scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question

Showing papers by "Lee A. Green published in 2018"


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: PCMH transformation reduces hospital and ED use, and the majority of the effect is specific to PCMH-targeted conditions.
Abstract: Objective To determine whether the Patient-Centered Medical Home (PCMH) transformation reduces hospital and ED utilization, and whether the effect is specific to chronic conditions targeted for management by the PCMH in our setting. Data Sources and Study Setting All patients aged 18 years and older in 2,218 primary care practices participating in a statewide PCMH incentive program sponsored by Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan (BCBSM) in 2009–2012. Study Design Quantitative observational study, jointly modeling PCMH-targeted versus other hospital admissions and ED visits on PCMH score, patient, and practice characteristics in a hierarchical multivariate model using the generalized gamma distribution. Data Collection Claims data and PCMH scores held by BCBSM. Principal Findings Both hospital and ED utilization were reduced proportionately to PCMH score. Hospital utilization was reduced by 13.9 percent for PCMH-targeted conditions versus only 3.8 percent for other conditions (p = .003), and ED utilization by 11.2 percent versus 3.7 percent (p = .010). Hospital PMPM cost was reduced by 17.2 percent for PCMH-targeted conditions versus only 3.1 percent for other conditions (p < .001), and ED PMPM cost by 9.4 percent versus 3.6 percent (p < .001). Conclusions PCMH transformation reduces hospital and ED use, and the majority of the effect is specific to PCMH-targeted conditions.

18 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Patients perceive that team-based care in family practice has improved their knowledge and access to care, overall health and avoided some emergency department visits and hospital admissions, and the findings support the continued development of team- based care infamily practice.
Abstract: INTRODUCTION The increasing complexity of health care and escalating prevalence of multiple chronic conditions have driven interprofessional team-based care in family practice. Most published studies examine team-based care from the perspective of health professionals. The purpose of this study was to examine patients' perceptions of team-based care in family practice. METHODS This was a waiting room survey conducted in five family medicine academic teaching clinics in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. Patients aged ≥18 years were invited to participate in a survey addressing patient access to team-based care, perceived benefits, preferred health professional and team member roles. RESULTS Of the 44.3% (565/1274) of respondents, 41.8% (231/552) reported receiving care from a team of health professionals, primarily for chronic disease management or pharmacy consultations. While there was a consistent pattern of patient perception that many aspects of care did not worsen with team-based care, improvements in knowledge of their medical condition (67.4%); the care received (65.0%); access to care (51.1%); ability to self-care (48.9%) and maintain their independence (43.7%); and overall health (51.1%) were reported. Some patients felt that team-based care reduced emergency visits (34.6%) and hospitalisations (29.9%), and 44.1% of patients felt that they had an active role on the team and made decisions about their care together with health professionals. CONCLUSION Patients perceive that team-based care in family practice has improved their knowledge and access to care, overall health and avoided some emergency department visits and hospital admissions. The findings support the continued development of team-based care in family practice.

10 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The findings suggest that a common research priority framework for PHC research in Canada would ensure that research priority-setting exercises are grounded in an evidence-based process.
Abstract: Despite significant investments to improve primary health care (PHC) delivery in Canada, provincial health care systems remain fragmented and uncoordinated. Canada’s commitment to strengthening PHC should be driven by robust research and evaluation that reflects our health policy priorities and responds to the needs of the population. One challenge facing health services researchers is developing and sustaining meaningful research priorities and agendas in an overburdened, complex health care system with limited capacity for PHC research and support for clinician researchers. A scoping review of the literature was conducted to examine PHC research priorities in Canada. We compared national research priorities for PHC to research priorities being considered in the province of Alberta. Our scoping review was guided by the following questions: (1) What are the research priorities for PHC in Canada?; and (2) What process is used to identity PHC research priorities? Six key theme areas for consideration in setting a PHC research agenda were identified: research in practice, research on practice, research about practice, methods of priority setting, infrastructure, and the intersection of PHC and population/public health. These thematic areas provide a new framework for guiding PHC research in Canada. It was developed to generate best practices and new knowledge (i.e., innovation), transform PHC clinical practice or support quality improvement (i.e., spread), and lead to large-scale health care system transformation (i.e., scale). Priority-driven research aims to answer questions of key importance that are likely to have a significant impact on knowledge or practice in the short to medium term. Setting PHC research priorities ensures funded research has the greatest potential population health benefit, that research funding and outputs are aligned with the needs of practitioners and decision makers, and that there is efficient and equitable use of limited resources with less duplication of research effort. Our findings also suggest that a common research priority framework for PHC research in Canada would ensure that research priority-setting exercises are grounded in an evidence-based process.

5 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
01 Jul 2018
TL;DR: The association of high-volume practice with outcomes important to patients, such as evidence of treatment failure (emergency department visits and hospital admissions) for conditions sensitive to primary care management, can inform policy-makers when considering payment system changes.
Abstract: Background Alberta is considering capping daily fee-for-service physician billings, but little is known about high-volume practice in the province and its impact on patient health outcomes. In this initial study, we conducted a descriptive analysis of general practitioners' patient volumes and billing practices in relation to associated practitioner demographic characteristics. Methods We conducted a retrospective descriptive analysis of the associations of practitioner characteristics, including full-time versus non-full-time practice, provider sex, years in practice, geographic location and international medical graduate status, with high-volume (> 50 visits/d) practice using general practice billing data from 2011 to 2016. Use of general practitioner service codes was described and compared by general practitioner volume status, with adjustment for physician demographic characteristics and geographic parameters. Results We included 3465 general practitioners practising fee-for-service in Alberta between 2011 and 2016, of whom 233 (6.7%) were identified as high-volume providers. Physicians who had been in practice longer (odds ratio [OR] 1.04 per year, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.02-1.05) and international medical graduates (OR 1.89, 95% CI 1.40-2.54) were more likely to exceed 50 patient visits/day. Female physicians were less likely to exceed 50 patient visits/day (OR 0.14, 95% CI 0.07-0.28). Rural practice location was negatively associated with high-volume practice (OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.79-0.95) when we controlled for zone within the province. Zone 5 (North) was associated with high-volume practice (OR 1.95, 95% CI 1.06-3.58). Less than full-time practice was prevalent (1836 providers [53.0%]). High-volume general practitioners billed fewer service codes requiring longer visits, except for the most highly remunerated code (patients with complex health issues). Interpretation These results can inform policy-makers when considering payment system changes. Our next step is to examine the association of high-volume practice with outcomes important to patients, such as evidence of treatment failure (emergency department visits and hospital admissions) for conditions sensitive to primary care management.

5 citations


Journal Article
TL;DR: Support and training rural FPs who perform endoscopy might help alleviate current wait times and improve access for rural Canadian patients and meet benchmarks in colonoscopy quality.
Abstract: Objective To determine whether rural FP colonoscopists in Alberta are achieving benchmarks in colonoscopy quality. Design Prospective, multicentre observational study. Setting Alberta. Participants Nine FP colonoscopists. Main outcome measures Proportion of successful cecal intubations; proportion of patients aged 50 and older with pathologically confirmed adenomas; mean number of adenomas per colonoscopy; and serious adverse events related to colonoscopy. Results In this 6-month study, 9 rural FPs in Alberta performed 1769 colonoscopies. Overall, all key colonoscopy quality benchmarks were met or exceeded. The proportion of successful cecal intubations was 97.9% (95% CI 97.2% to 98.6%). The proportion of male and female patients aged 50 and older whose first-time colonoscopy results revealed an adenoma was 67.4% (95% CI 62.4% to 72.7%) and 51.1% (95% CI 45.5% to 56.7%), respectively. There were 120 adenomas, 36 advanced adenomas, and 1 colon cancer case per 100 colonoscopies. There were 2 postpolypectomy bleeds and no other serious complications. Conclusion Alberta rural FP colonoscopists are meeting benchmarks in colonoscopy quality. Ongoing electronic collection of endoscopy quality markers should be encouraged. Supporting and training rural FPs who perform endoscopy might help alleviate current wait times and improve access for rural Canadian patients.

4 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The novel use of co-design created directive dialog around the needs of patients, highlighting the contrasting views that exist between patients and FPs and emphasizing how exploring these differences might lead to strong design options for patient-oriented m-health apps.
Abstract: Introduction:A gap exists between the evidence for reducing risk of knee osteoarthritis (KOA) progression and its application in patients’ daily lives. We aimed to bridge this gap by identifying patient and family physician (FP) self-management priorities to conceptualize and develop a mobile-health application (m-health app). Our co-design approach combined priorities and concerns solicited from patients and FPs with evidence on risk of progression to design and develop a KOA self-management tool.Methods:Parallel qualitative research of patient and FP perspectives was conducted to inform the co-design process. Researchers from the Enhancing Alberta Primary Care Research Networks (EnACT) evaluated the mental models of FPs using cognitive task analysis through structured interviews with four FPs. Using grounded theory methods, patient researchers from the Patient and Community Engagement Research (PaCER) program interviewed five patients to explore their perspectives about needs and interactions within primary care. In three co-design sessions relevant stakeholders (four patients, five FPs, and thirteen researchers) participated to: (i) identify user needs with regard to KOA self-management; and (ii) conceptualize and determine design priorities and functionalities of an m-health app using a modified nominal group process.Results:Priority measures for symptoms, activities, and quality of life from the user perspective were determined in the first two sessions. The third co-design session with our industry partner resulted in finalization of priorities through interactive patient and FP feedback. The top three features were: (i) a symptoms graph and summary; (ii) information and strategies; and (iii) setting goals. These features were used to inform the development of a minimum viable product.Conclusions:The novel use of co-design created directive dialog around the needs of patients, highlighting the contrasting views that exist between patients and FPs and emphasizing how exploring these differences might lead to strong design options for patient-oriented m-health apps. Characterizing these disjunctions has important implications for operationalizing patient-centered health care.

1 citations