Dataset Information

Access to primary care is associated with better autoimmune hepatitis outcomes in an urban county hospital.

ABSTRACT: Autoimmune hepatitis causes chronic hepatitis and often leads to cirrhosis and death without treatment. We wanted to see if having access to primary care or insurance prior to diagnosis is associated with better outcomes for patients in an urban, public hospital with mostly socioeconomically disadvantaged Hispanic patients.We did a retrospective study at our institution. Kaplan Meier survival analysis was done looking at transplant-free overall survival for patients diagnosed at our institution. The log-rank test was done to compare survival between patients with and without prior access to primary care, and between patients with and without insurance at diagnosis.Overall 5- and 10-year transplant-free overall survival was 91% (95% CI, 83-100%) and 75% (95% CI, 50-99%), respectively. Patients with primary care prior to diagnosis had significantly better transplant-free overall survival than those without (log rank test p = 0.019). Patients with primary care also had better clinical markers at diagnosis. Having insurance at diagnosis was not associated with better outcomes.Outcomes of autoimmune hepatitis are poor in our setting but access to primary care prior to diagnosis was associated with better outcomes. This is likely due to the important role that primary care plays in detecting disease and initiating treatment earlier. With the expansion of access to healthcare that the Affordable Care Act provides, future patients are likely to do better with even rare diseases like autoimmune hepatitis.

SUBMITTER: Kim D

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4517362 | biostudies-other | 2015

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Access to primary care is associated with better autoimmune hepatitis outcomes in an urban county hospital.

Kim Daniel D Eshtiaghpour Daniel D Alpern Joel J Datta Anuj A Eysselein Viktor E VE Yee Hal F HF

BMC gastroenterology 20150728

<h4>Background</h4>Autoimmune hepatitis causes chronic hepatitis and often leads to cirrhosis and death without treatment. We wanted to see if having access to primary care or insurance prior to diagnosis is associated with better outcomes for patients in an urban, public hospital with mostly socioeconomically disadvantaged Hispanic patients.<h4>Methods</h4>We did a retrospective study at our institution. Kaplan Meier survival analysis was done looking at transplant-free overall survival for pat ...[more]

PMID: 26215250

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundSpatial access to primary care has been associated with late-stage and fatal breast cancer, but less is known about its relation to outcomes of other screening-preventable cancers such as colorectal cancer. This population-based retrospective cohort study examined whether spatial access to primary care providers associates with colorectal cancer-specific survival.MethodsApproximately 26 600 incident colorectal cancers diagnosed between 2000 and 2008 in adults residing in Cook County, Illinois were identified through the state cancer registry and georeferenced to the census tract of residence at diagnosis. An enhanced two-step floating catchment area method measured tract-level access to primary care physicians (PCPs) in the year of diagnosis using practice locations obtained from the American Medical Association. Vital status and underlying cause of death were determined using the National Death Index. Fine-Gray proportional subdistribution hazard models analyzed the association between tract-level PCP access scores and colorectal cancer-specific survival after accounting for tract-level socioeconomic status, case demographics, tumor characteristics, and other factors.ResultsIncreased tract-level access to PCPs was associated with a lower risk of death from colorectal cancer (hazard ratio [HR], 95% confidence interval [CI]) = 0.87 [0.79, 0.96], P = .008, highest vs lowest quintile), especially among persons diagnosed with regional-stage tumors (HR, 95% CI = 0.80 [0.69, 0.93], P = .004, highest vs lowest quintile).ConclusionsSpatial access to primary care providers is a predictor of colorectal cancer-specific survival in Cook County, Illinois. Future research is needed to determine which areas within the cancer care continuum are most affected by spatial accessibility to primary care such as referral for screening, accessibility of screening and diagnostic testing, referral for treatment, and access to appropriate survivorship-related care.

Project description:BackgroundThe growing number of primary care physicians (PCPs) reducing their clinical work hours has raised concerns about meeting the future demand for services and fulfilling the continuity and access mandates for patient-centered care. However, the patient's experience of care with part-time physicians is relatively unknown, and may be mediated by continuity and access to care outcomes.ObjectiveWe aimed to examine the relationships between a physicians' clinical full-time equivalent (FTE), continuity of care, access to care, and patient satisfaction with the physician.DesignWe used a multi-level structural equation estimation, with continuity and access modeled as mediators, for a cross-section in 2010.ParticipantsThe study included family medicine (n?=?104) and internal medicine (n?=?101) physicians in a multi-specialty group practice, along with their patient satisfaction survey responses (n?=?12,688).Main measuresPhysician level FTE, continuity of care received by patients, continuity of care provided by physician, and a Press Ganey patient satisfaction with the physician score, on a 0-100 % scale, were measured. Access to care was measured as days to the third next-available appointment.Key resultsPhysician FTE was directly associated with better continuity of care received (0.172% per FTE, p?<?0.001), better continuity of care provided (0.108% per FTE, p?<?0.001), and better access to care (-0.033 days per FTE, p?<?0.01), but worse patient satisfaction scores (-0.080% per FTE, p?=?0.03). The continuity of care provided was a significant mediator (0.016% per FTE, p?<?0.01) of the relationship between FTE and patient satisfaction; but overall, reduced clinical work hours were associated with better patient satisfaction (-0.053 % per FTE, p?=?0.03).ConclusionsThese results suggest that PCPs who choose to work fewer clinical hours may have worse continuity and access, but they may provide a better patient experience. Physician workforce planning should consider these care attributes when considering the role of part-time PCPs in practice redesign efforts and initiatives to meet the demand for primary care services.

Project description:BackgroundRurality strongly correlates with higher pay-for-performance access bonuses, despite higher emergency department use and fewer primary care services than in urban settings. We sought to evaluate the relation between patient-reported access to primary care and access bonus payments in urban settings.MethodsWe conducted a cross-sectional, secondary data analysis using Ontario survey and health administrative data from 2013 to 2017. We used administrative data to calculate annual access bonuses for eligible urban family physicians. We linked this payment data to adult (≥ 16 yr) patient data from the Health Care Experiences Survey to examine the relation between access bonus achievement (in quintiles of the proportion of bonus achieved, from lowest [Q1, reference category] to highest [Q5]) and 4 patient-reported access outcomes. The average survey response rate to the patient survey during the study period was 51%. We stratified urban geography into large, medium and small settings. In a multilevel regression model, we adjusted for patient-, physician- and practice-level covariates. We tested linear trends, adjusted for clustering, for each outcome.ResultsWe linked 18 893 respondents to 3940 physicians in 414 bonus-eligible practices. Physicians in small urban settings earned the highest proportion of their maximum potential access bonuses. Access bonus achievement was positively associated with telephone access (Q2 odds ratio [OR] 1.18, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.98-1.42; Q3 OR 1.34, 95% CI 1.10-1.63; Q4 OR 1.46, 95% CI 1.19-1.79; Q5 OR 1.87, 95% CI 1.50-2.33), after hours access (Q2 OR 1.26, 95% CI 1.09-1.47; Q3 OR 1.46, 95% CI 1.23-1.74; Q4 OR 1.77, 95% CI 1.46-2.15; Q5 OR 1.88, 95% CI 1.52-2.32), wait time for care (Q2 OR 1.01, 95% CI 0.85-1.20; Q3 OR 1.17, 95% CI 0.97-1.41; Q4 OR 1.27, 95% CI 1.05-1.55; Q5 OR 1.63, 95% CI 1.32-2.00) and timeliness (Q2 OR 1.29, 95% CI 0.98-1.69; Q3 OR 1.29, 95% CI 0.94-1.77; Q4 OR 1.58, 95% CI 1.16-2.13; Q5 OR 1.98, 95% CI 1.38-2.82). When stratified by geography, we observed several of these associations in large urban settings, but not in small urban settings. Trend tests were statistically significant for all 4 outcomes.InterpretationAlthough the access bonus correlated with access in larger urban settings, it did not in smaller settings, aligning with previous research questioning its utility in smaller geographies. The access bonus may benefit from a redesign that considers geography and patient experience.

Project description:BACKGROUND:The UK government is pursuing policies to improve primary care access, as many patients visit accident and emergency (A and E) departments after being unable to get suitable general practice appointments. Direct admission to hospital via a general practitioner (GP) averts A and E use, and may reduce total hospital costs. It could also enhance the continuity of information between GPs and hospital doctors, possibly improving healthcare outcomes. OBJECTIVE:To determine whether primary care access is associated with the route of emergency admission-via a GP versus via an A and E department. METHODS:Retrospective analysis of national administrative data from English hospitals for 2011-2012. Adults admitted in an emergency (unscheduled) for ?1 night via a GP or an A and E department formed the study population. The measure of primary care access-the percentage of patients able to get a general practice appointment on their last attempt-was derived from a large, nationally representative patient survey. Multilevel logistic regression was used to estimate associations, adjusting for patient and admission characteristics. RESULTS:The analysis included 2?322?112 emergency admissions (81.9% via an A and E department). With a 5?unit increase in the percentage of patients able to get a general practice appointment on their last attempt, the adjusted odds of GP admission (vs A and E admission) was estimated to increase by 15% (OR 1.15, 95% CI 1.12 to 1.17). The probability of GP admission if ?95% of appointment attempts were successful in each general practice was estimated to be 19.6%. This probability reduced to 13.6% when <80% of appointment attempts were successful. This equates to 139?673 fewer GP admissions (456?232 vs 316?559) assuming no change in the total number of admissions. Associations were consistent in direction across geographical regions of England. CONCLUSIONS:Among hospital inpatients admitted as an emergency, patients registered to more accessible general practices were more likely to have been admitted via a GP (vs an A and E department). This furthers evidence suggesting that access to general practice is related to use of emergency hospital services in England. The relative merits of the two admission routes remain unclear.

Project description:BackgroundPrimary care telephone access has been associated with patient satisfaction and emergency department utilization even after accounting for objective appointment wait times. However, relatively little is known about how to best structure and manage telephone access in primary care.ObjectiveAssess how primary care telephone access is structured and managed and explore how variation in telephone management may affect primary care teams and patients.DesignWe used 2016 administrative and patient survey data to select six Veterans Administration medical centers (VAMCs) with above-average primary care access (time to third next available appointment) but variable patient-reported access, geographic region, and urbanicity. Semi-structured interviews were conducted August -October 2017.ParticipantsForty-three key stakeholders knowledgeable about primary care, telephone management, and operational priorities nationally and/or within each VAMC.Key resultsTelephone access was organized and managed differently across sites. Regional call centers were perceived as more efficient but less flexible in tailoring processes to meet local needs. Patient preferences for speaking with their own care teams were cited as a reason to manage telephone access locally rather than regionally, particularly in rural sites. Sites with high patient-rated access described call center functions as well-integrated with primary care team workflow, while those with low patient-rated access perceived telephone management practices as negatively affecting primary care team workload. Call center understaffing was a major barrier to optimal telephone access in all six sites, though rural sites reported greater challenges with provider recruitment and retention.ConclusionsIn VA, efforts to improve telephone access have focused on centralizing call center operations but current call center performance metrics do not account for the extent to which call center functions are integrated with primary care workflows or may impact patient experience. Efforts to improve primary care access should carefully consider impact of telephone management practices on providers and patients.

Dataset Information

Access to primary care is associated with better autoimmune hepatitis outcomes in an urban county hospital.

Publications

Access to primary care is associated with better autoimmune hepatitis outcomes in an urban county hospital.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets