Linking clinician interaction and coordination to clinical performance in Patient-Aligned Care Teams.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Hysong SJ
PROVIDER: S-EPMC4714534 | biostudies-other | 2016 Jan
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other
Similar Datasets
Project description:Background/objectiveDespite numerous extant measures assessing context-specific elements of care coordination, we are unaware of any comprehensive, team-based instrument that measures the requisite mechanisms and conditions required to coordinate successfully. In this study we develop and validate the psychometric properties of the Coordination Practices Survey, a context-agnostic measure of coordination for primary care teams.MethodsCoordination items were developed based on a systematic literature review; items from previously developed scales were adapted and new items were created as needed; all items were refined after subject matter expert review and feedback. We collected data from Primary Care teams drawn from 1200 Veterans Health Administration (VHA) medical centers and outpatient clinics nationwide. 1645 primary care team members from 512 patient aligned care teams in the Veterans Health Administration completed the survey from 2015 to 2016. Psychometric properties were assessed after data collection using Cronbach's alpha, intraclass correlations and multilevel confirmatory factor analysis to assess the factor structure.ResultsOur findings confirmed the psychometric properties of two distinguishable subscales of coordination: (a) Accountability and (b) Common Understanding. The within- and between-team latent structure of each subscale exhibited adequate fit to the data, as well as appropriately high Cronbach's alpha and intraclass correlations. There was insufficient variability in responses to the predictability subscale to properly assess its psychometric properties.ConclusionWith context-specific validation, our subscales of accountability and common understanding may be used to assess coordination processes in other contexts for both research and operational applications.
| S-EPMC9549451 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Geriatric Patient-Aligned Care Teams (GeriPACT) were implemented in the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) (i.e., Patient-Centered Medical Homes for older adults) to provide high quality coordinated care to older adults with more risk of negative health and psychosocial outcomes. The objectives of this paper are: (1) to present data on GeriPACT structural characteristics; and (2) to examine a composite measure of GeriPACT model consistency. We utilized a web survey targeting 71 physician leads resulting in a 62% response rate. We found GeriPACTs employed a range of staffing, empanelment, clinic space, and patient assignment practices. The mean value of the GeriPACT consistency measure was 2.03 (range: 1-4) and 6.3% of facilities were considered consistent to the GeriPACT model. We observed large variation in GeriPACT structure and in model consistency. More research is needed to understand how these variations are related to processes and outcomes of care.
| S-EPMC6196730 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIn 2012, select Veterans Health Administration (VHA) facilities implemented a homeless-tailored medical home model, called Homeless Patient Aligned Care Teams (H-PACT), to improve care processes and outcomes for homeless Veterans.ObjectiveThe main aim of this study was to determine whether H-PACT offers a better patient experience than standard VHA primary care.Research designWe used multivariable logistic regressions to estimate differences in the probability of reporting positive primary care experiences on a national survey.SubjectsHomeless-experienced survey respondents enrolled in H-PACT (n=251) or standard primary care in facilities with H-PACT available (n=1527) and facilities without H-PACT (n=10,079).MeasuresPatient experiences in 8 domains from the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Provider and Systems surveys. Domain scores were categorized as positive versus nonpositive.ResultsH-PACT patients were less likely than standard primary care patients to be female, have 4-year college degrees, or to have served in recent military conflicts; they received more primary care visits and social services. H-PACT patients were more likely than standard primary care patients in the same facilities to report positive experiences with access [adjusted risk difference (RD)=17.4], communication (RD=13.9), office staff (RD=13.1), provider ratings (RD=11.0), and comprehensiveness (RD=9.3). Standard primary care patients in facilities with H-PACT available were more likely than those from facilities without H-PACT to report positive experiences with communication (RD=4.7) and self-management support (RD=4.6).ConclusionsPatient-centered medical homes designed to address the social determinants of health offer a better care experience for homeless patients, when compared with standard primary care approaches. The lessons learned from H-PACT can be applied throughout VHA and to other health care settings.
| S-EPMC7773035 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Importance:Collaborative chronic care models (CCMs) have extensive randomized clinical trial evidence for effectiveness in serious mental illnesses, but little evidence exists regarding their feasibility or effect in typical practice conditions. Objective:To determine the effectiveness of implementation facilitation in establishing the CCM in mental health teams and the impact on health outcomes of team-treated individuals. Design, Setting, and Participants:This quasi-experimental, randomized stepped-wedge implementation trial was conducted from February 2016 through February 2018, in partnership with the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Office of Mental Health and Suicide Prevention. Nine facilities were enrolled from all VA facilities in the United States to receive CCM implementation support. All veterans (n = 5596) treated by designated outpatient general mental health teams were included for hospitalization analyses, and a randomly selected sample (n = 1050) was identified for health status interviews. Individuals with dementia were excluded. Clinicians (n = 62) at the facilities were surveyed, and site process summaries were rated for concordance with the CCM process. The CCM implementation start time was randomly assigned across 3 waves. Data analysis of this evaluable population was performed from June to September 2018. Interventions:Internal-external facilitation, combining a study-funded external facilitator and a facility-funded internal facilitator working with a designated team for 1 year. Main Outcomes and Measures:Facilitation was hypothesized to be associated with improvements in both implementation and intervention outcomes (hybrid type II trial). Implementation outcomes included the clinician Team Development Measure (TDM) and proportion of CCM-concordant team care processes. The study was powered for the primary health outcome, mental component score (MCS). Hospitalization rate was derived from administrative data. Results:The veteran population (n = 5596) included 881 women (15.7%), and the mean (SD) age was 52.2 (14.5) years. The interviewed sample (n = 1050) was similar but was oversampled for women (n = 210 [20.0%]). Facilitation was associated with improvements in TDM subscales for role clarity (53.4%-68.6%; δ = 15.3; 95% CI, 4.4-26.2; P = .01) and team primacy (50.0%-68.6%; δ = 18.6; 95% CI, 8.3-28.9; P = .001). The percentage of CCM-concordant processes achieved varied, ranging from 44% to 89%. No improvement was seen in veteran self-ratings, including the primary outcome. In post hoc analyses, MCS improved in veterans with 3 or more treated mental health diagnoses compared with others (β = 5.03; 95% CI, 2.24-7.82; P < .001). Mental health hospitalizations demonstrated a robust decrease during facilitation (β = -0.12; 95% CI, -0.16 to -0.07; P < .001); this finding withstood 4 internal validity tests. Conclusions and Relevance:Implementation facilitation that engages clinicians under typical practice conditions can enhance evidence-based team processes; its effect on self-reported overall population health status was negligible, although health status improved for individuals with complex conditions and hospitalization rate declined. Trial Registration:ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02543840.
| S-EPMC6484628 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Over 1100 Veterans work in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) as peer specialists (PSs). PSs are Veterans with formal training who provide support to other Veterans with similar diagnoses, primarily in mental health settings. A White House Executive Action mandated the pilot reassignment of VHA PSs from mental health to 25 primary care Patient Aligned Care Teams (PACT) in order to broaden the provision of wellness services that can address many chronic illnesses. An evaluation of this initiative was undertaken to assess the impact of outside assistance on the deployment of PS in PACT, as implementation support is often needed to prevent challenges commonly experienced when first deploying PSs in VHA settings. We present the protocol for this cluster-randomized hybrid type II trial to test the impact of standard implementation (receive minimal assistance) vs. facilitated implementation (receive outside assistance) on the deployment of VHA PSs in PACT.A VHA Office of Mental Health Services work group is recruiting 25 Veterans Affairs Medical Centers to reassign a mental health PSs to provide wellness-oriented care in PACT. Sites in three successive cohorts (n?=?8, 8, 9) beginning over 6-month blocks will be matched and randomized to either standard or facilitated implementation. In facilitated implementation, an outside expert works with site stakeholders through a site visit, regular calls, and performance data to guide the planning and address challenges. Standard implementation sites will receive a webinar and access the Office of Mental Health Services work group. The two conditions will be compared on PS workload data, fidelity to the PS model of service delivery, team functioning, and Veteran measures of activation, satisfaction, and functioning. Qualitative interviews will collect information on implementation barriers and facilitators.This evaluation will provide critical data to guide administrators and VHA policy makers on future deployment of PSs, as their role has been expanding beyond mental health. In addition, development of novel implementation strategies (facilitation tailored to PSs) and the use of new tools (peer fidelity) can be models for monitoring and supporting deployment of PSs throughout VHA.ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02732600 (URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02732600 ).
