How to Identify Team-based Primary Care in the United States Using Medicare Data.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
Studying team-based primary care using 100% national outpatient Medicare data is not feasible, due to limitations in the availability of this dataset to researchers.Methods
We assessed whether analyses using different sets of Medicare data can produce results similar to those from analyses using 100% data from an entire state, in identifying primary care teams through social network analysis. First, we used data from 100% Medicare beneficiaries, restricted to those within a primary care services area (PCSA), to identify primary care teams. Second, we used data from a 20% sample of Medicare beneficiaries and defined shared care by 2 providers using 2 different cutoffs for the minimum required number of shared patients, to identify primary care teams.Results
The team practices identified with social network analysis using the 20% sample and a cutoff of 6 patients shared between 2 primary care providers had good agreement with team practices identified using statewide data (F measure: 90.9%). Use of 100% data within a small area geographic boundary, such as PCSAs, had an F measure of 83.4%. The percent of practices identified from these datasets that coincided with practices identified from statewide data were 86% versus 100%, respectively.Conclusions
Depending on specific study purposes, researchers could use either 100% data from Medicare beneficiaries in randomly selected PCSAs, or data from a 20% national sample of Medicare beneficiaries to study team-based primary care in the United States.
SUBMITTER: Kuo YF
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7855067 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BACKGROUND:It is unclear whether Medicare data can be used to identify type and degree of collaboration between primary care providers (PCPs) [medical doctors (MDs), nurse practitioners, and physician assistants] in a team care model. METHODS:We surveyed 63 primary care practices in Texas and linked the survey results to 2015 100% Medicare data. We identified PCP dyads of 2 providers in Medicare data and compared the results to those from our survey. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value (PPV) of dyads in Medicare data at different threshold numbers of shared patients were reported. We also identified PCPs who work in the same practice by Social Network Analysis (SNA) of Medicare data and compared the results to the surveys. RESULTS:With a cutoff of sharing at least 30 patients, the sensitivity of identifying dyads was 27.8%, specificity was 91.7%, and PPV 72.2%. The PPV was higher for MD-nurse practitioner/physician assistant pairs (84.4%) than for MD-MD pairs (61.5%). At the same cutoff, 90% of PCPs identified in a practice from the survey were also identified by SNA in the corresponding practice. In 5 of 8 surveyed practices with at least 3 PCPs, about ?20% PCPs identified in the practices by SNA of Medicare data were not identified in the survey. CONCLUSIONS:Medicare data can be used to identify shared care with low sensitivity and high PPV. Community discovery from Medicare data provided good agreement in identifying members of practices. Adapting network analyses in different contexts needs more validation studies.
| S-EPMC6791761 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundExisting evidence points to substantial gaps in detecting mild cognitive impairment in primary care but is based on limited or self-reported data. The recent emergence of disease-modifying treatments for the Alzheimer's disease, the most common etiology of mild cognitive impairment, calls for a systematic assessment of detection rates in primary care.ObjectivesThe current study aims to examine detection rates for mild cognitive impairment among primary care clinicians and practices in the United States using Medicare claims and encounter data.DesignObservational study.SettingMedicare administrative data.ParticipantsThe study sample includes a total of 226,756 primary care clinicians and 54,597 practices that had at least 25 patients aged 65 or older, who were enrolled in Medicare fee-for-service or a Medicare Advantage plan between 2017 and 2019.MeasurementsThe detection rate for mild cognitive impairment is assessed as the ratio between the observed diagnosis rate of a clinician or practice as documented in the data, and the expected rate based on a predictive model.ResultsThe average detection rates for mild cognitive impairment is 0.08 (interquartile range=0.00-0.02) for both clinicians and practices, suggesting that only about 8% of expected cases were diagnosed on average. Only 0.1% of clinicians and practices had diagnosis rates within the expected range.ConclusionsMild cognitive impairment is vastly underdiagnosed, pointing to an urgent need to improve early detection in primary care.
