Tracking Blood Pressure Control Performance and Process Metrics in 25 US Health Systems: The PCORnet Blood Pressure Control Laboratory.

Background The National Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network Blood Pressure Control Laboratory Surveillance System was established to identify opportunities for blood pressure (BP) control improvement and to provide a mechanism for tracking improvement longitudinally. Methods and Results We conducted a serial cross-sectional study with queries against standardized electronic health record data in the National Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network (PCORnet) common data model returned by 25 participating US health systems. Queries produced BP control metrics for adults with well-documented hypertension and a recent encounter at the health system for a series of 1-year measurement periods for each quarter of available data from January 2017 to March 2020. Aggregate weighted results are presented overall and by race and ethnicity. The most recent measurement period includes data from 1 737 995 patients, and 11 956 509 patient-years were included in the trend analysis. Overall, 15% were Black, 52% women, and 28% had diabetes. BP control (<140/90 mm Hg) was observed in 62% (range, 44%-74%) but varied by race and ethnicity, with the lowest BP control among Black patients at 57% (odds ratio, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.66-0.94). A new class of antihypertensive medication (medication intensification) was prescribed in just 12% (range, 0.6%-25%) of patient visits where BP was uncontrolled. However, when medication intensification occurred, there was a large decrease in systolic BP (≈15 mm Hg; range, 5-18 mm Hg). Conclusions Major opportunities exist for improving BP control and reducing disparities, especially through consistent medication intensification when BP is uncontrolled. These data demonstrate substantial room for improvement and opportunities to close health equity gaps.

Benchmarks for Support and Outcomes for Internal Medicine-Pediatrics Residency Programs: A 5-Year Review.

BACKGROUND: Combined internal medicine and pediatrics (medicine-pediatrics) residencies were Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) accredited separately from their corresponding categorical residencies in June 2006. OBJECTIVE: We investigated how ACGME accreditation of medicine-pediatrics programs has affected the levels of support (both financial and personnel), the National Resident Matching Program (NRMP) match rate, performance on the board examination, and other graduate outcomes. METHODS: From 2009 through 2013 we sent an annual SurveyMonkey online survey to members of the Medicine-Pediatrics Program Directors Association. Questions pertained to program characteristics, program director support, recruitment, ambulatory training, and graduate data. More than 79% of responders completed the entire survey for each year (sample size was 60 program directors). RESULTS: Compared to the time prior to accreditation of the specialty, there was an increase in program directors who are dually trained (89% versus 93%), an increase in program director salary ($134,000 before accreditation versus $185,000 in 2013, P < .05), and an increase in the average full-time equivalent support (0.32 before accreditation versus 0.42 in 2013, P < .05). There was also an increase in programs with associate program directors (35% versus 78%), programs with chief residents (71% versus 91%), and an increase in program budgets controlled by program directors (52% versus 69%). The 2013 NRMP match rates increased compared to those of 2005 (99% versus 49%). Performance on the American Board of Pediatrics examination was comparable to that for pediatrics residents. Since accreditation, a larger number of residents are choosing careers in hospital medicine. CONCLUSIONS: Our data show widespread improved support for medicine-pediatrics programs since the 2006 start of ACGME accreditation.