Key elements of high-quality primary care for vulnerable elders.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Ganz DA
PROVIDER: S-EPMC2596509 | biostudies-other | 2008 Dec
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundDevelopment has promoted longer and healthier lives, but the rise in the proportion of older adults poses new challenges to health systems. Susceptibilities of older persons resulting from lower knowledge about services availability, health illiteracy, lower income, higher mental decline, or physical limitations need to be identified and monitored to assure the equity and quality of health care. The aim of this study was to develop equity indicators for the Assessing Care of Vulnerable Elders (ACOVE)-3 checklist and perform the first cross-cultural adaptation and validation of this checklist into Portuguese.MethodsA scoping literature review of determinants or indicators of health (in)equity in the care of older people was performed. A total of 5 language experts and 18 health professionals were involved in the development and validation of the equity and quality indicators through expert opinion and focus groups. Data collected from focus groups was analyzed through directed or conventional content analysis. The usefulness of the indicators was assessed by analyzing the clinical records of 30 patients.ResultsThe literature review revealed that there was a worldwide gap concerning equity indicators for older people primary health care. A structured and complete checklist composed of equity and quality indicators was obtained, validated and assessed. A significant number of non-screened quality or equity related potential occurrences that could have been avoided if the proposed indicators were implemented were detected. The percentage of non-registered indicators was 76.6% for quality and 96.7% for equity.ConclusionsApplying the proposed checklist will contribute to improve the monitoring of the clinical situation of vulnerable older people and the planning of medical and social actions directed at this group.
| S-EPMC9256534 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Medication management involving pharmacists and PCPs and empowering patients and caregivers resulted in higher satisfaction and cost savings.
| S-EPMC4985243 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundNo primary practice care model has been shown to be superior in achieving high-quality primary care. We aimed to identify the organizational characteristics of primary care practices that provide high-quality primary care.MethodsWe performed a cross-sectional observational study involving a stratified random sample of 37 primary care practices from 3 regions of Quebec. We recruited 1457 patients who had 1 of 2 chronic care conditions or 1 of 6 episodic care conditions. The main outcome was the overall technical quality score. We measured organizational characteristics by use of a validated questionnaire and the Team Climate Inventory. Statistical analyses were based on multilevel regression modelling.ResultsThe following characteristics were strongly associated with overall technical quality of care score: physician remuneration method (27.0; 95% confidence interval [CI] 19.0-35.0), extent of sharing of administrative resources (7.6; 95% CI 0.8-14.4), presence of allied health professionals (15.3; 95% CI 5.4-25.2) and/or specialist physicians (19.6; 95% CI 8.3-30.9), the presence of mechanisms for maintaining or evaluating competence (7.7; 95% CI 3.0-12.4) and average organizational access to the practice (4.9; 95% CI 2.6-7.2). The number of physicians (1.2; 95% CI 0.6-1.8) and the average Team Climate Inventory score (1.3; 95% CI 0.1-2.5) were modestly associated with high-quality care.InterpretationWe identified a common set of organizational characteristics associated with high-quality primary care. Many of these characteristics are amenable to change through practice-level organizational changes.
| S-EPMC3761041 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Introduction:Despite availability of effective care strategies for dementia, most health care systems are not yet organized or equipped to provide comprehensive family-centered dementia care management. Maximizing Independence at Home-Plus is a promising new model of dementia care coordination being tested in the U.S. through a Health Care Innovation Award funded by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services that may serve as a model to address these delivery gaps, improve outcomes, and lower costs. This report provides an overview of the Health Care Innovation Award aims, study design, and methodology. Methods:This is a prospective, quasi-experimental intervention study of 342 community-living Medicare-Medicaid dual eligibles and Medicare-only beneficiaries with dementia in Maryland. Primary analyses will assess the impact of Maximizing Independence at Home-Plus on risk of nursing home long-term care placement, hospitalization, and health care expenditures (Medicare, Medicaid) at 12, 18 (primary end point), and 24 months, compared to a propensity-matched comparison group. Discussion:The goals of the Maximizing Independence at Home-Plus model are to improve care coordination, ability to remain at home, and life quality for participants and caregivers, while reducing total costs of care for this vulnerable population. This Health Care Innovation Award project will provide timely information on the impact of Maximizing Independence at Home-Plus care coordination model on a variety of outcomes including effects on Medicaid and Medicare expenditures and service utilization. Participant characteristic data, cost savings, and program delivery costs will be analyzed to develop a risk-adjusted payment model to encourage sustainability and facilitate spread.
| S-EPMC5870897 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The effects of high-deductible health plans (HDHPs) on breast cancer diagnosis and treatment among vulnerable populations are unknown. We examined time to first breast cancer diagnostic testing, diagnosis, and chemotherapy among a group of women whose employers switched their insurance coverage from health plans with low deductibles ($500 or less) to plans with high deductibles ($1,000 or more) between 2004 and 2014. Primary subgroups of interest comprised 54,403 low-income and 76,776 high-income women continuously enrolled in low-deductible plans for a year and then up to four years in HDHPs. Matched controls had contemporaneous low-deductible enrollment. Low-income women in HDHPs experienced relative delays of 1.6 months to first breast imaging, 2.7 months to first biopsy, 6.6 months to incident early-stage breast cancer diagnosis, and 8.7 months to first chemotherapy. High-income HDHP members had shorter delays that did not differ significantly from those of their low-income counterparts. HDHP members living in metropolitan, nonmetropolitan, predominantly white, and predominantly nonwhite areas also experienced delayed breast cancer care. Policies may be needed to reduce out-of-pocket spending obligations for breast cancer care.
| S-EPMC7268048 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8118491 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSince 2000, Israel has had a national program for ongoing monitoring of the quality of the primary care services provided by the country's four competing non-profit health plans. Previous research has demonstrated that quality of care has improved substantially since the program's inception and that the program enjoys wide support among health plan managers. However, prior to this study there were anecdotal and journalistic reports of opposition to the program among primary care physicians engaged in direct service delivery; these raised serious questions about the extent of support among physicians nationally.GoalsTo assess how Israeli primary care physicians experience and rate health plan efforts to track and improve the quality of care.MethodThe study population consisted of primary care physicians employed by the health plans who have responsibility for the quality of care of a panel of adult patients. The study team randomly sampled 250 primary-care physicians from each of the four health plans. Of the 1,000 physicians sampled, 884 met the study criteria. Every physician could choose whether to participate in the survey by mail, e-mail, or telephone. The anonymous questionnaire was completed by 605 physicians - 69% of those eligible. The data were weighted to reflect differences in sampling and response rates across health plans.Main findingsThe vast majority of respondents (87%) felt that the monitoring of quality was important and two-thirds (66%) felt that the feedback and subsequent remedial interventions improved medical care to a great extent. Almost three-quarters (71%) supported continuation of the program in an unqualified manner. The physicians with the most positive attitudes to the program were over age 44, independent contract physicians, and either board-certified in internal medicine or without any board-certification (i.e., residents or general practitioners). At the same time, support for the program was widespread even among physicians who are young, board-certified in family medicine, and salaried.Many physicians also reported that various problems had emerged to a great or very great extent: a heavier workload (65%), over-competitiveness (60%), excessive managerial pressure (48%), and distraction from other clinical issues (35%). In addition, there was some criticism of the quality of the measures themselves. Respondents also identified approaches to addressing these problems.ConclusionsThe findings provide perspective on the anecdotal reports of physician opposition to the monitoring program; they may well accurately reflect the views of the small number of physicians directly involved, but they do not reflect the views of primary care physicians as a whole, who are generally quite supportive of the program. At the same time, the study confirms the existence of several perceived problems. Some of these problems, such as excess managerial pressure, can probably best be addressed by the health plans themselves; while others, such as the need to refine the quality indicators, are probably best addressed at the national level. Cooperation between primary care physicians and health plan managers, which has been an essential component of the program's success thus far, can also play an important role in addressing the problems identified.
| S-EPMC3472172 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIdentifying and assessing degree and type of frailty among older persons is a major challenge when targeting high risk populations to identify preventive interventions. The Vulnerable Elders Survey-(VES-13) is a simple instrument to identify frailty defined as risk for death, functional decline or institutionalization.ObjectiveTranslate VES-13 into French and validate it.MethodsThe French version of VES-13 was developed by forward-backward translation of the VES-13 survey instrument. The authors assessed its feasibility, construct validity, and ability to predict the combined outcomes of admission to institution or death at 18?months, in 135 persons over 70?years of age living in the community. Subjects were recruited from three settings: Group 1 - a health prevention center (n =?45); Group 2 - an ambulatory care geriatric clinic (n =?40); and Group 3 - an intermediate care hospital unit (n =?50). The combined outcomes data were recorded by telephone interview with participants or a proxy.ResultsFeasibility of the French version, named Echelle de Vulnérabilité des Ainés-13 or EVA-13, was excellent. The scale classified 5 (11%) persons as vulnerable (score of 3 or more) in Group 1, 23 (58%) in Group 2 and 45 (90%) in Group 3 (p <?0.001) with scores of 0.91 +/-?1.16, 4.27 +/-?3.17 and 6.90 +/-?3.17, respectively (p <?0.001). At follow-up, among the 60 non-vulnerable subjects, 58 (96%) were alive and living at home, whereas 46 (65%) of the 70 vulnerable subjects were alive and living at home (p <?0.001).ConclusionsEVA-13 was determined to be valid and reliable.
| S-EPMC7003319 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to obtain feedback from key stakeholders and end users to identify program strengths and weaknesses to plan for wider dissemination and implementation of the Virtual Acute Care for Elders (Virtual ACE) program, a novel intervention that improves outcomes for older surgical patients.BackgroundVirtual ACE was developed to deliver evidence-based geriatric care without requiring daily presence of a geriatrician. Previous work demonstrated that Virtual ACE increased mobility and decreased delirium rates for surgical patients.MethodsWe conducted semi-structured interviews with 30 key stakeholders (physicians, nurses, hospital leadership, nurse managers, information technology staff, and physical/occupational therapists) involved in the implementation and use of the program.ResultsOur stakeholders indicated that Virtual ACE was extremely empowering for bedside nurses. The program helped nurses identify older patients who were at risk for a difficult postoperative recovery. Virtual ACE also gave them skills to manage complex older patients and more effectively communicate their needs to surgeons and other providers. Nurse managers felt that Virtual ACE helped them allocate limited resources and plan their unit staffing assignments to better manage the needs of older patients. The main criticism was that the Virtual ACE Tracker that displayed patient status was difficult to interpret and could be improved by a better design interface. Stakeholders also felt that program training needed to be improved to accommodate staff turnover.ConclusionsAlthough respondents identified areas for improvement, our stakeholders felt that Virtual ACE empowered them and provided effective tools to improve outcomes for older surgical patients.
| S-EPMC9272911 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Almost 90% of residents living in long-term care facilities have limited mobility which is associated with a loss of ability in activities of daily living, falls, increased risk of serious medical problems such as pressure ulcers, incontinence and a significant decline in health-related quality of life. For health workers caring for residents it may also increase the risk of injury. The effectiveness of rehabilitation to facilitate mobility has been studied with dedicated research assistants or extensively trained staff caregivers; however, few investigators have examined the effectiveness of techniques to encourage mobility by usual caregivers in long-term care facilities.This longitudinal, quasi-experimental study is designed to demonstrate the effect of the sit-to-stand activity carried out by residents in the context of daily care with health care aides. In three intervention facilities health care aides will prompt residents to repeat the sit-to-stand action on two separate occasions during each day and each evening shift as part of daily care routines. In three control facilities residents will receive usual care. Intervention and control facilities are matched on the ownership model (public, private for-profit, voluntary not-for-profit) and facility size. The dose of the mobility intervention is assessed through the use of daily documentation flowsheets in the health record. Resident outcome measures include: 1) the 30-second sit-to-stand test; 2) the Functional Independence Measure; 3) the Health Utilities Index Mark 2 and 3; and, 4) the Quality of Life - Alzheimer's Disease.There are several compelling reasons for this study: the widespread prevalence of limited mobility in this population; the rapid decline in mobility after admission to a long-term care facility; the importance of mobility to quality of life; the increased time (and therefore cost) required to care for residents with limited mobility; and, the increased risk of injury for health workers caring for residents who are unable to stand. The importance of these issues is magnified when considering the increasing number of people living in long-term care facilities and an aging population.This clinical trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (trial registration number: NCT01474616).
| S-EPMC3264506 | biostudies-literature