| S-EPMC10995024 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAttributes of teams could affect the quality of care delivered in primary care. The aim of this study was to systematically review studies conducted within the UK NHS primary care that have measured team climate using the Team Climate Inventory (TCI), and to describe, if reported, the relationship between the TCI and measures of quality of care.FindingsThe databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL were searched. The reference lists of included article were checked and one relevant journal was hand-searched. Eight papers were included. Three studies used a random sample; the remaining five used convenience or purposive samples. Six studies were cross sectional surveys, whilst two were before and after studies. Four studies examined the relationship between team climate and quality of care. Only one study found a positive association between team climate and higher quality care in patients with diabetes, positive patient satisfaction and self-reported effectiveness.ConclusionWhile the TCI has been used to measure team attributes in primary care settings in the UK it is difficult to generalise from these data. A small number of studies reported higher TCI scores being associated with only certain aspects of quality of care; reasons for the pattern of association are unclear. There are a number of methodological challenges to conducting such studies in routine service settings. Further research is needed in order to understand how to measure team functioning in relation to quality of care.
| S-EPMC2775031 | biostudies-literature
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.
| S-EPMC7255778 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The proposed ONE TEAM Study is an 18-month, cluster randomized controlled trial. This study will use a sequential multiple assignment randomized trial (SMART) design with a second randomization for the intervention group using a dynamic treatment regimen approach. The investigators propose to randomize 800 adults with newly-diagnosed selected cancers treated with curative intent (breast, prostate, colorectal, endometrial, non-small cell lung, and endometrial) and with >1 selected cardiovascular disease (CVD) comorbidity (hypertension, type 2 diabetes mellitus, hypercholesterolemia). Participants will be enrolled through Duke Cancer Institute and two community-based oncology practices, both settings serving socio-demographically diverse populations. The unit of randomization will be the PCP clinic; there will be ~80 PCP clinics across North Carolina involved in the study. The overarching goals of this study are to improve chronic disease management and communication among cancer survivors by engaging PCPs as active members of the cancer care team and reframing the message to cancer survivors and providers.
A diversity supplement with retrospective and qualitative components has been added to abstract older adults with solid tumors who underwent cancer surgery at DUHS. Aims include (1) to estimate the prevalence of cardiovascular complications ≤90 postoperative days among older adults with solid tumors undergoing surgery, and its association with care coordination between surgical providers and PCPs ; (2) to develop a risk index for cardiovascular complications ≤90 days of surgery among older adult patients with a solid tumor; and (3) to Assess experience and perceptions of PCPs on care coordination with surgical providers of older adults with a solid tumor following cancer surgery.
| 2329282 | ecrin-mdr-crc
Project description:Weeds can cause great economic and ecological harm to ecosystems. Despite their importance, comparisons of the taxonomy and traits of successful weeds often focus on a few specific comparisons - for example, introduced versus native weeds. We used publicly available inventories of US plant species to make comprehensive comparisons of the factors that underlie weediness. We quantitatively examined taxonomy to determine if certain genera are overrepresented by introduced, weedy or herbicide-resistant species, and we compared phenotypic traits of weeds to those of nonweeds, whether introduced or native. We uncovered genera that have more weeds and introduced species than expected by chance and plant families that have more herbicide-resistant species than expected by chance. Certain traits, generally related to fast reproduction, were more likely to be associated with weedy plants regardless of species' origins. We also found stress tolerance traits associated with either native or introduced weeds compared with native or introduced nonweeds. Weeds and introduced species have significantly smaller genomes than nonweeds and native species. These results support trends for weedy plants reported from other floras, suggest that native and introduced weeds have different stress adaptations, and provide a comprehensive survey of trends across weeds within the USA.
| S-EPMC4235316 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeTo evaluate trends in glaucoma procedures in the United States Medicare population and to evaluate which physicians are performing newer procedures.DesignAnalysis of publicly available claims and payment data.ParticipantsSurgeons and beneficiaries enrolled in United States Medicare between 1994 and 2017.MethodsData regarding payments to physicians by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) were downloaded for the years 2012 through 2017. Data regarding claims to CMS by physicians were requested and processed between 1994 and 2017. Procedure counts from both data sets then were normalized for changes in the Medicare population, with 1995 as the baseline. The normalized volumes of procedures over time were visualized, as were geographic distributions of surgeons and their volume of procedures.Main outcome measuresTrends in procedure counts over time, geographic distribution of surgeons, and their volume of procedures.ResultsThe number of trabeculectomies continues to decline and now is similar to the number of tubes. Use of the relatively new trabecular bypass shunts has increased rapidly. Surgeons performing these procedures are less likely to be performing traditional glaucoma surgeries as well. The number of laser-based cyclodestruction procedures increased after introduction of the endoscopic technique and again with the introduction of so-called micropulse procedures. The procedure counts obtained with physician payment data consistently are lower than those from claims data given the limitations of the payment data.ConclusionsGlaucoma practice patterns change each time a new device or procedure is introduced. Collectively, the use of new microinvasive glaucoma surgery procedures has increased rapidly such that they now account for a significant majority of glaucoma surgeries. Given the almost complete lack of comparative data to inform surgeon choices regarding these procedures, it will be important that randomized studies are carried out to fill this gap.
