MIPS scores, physicians with low MIPS scores had significantly worse mean performance on 3 of 5 process measures: diabetic eye examinations (56.1% vs 63.2%; difference, -7.1 percentage points [95% CI, -8.0 to -6.2]; P < .001), diabetic HbA1c screening (84.6% vs 89.4%; difference, -4.8 percentage points [95% CI, -5.4 to -4.2]; P < .001), and mammography screening (58.2% vs 70.4%; difference, -12.2 percentage points [95% CI, -13.1 to -11.4]; P < .001) but significantly better mean performance on rates of influenza vaccination (78.0% vs 76.8%; difference, 1.2 percentage points [95% CI, 0.0 to 2.5]; P = .045] and tobacco screening (95.0% vs 94.1%; difference, 0.9 percentage points [95% CI, 0.3 to 1.5]; P = .001). MIPS scores were inconsistently associated with risk-adjusted patient outcomes: compared with physicians with high MIPS scores, physicians with low MIPS scores had significantly better mean performance on 1 outcome (307.6 vs 316.4 emergency department visits per 1000 patients; difference, -8.9 [95% CI, -13.7 to -4.1]; P < .001), worse performance on 1 outcome (255.4 vs 225.2 all-cause hospitalizations per 1000 patients; difference, 30.2 [95% CI, 24.8 to 35.7]; P < .001), and did not have significantly different performance on 4 ambulatory care-sensitive admission outcomes. Nineteen percent of physicians with low MIPS scores had composite outcomes performance in the top quintile, while 21% of physicians with high MIPS scores had outcomes in the bottom quintile. Physicians with low MIPS scores but superior outcomes cared for more medically complex and socially vulnerable patients, compared with physicians with low MIPS scores and poor outcomes.Conclusions and relevanceAmong US primary care physicians in 2019, MIPS scores were inconsistently associated with performance on process and outcome measures. These findings suggest that the MIPS program may be ineffective at measuring and incentivizing quality improvement among US physicians.

Dataset Information

Association of physician payment model and team-based care with timely access in primary care: a population-based cross-sectional study.

Background

Methods

Results

Interpretation

Publications

Association of physician payment model and team-based care with timely access in primary care: a population-based cross-sectional study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets