Not perfect, but better: primary care providers' experiences with electronic referrals in a safety net health system.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Kim Y
PROVIDER: S-EPMC2669877 | biostudies-other | 2009 May
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other
Similar Datasets
Project description:With the growing number of survivors of breast cancer outpacing the capacity of oncology providers, there is pressure to transition patients back to primary care. Primary care providers (PCPs) working in safety-net settings may have less experience treating survivors, and little is known about their knowledge and views on survivorship care. The current study was performed to determine the knowledge, attitudes, and confidence of PCPs in the safety net at delivering care to survivors of breast cancer.A modified version of the National Cancer Institute's Survey of Physician Attitudes Regarding Care of Cancer Survivors was given to providers at 2 county hospitals and 5 associated clinics (59 providers). Focus groups were held to understand barriers to survivorship care.Although the majority of providers believed PCPs have the skills necessary to provide cancer-related follow-up, the vast majority were not comfortable providing these services themselves. Providers were adherent to American Society of Clinical Oncology recommendations for mammography (98%) and physical examination (87%); less than one-third were guideline-concordant for laboratory testing and only 6 providers (10%) met all recommendations. PCPs universally requested additional training on clinical guidelines and the provision of written survivorship care plans before transfer. Concerns voiced in qualitative sessions included unfamiliarity with the management of endocrine therapy and confusion regarding who would be responsible for certain aspects of care.Safety-net providers currently lack knowledge of and confidence in providing survivorship care to patients with breast cancer. Opportunities exist for additional training in evidence-based guidelines and improved coordination of care between PCPs and oncology specialists.
| S-EPMC4393343 | biostudies-other
Project description:ObjectiveTo examine referral by primary care providers (PCPs) of preschool children with obesity (≥95th percentile for body mass index [BMI]) to a weight management intervention when offered through a randomized clinical trial (RCT), and identify reasons for not referring children.Study designIn phase I, 3 experts in obesity, psychology, and nutrition completed an open card sort and classified PCPs' reasons for declining referral into groups based on similarity of reasons. Categories were then defined and labeled. In phase II, 2 independent sorters placed each decline into 1 of the categories defined in phase I.ResultsPCPs referred 78% of eligible children to the RCT. Compared with children declined for referral, referred children had a significantly higher weight (48.4 lb vs 46.1 lb; P < .001) and BMI percentile (97.6 vs 97.0; P < .001). Eleven categories for decline were identified in phase I. In phase II, excellent reliability was obtained between each independent sorter and the phase I categories, and also between the 2 independent sorters (κ values, 0.72-1.0). The most common reason for declining was "family not a good fit" (23.6%), followed by "doesn't believe weight is a problem" (13.9%), "family would not be interested" (12%), and "doesn't believe measurement is accurate" (11.5%). Appropriately, exclusionary criteria of the RCT was a reason as well (11.8%).ConclusionThe availability of weight management for preschoolers through RCTs appeared to overcome barriers of resources, time, and credible treatment cited in previous studies. However, concerns about the family's response or interest in a weight management program remained barriers, as did PCPs' perceptions about obesity in young children.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov:NCT01546727.
| S-EPMC5037027 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundGuideline recommendations to reduce prescription opioid misuse among patients with chronic noncancer pain include the routine use of urine toxicology tests for high-risk patients. Yet little is known about how the implementation of urine toxicology tests among patients with co-occurring chronic noncancer pain and substance use impacts primary care providers' management of misuse. Clinicians' perspectives on the benefits and challenges of implementing urine toxicology tests in the monitoring of opioid misuse and substance use in safety net health care settings are presented in this paper.MethodsTwenty-three primary care providers from 6 safety net health care settings whose patients had a diagnosis of co-occurring chronic noncancer pain and substance use were interviewed. Interviews were transcribed, coded, and analyzed using grounded theory methodology.ResultsThe benefits of implementing urine toxicology tests for primary care providers included less reliance on intuition to assess for misuse and the ability to identify unknown opioid misuse and/or substance use. The challenges of implementing urine toxicology tests included insufficient education and training about how to interpret and implement tests, and a lack of clarity on how and when to act on tests that indicated misuse and/or substance use.ConclusionsThese data suggest that primary care clinicians' lack of education and training to interpret and implement urine toxicology tests may impact their management of patient opioid misuse and/or substance use. Clinicians may benefit from additional education and training about the clinical implementation and use of urine toxicology tests. Additional research is needed on how primary care providers implementation and use of urine toxicology tests impacts chronic noncancer pain management in primary care and safety net health care settings among patients with co-occurring chronic non cancer pain and substance use.
| S-EPMC4823143 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo identify impacts of different survey methodologies assessing primary care physicians' (PCPs') experiences with electronic health records (EHRs), we compared three surveys: the 2022 Continuous Certification Questionnaire (CCQ) from the American Board of Family Medicine, the 2022 University of California San Francisco (UCSF) Physician Health IT Survey, and the 2021 National Electronic Health Records Survey (NEHRS).Materials and methodsWe evaluated differences between survey pairs using Rao-Scott corrected chi-square tests, which account for weighting.ResultsCCQ received 3991 responses from PCPs (100% response rate), UCSF received 1375 (3.6% response rate), and NEHRS received 858 (18.2% response rate). Substantial, statistically significant differences in demographics were detected across the surveys. CCQ respondents were younger and more likely to work in a health system; NEHRS respondents were more likely to work in private practice; and UCSF respondents disproportionately practiced in larger academic settings. Many EHR experience indicators were similar between CCQ and NEHRS, but CCQ respondents reported higher documentation burden.DiscussionThe UCSF approach is unlikely to supply reliable data. Significant demographic differences between CCQ and NEHRS raise response bias concerns, and while there were similarities in some reported EHR experiences, there were important, significant differences.ConclusionFederal EHR policy monitoring and maintenance require reliable data. This test of existing and alternative sources suggest that diversified data sources are necessary to understand physicians' experiences with EHRs and interoperability. Comprehensive surveys administered by specialty boards have the potential to contribute to these efforts, since they are likely to be free of response bias.
| S-EPMC11258403 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate safety-net clinics' responses to a novel community-wide Patient-Centered Medical Home (PCMH) financial incentive program in post-Katrina New Orleans.Data sources/study settingBetween June 2008 and June 2010, we studied 50 primary care clinics in New Orleans receiving federal funds to expand services and improve care delivery.Study designMultiwave, longitudinal, observational study of a local safety-net primary care system.Data collectionClinic-level data from a semiannual survey of clinic leaders (89.3 percent response rate), augmented by administrative records.Principal findingsOverall, 62 percent of the clinics responded to financial incentives by achieving PCMH recognition from the National Committee on Quality Assurance (NCQA). Higher patient volume, higher baseline PCMH scores, and type of ownership were significant predictors of achieving NCQA recognition. The steepest increase in adoption of PCMH processes occurred among clinics achieving the highest, Level 3, NCQA recognition. Following NCQA recognition, 88.9 percent stabilized or increased their use of PCMH processes, although several specific PCMH processes had very low rates of adoption overall.ConclusionsFindings demonstrate that widespread PCMH implementation is possible in a safety-net environment when external financial incentives are aligned with the goal of practice innovation.
| S-EPMC3922467 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo identify barriers and opportunities for quality diabetes care in safety net practices.MethodsIn 3 federally qualified health centers and 1 free clinic, 19 primary care clinicians profiled patient and visit characteristics and quality of care measures for 181 consecutive visits by adult type 2 diabetic patients. Open-ended questions assessed patient and clinician perception of barriers to diabetes care and patient report of enabling factors. A multidisciplinary team identified themes from open-ended responses. Logistic regression analyses assessed the association of the identified barriers/enablers with 2 measures of quality care: glycosylated hemoglobin and prophylactic aspirin use.ResultsRanked barriers noted by patients included adherence (40%), financial/insurance (23%), and psychosocial (13%) factors. Clinicians ranked systemic factors, including financial/ insurance (32%) and cultural/psychosocial (29%) factors, as important to adherence (29%) in determining quality diabetes care. Patients reported dietary and medical adherence (37%) and family/health care worker support (17%) as helpful factors. Among 175 patients with available data, glycosylated hemoglobin levels were associated with patient report of financial/insurance factors both as a barrier when visits and medications were unaffordable and as an opportunity when free or low-cost medications and services were provided. Patients' adherence with aspirin prophylaxis was strongly associated with African American race, prior prescription of aspirin and distribution of aspirin at the practice site (p<.001).ConclusionsPatients were less likely than clinicians to identify systemic and contextual factors contributing to poor diabetes care. From the front line's perspective, enabling patient self-management and systemic support is a target for improving diabetes care in safety net practices.