| S-EPMC8322150 | biostudies-literature
Project description:INTRODUCTION:Musculoskeletal conditions disproportionately affect the lives of aging adults. We aimed to examine the literature using Medicare claims data in the United States for musculoskeletal surgical procedures. METHODS:Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis guidelines, we searched the PubMed and Medline databases for peer-reviewed articles published between 1990 and 2015. We included the studies that (1) reported primary Medicare claims data use, (2) involved musculoskeletal surgery, and (3) were original peer-reviewed studies. We abstracted the types of surgical procedure and aims, and evaluated outcomes, and strengths and weaknesses of each included article. We assessed the quality of included articles with Newcastle Ottawa Assessment Scale. RESULTS:The literature search returned 3,233 articles, of which 119 met our inclusion criteria. These studies focused on different outcomes: epidemiology and treatment variation (26), cost of care (15), hospital-level analyses (30), health outcomes (31), the validity and accuracy of Medicare claims data (4), disparities in health care (10), and policy evaluation (3). DISCUSSION:Medicare claims data provide a unique way for researchers to study a nationally representative patient population longitudinally. A significant limitation of using claims data has been a lack of granularity on defining severity of a condition. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE:Therapeutic level III.
| S-EPMC6604860 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo introduce the new Team-based care Evaluation and Adoption Model (TEAM) Framework.Quality of evidenceThe initial TEAM Framework was derived from a series of reviews and consultations with academic and clinical experts. In a parallel process, team-based primary and community care evaluation in Canada was assessed through a structured review of academic literature, followed by a review of policy literature of existing primary care evaluation frameworks.Main messageThe review of academic articles alongside an analysis of policy documents and existing evaluation frameworks in primary care resulted in the development of the 10-dimension TEAM Framework.ConclusionPrimary care transformation requires evaluation over time. The TEAM Framework provides a comprehensive framework for assessing evidence needed to support short- and long-term actionable improvements for team-based primary and community care in Canada. This framework will inform the development of an evaluation tool kit for primary care teams.
| S-EPMC8670636 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundHealth services researchers have studied how care from oncologists impacts treatment and outcomes for cancer patients. These studies frequently identify physician specialty using files from the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) or the American Medical Association (AMA). The completeness of the CMS data resources, individually or combined, to identify oncologists is unknown. This study assessed the sensitivity of CMS data to capture oncologists included in the AMA Physician Masterfile.MethodsOncologists were identified from three CMS data resources: physician claims, the National Plan and Provider Enumeration System Registry, and the Medicare Data on Provider Practice and Specialty file. CMS files and AMA data were linked using a unique physician identifier. Sensitivity to identify any oncologists, radiation oncologists (ROs), surgical oncologists (SOs), and medical oncologists (MOs) was calculated for individual and combined CMS files. For oncologists in the AMA data not identified as oncologists in the CMS data, their CMS specialty was assessed.ResultsIndividual CMS files each captured approximately 83% of the 17 934 oncologists in the AMA Masterfile; combined CMS files captured 90.4%. By specialty, combined CMS data captured 98.2% of ROs, 89.3% of MOs, and 70.1% of SOs. For ROs and SOs in the AMA data not identified as oncologists in the CMS data, their CMS specialty was usually similar to the AMA subspecialty; ROs were radiologists and SOs were surgeons.ConclusionUsing combined files from CMS identified most ROs and MOs found in the AMA, but not most SOs. Determining whether to use the AMA data or CMS files for a particular research project will depend on the specific research question and the type of oncologist included in the study.
| S-EPMC7868031 | biostudies-literature