| S-EPMC5414325 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThis article describes the design and baseline sample of a single-site trial comparing Individual Placement and Support (IPS) supported employment delivered within a Veterans Health Administration (VHA) primary care Patient Aligned Care Team (PACT) to treatment-as-usual vocational rehabilitation (TAU-VR) that includes transitional work.MethodsUnemployed U.S. military veterans receiving care in a VHA PACT who were seeking competitive work, otherwise eligible for vocational rehabilitation, and diagnosed with a mental health condition other than a psychotic or bipolar I disorder were prospectively randomized to receive either IPS or TAU-VR. Employment outcomes and measures of quality of life, self-esteem, and community reintegration are being collected for 12 months.ResultsThe participant sample (n = 119) is comprised of 17.6% female, 73.1% African-Americans, and 1.7% Hispanic. Average age is 38.2 (SD ± 8.41) years; 80.7% served in the military since 2001; 78% are receiving or applying for U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) service-connected disability; 26.9% have not held a competitive job in the past 3 years; and the average length of pre-randomization unemployment is 1.4 (SD ± 2.3) years.ConclusionsUnique design features include evaluating the efficacy of evidenced-based IPS within the primary care setting, having broad diagnostic eligibility, and defining the primary outcome criterion as "steady employment", i.e. holding a competitive job for ≥26 weeks of the 12-month follow-up period. The findings illustrate the characteristics of a primary care veteran sample in need of employment services.Trial registrationwww.clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02400736.
| S-EPMC7027030 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe consideration of health-related quality of life (HRQL) is a hallmark of best practice in HIV care. Information technology offers an opportunity to more closely engage patients with chronic HIV infection in their long-term management and support a focus on HRQL. However, the implementation of patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures, such as HRQL in routine care, is challenged by the need to synthesize data generated by questionnaires, the complexity of collecting data between patient visits, and the integration of results into clinical decision-making processes.ObjectiveOur aim is to design and pilot-test a multimedia software platform to overcome these challenges and provide a vehicle to increase focus on HRQL issues in HIV management.MethodsA multidisciplinary team in France and Australia conducted the study with 120 patients and 16 doctors contributing to the design and development of the software. We used agile development principles, user-centered design, and qualitative research methods to develop and pilot the software platform. We developed a prototype application to determine the acceptability of the software and piloted the final version with 41 Australian and 19 French residents using 2 validated electronic questionnaires, the Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale-21 Items, and the Patient Reported Outcomes Quality of Life-HIV.ResultsTesting of the prototype demonstrated that patients wanted an application that was intuitive and without excessive instruction, so it felt effortless to use, as well as secure and discreet. Clinicians wanted the PRO data synthesized, presented clearly and succinctly, and clinically actionable. Safety concerns for patients and clinicians included confidentiality, and the potential for breakdown in communication if insufficient user training was not provided. The final product, piloted with patients from both countries, showed that most respondents found the application easy to use and comprehend. The usability testing survey administered found that older Australians had reduced scores for understanding the visual interface (P=.004) and finding the buttons organized (P=.02). Three-fourths of the respondents were concerned with confidentiality (P=.007), and this result was more prevalent in participants with higher anxiety and stress scores (P=.01), as measured by the Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale-21 Items. These statistical associations were not observed in 15 French patients who completed the same questionnaire.ConclusionsDigital applications in health care should be safe and fit for purpose. Our software was acceptable to patients and shows potential to overcome some barriers to the implementation of PROs in routine care. The design of the clinicians' interface presents a solution to the problem of voluminous data, both synthesizing and providing a snapshot of longitudinal data. The next stage is to conduct a randomized controlled trial to determine whether patients experience increased satisfaction with care and whether doctors perceive that they deliver better clinical care without compromising efficiency.
| S-EPMC8367117 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimThe aim of the study was to describe practices that support collaboration in interprofessional primary health care teams, and identify performance indicators perceived to measure the impact of this collaboration from the perspective of interprofessional health providers.BackgroundDespite the surge of interprofessional primary health care models implemented across Canada, there is little evidence as to whether or not the intended outcomes of primary health care teams have been achieved. Part of the challenge is determining the most appropriate measures that can demonstrate the value of collaborative care. To date, little remains known about performance measurement from the providers contributing to the collaborative care process in interprofessional primary care teams. Having providers from a range of disciplinary backgrounds assist in the development of performance measures can help identify measures most relevant to demonstrate the value of collaborative care on the intended outcomes of interprofessional primary care models.MethodsA qualitative study; part of a larger mixed methods developmental evaluation to examine performance measurement in interprofessional primary health care teams. A stakeholder workshop was conducted at an annual association meeting of interprofessional primary health care teams in the province of Ontario, Canada. Six questions guided the workshop groups and participant responses were documented on worksheets and flip charts. All responses were collected and entered verbatim into a word document. Qualitative analytic strategies were applied to each question.FindingsA total of 283 primary health care providers from 14 health professions working in interprofessional primary health care teams participated. Top three elements of interprofessional collaboration (total n = 628) were communication (n = 146), co-treatment (n = 112) and patient-based conferences (n = 81). Top three performance indicators currently used to demonstrate the value of interprofessional collaboration (total n = 241) were patient experience (n = 71), patient health status (n = 35) and within team referrals (n = 30).
| S-EPMC6719251 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background:Over the last decade, international surveys of patients and clinicians have been used to compare health care across countries. Findings from these surveys have been extensively used to create aggregate scores and rankings. Objective:To assess the concordance of survey responses provided by patients and clinicians. Methods:Analysis of 16 pairs of questions that focused on coordination, organizational factors, and patient-centered competencies from the Commonwealth Fund International Health Policy Survey of older adults (2014) and of primary care physicians (2015). Concordance was assessed by comparing absolute rates and relative rankings. Results:In absolute terms, patients and clinicians gave differing responses for questions about coordination of care (patients were more positive) and provision of after-hours care (patients were less positive). In relative terms, country rankings were positively correlated for 5 of 16 question pairs (Spearman ? > .6 and P < .05). Conclusion:Patterns of concordance between patient and clinician perspectives provides information to guide the use of survey data in performance assessment. However, this study highlights the need to assess the complementarity and substitutive nature of patients' and clinicians' perspectives before combining them to create aggregate assessments of performance.
| S-EPMC7427366 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe Veterans Health Administration (VA) has undertaken a major initiative to transform care through implementation of Patient Aligned Care Teams (PACTs). Based on the patient-centered medical home (PCMH) concept, PACT aims to improve access, continuity, coordination, and comprehensiveness using team-based care that is patient-driven and patient-centered. However, how VA should adapt PACT to meet the needs of special populations, such as women Veterans (WVs), was not considered in initial implementation guidance. WVs' numerical minority in VA healthcare settings (approximately 7-8 % of users) creates logistical challenges to delivering gender-sensitive comprehensive care. The main goal of this study is to test an evidence-based quality improvement approach (EBQI) to tailoring PACT to meet the needs of WVs, incorporating comprehensive primary care services and gender-specific care in gender-sensitive environments, thereby accelerating achievement of PACT tenets for women (Women's Health (WH)-PACT).Methods/designEBQI is a systematic approach to developing a multilevel research-clinical partnership that engages senior organizational leaders and local quality improvement (QI) teams in adapting and implementing new care models in the context of prior evidence and local practice conditions, with researchers providing technical support, formative feedback, and practice facilitation. In a 12-site cluster randomized trial, we will evaluate WH-PACT model achievement using patient, provider, staff, and practice surveys, in addition to analyses of secondary administrative and chart-based data. We will explore impacts of receipt of WH-PACT care on quality of chronic disease care and prevention, health status, patient satisfaction and experience of care, provider experience, utilization, and costs. Using mixed methods, we will assess pre-post practice contexts; document EBQI activities undertaken in participating facilities and their relationship to provider/staff and team actions/attitudes; document WH-PACT implementation; and examine barriers/facilitators to EBQI-supported WH-PACT implementation through a combination of semi-structured interviews and monthly formative progress narratives and administrative data.DiscussionLack of gender-sensitive comprehensive care has demonstrated consequences for the technical quality and ratings of care among WVs and may contribute to decisions to continue use or seek care elsewhere under the US Affordable Care Act. We hypothesize that tailoring PACT implementation through EBQI may improve the experience and quality of care at many levels.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02039856.
| S-EPMC4950741 | biostudies-literature