| S-EPMC4457369 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPrimary care providers (PCPs) are critical to the provision of comprehensive care for cancer survivors, yet there is very little data on the practices and quality of survivorship care occurring in safety net primary care settings. This study aimed to assess the knowledge and attitudes of PCPs and preferences for care models for breast and colon cancer survivors in a safety net health network.MethodsA modified National Cancer Institute Survey of Physician Attitudes Regarding the Care of Cancer Survivors was sent electronically to 220 PCPs in 12 primary care clinics in the San Francisco Health Network affiliated with Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital and Trauma Center.ResultsThe response rate was 50% (110/220). About half of PCPs strongly/somewhat agreed (vs. strongly/somewhat disagreed) that PCPs have the knowledge needed to provide follow-up care related to breast (50%) and colon cancer (54%). Most providers (93%) correctly reported recommended frequency of mammography, however, frequency of blood tests and other imaging surveillance were not as well recognized for breast or colon cancer. Recognition of long-term side effects of chemotherapy drugs ranged from 12% for oxaliplatin to 44% for doxorubicin. Only 33% of providers reported receiving any survivorship training. The most preferred model for survivorship care was shared care model (40%).ConclusionsSafety net PCPs prefer a shared care model for care of cancer survivors but are limited by lack of training, poor communication, and poor delineation of roles. Patient-centered survivorship care can be improved through effective oncologist-PCP-patient partnerships and coordination.
| S-EPMC7396282 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Safety-net health systems are a primary source of care for socioeconomically disadvantaged individuals who may be eligible for HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) and are priority groups under the Ending the HIV Epidemic (EHE) initiative. Nevertheless, little evidence is available about barriers to PrEP implementation in safety-net settings. We aimed to assess the association between PrEP knowledge and prescribing practices, and to ascertain unmet knowledge needs to implement PrEP. In 2019, we surveyed primary care providers (PCPs) in a safety-net health system that serves an EHE priority jurisdiction located in North Texas. Our questionnaire ascertained self-reported prescribing practices, knowledge, and training needs related to PrEP. We used penalized logistic regression to estimate odds ratio (OR) and 95% posterior limits (PL) for the association between provider self-rated knowledge of PrEP and PrEP prescribing. Our study population comprised 62 primary care providers, of whom 61% were female, 60% were non-Hispanic White, 76% were physicians (76%), 57% had ≥ 10 years of practice experience, 45% reported low self-rated PrEP knowledge, and 35% prescribed PrEP in the past year. Providers with low PrEP knowledge had 69% lower odds of prescribing PrEP within the past year (OR = 0.31, 95% PL: 0.12, 0.82). Eligibility for PrEP, side effects and adherence concerns were key unmet knowledge needs. Our findings suggest that low provider PrEP knowledge may be a barrier to PrEP prescribing among safety-net PCPs. Our results provide insight about specific educational needs of PCPs in a safety-net health system, which are amenable to educational intervention.
| S-EPMC7750167 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionPrevention of tuberculosis disease through diagnosis and treatment of latent tuberculosis infection is critical for achieving tuberculosis elimination in the U.S. Diagnosis and treatment of latent tuberculosis infection in safety-net primary care settings that serve patients at risk for tuberculosis may increase uptake of this prevention effort and accelerate progress toward elimination. Optimizing tuberculosis prevention in these settings requires measuring the latent tuberculosis infection care cascade (testing, diagnosis, and treatment) and identifying gaps to develop solutions to overcome barriers. We used electronic health record data to describe the latent tuberculosis infection care cascade and identify gaps among a network of safety-net primary care clinics.MethodsElectronic health record data for patients seen in the OCHIN Clinical Network, the largest network of safety-net clinics in the U.S., between 2012 and 2019 were extracted. electronic health record data were used to measure the latent tuberculosis infection care cascade: patients who met tuberculosis screening criteria on the basis of current recommendations were tested for tuberculosis infection, diagnosed with latent tuberculosis infection, and prescribed treatment for latent tuberculosis infection. Outcomes were stratified by diagnostic test and treatment regimen.ResultsAmong 1.9 million patients in the analytic cohort, 43.5% met tuberculosis screening criteria, but only 21.4% were tested for latent tuberculosis infection; less than half (40.4%) were tested using an interferon-gamma release assay. Among those with a valid result, 10.5% were diagnosed with latent tuberculosis infection, 29.1% of those were prescribed latent tuberculosis infection treatment, and only 33.6% were prescribed a recommended rifamycin-based regimen.ConclusionsElectronic health record data can be used to measure the latent tuberculosis infection care cascade. A large proportion of patients in this safety-net clinical network are at high risk for tuberculosis infection. Addressing identified gaps in latent tuberculosis infection testing and treatment may have a direct impact on improving tuberculosis prevention in primary care clinics and accelerate progress toward elimination.
| S-EPMC10630620 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Safety net health systems face barriers to effective ambulatory medication reconciliation for vulnerable populations. Although some electronic health record (EHR) systems offer safety advantages, EHR use may affect the quality of patient-provider communication.This mixed-methods observational study aimed to develop a conceptual framework of how clinicians balance the demands and risks of EHR and communication tasks during medication reconciliation discussions in a safety net system.This study occurred 3 to 16 (median 9) months after new EHR implementation in five academic public hospital clinics. We video recorded visits between English-/Spanish-speaking patients and their primary/specialty care clinicians. We analyzed the proportion of medications addressed and coded time spent on nonverbal tasks during medication reconciliation as "multitasking EHR use," "silent EHR use," "non-EHR multitasking," and "focused patient-clinician talk." Finally, we analyzed communication patterns to develop a conceptual framework.We examined 35 visits (17%, 6/35 Spanish) between 25 patients (mean age 57, SD 11 years; 44%, 11/25 women; 48%, 12/25 Hispanic; and 20%, 5/25 with limited health literacy) and 25 clinicians (48%, 12/25 primary care). Patients had listed a median of 7 (IQR 5-12) relevant medications, and clinicians addressed a median of 3 (interquartile range [IQR] 1-5) medications. The median duration of medication reconciliation was 2.1 (IQR 1.0-4.2) minutes, comprising a median of 10% (IQR 3%-17%) of visit time. Multitasking EHR use occurred in 47% (IQR 26%-70%) of the medication reconciliation time. Silent EHR use and non-EHR multitasking occurred a smaller proportion of medication reconciliation time, with a median of 0% for both. Focused clinician-patient talk occurred a median of 24% (IQR 0-39%) of medication reconciliation time. Five communication patterns with EHR medication reconciliation were observed: (1) typical EHR multitasking for medication reconciliation, (2) dynamic EHR use to negotiate medication discrepancies, (3) focused patient-clinician talk for medication counseling and addressing patient concerns, (4) responding to patient concerns while maintaining EHR use, and (5) using EHRs to engage patients during medication reconciliation. We developed a conceptual diagram representing the dilemma of the multitasking clinician during medication reconciliation.Safety net visits involve multitasking EHR use during almost half of medication reconciliation time. The multitasking clinician balances the cognitive and emotional demands posed by incoming information from multiple sources, attempts to synthesize and act on this information through EHR and communication tasks, and adopts strategies of silent EHR use and focused patient-clinician talk that may help mitigate the risks of multitasking. Future studies should explore diverse patient perspectives about clinician EHR multitasking, clinical outcomes related to EHR multitasking, and human factors and systems engineering interventions to improve the safety of EHR use during the complex process of medication reconciliation.
| S-EPMC5962827 | biostudies-other