Can the Use of Health Insurance Claim Data Benefit the Risk-Based Supervision of General Practitioner Practices? An Exploratory Study in the Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: The Dutch Health and Youth Care Inspectorate has organized a study investigating whether there are benefits to using claim data in the risk-based supervision of general practitioner (GP) practices. METHODS: We identified and selected signals of risks based on interviews with experts. Next, we selected 3 indicators that could be measured in the claim database. These were: the expected and actual costs of the GP practice; the percentage of reserve antibiotics prescribed; and the percentage of patients undergoing an emergency admission during the weekend. We corrected the scores of the GP practices based on their casemix and identified practices with the most unfavorable scores, 'red flags,' in 2015, or the trend between 2013-2015. Finally, we analysed the data of GP practices already identified as delivering substandard care by the Health and Youth Care Inspectorate and calculated the sensitivity and specificity of using the indicators to identify poor performing GP practices. RESULTS: By combining the 3 indicators, we identified 1 GP practice with 3 red flags and 24 GP practices with 2 red flags. The a priori chance of identifying a GP practice that shows substandard care is 0.3%. Using the indicators, this improved to 1.0%. The sensitivity was 26.7%, the specificity was 92.8%. CONCLUSION: The Dutch Health and Youth Care Inspectorate might use claim data to calculate indicators on costs, the prescribing of reserve antibiotics and emergency admissions during the weekend, when setting priorities for its visits to GP practices. Visiting more GP practices by the Health and Youth Care Inspectorate, and identifying substandard care, is necessary to validate the use of these indicators.

Substitution of general practitioners by nurse practitioners in out-of-hours primary care home visits: A quasi-experimental study.

BACKGROUND: General practitioners experience a high workload during out-of-hours care. A possible solution is the shifting of care to nurse practitioners. OBJECTIVES: To provide insight into patient- and care characteristics, safety, efficiency, and patient satisfaction of substituting general practitioners with nurse practitioners for home visits by out-of-hours primary care services. DESIGN: Quasi-experimental non-randomised study comparing home visits by nurse practitioners (intervention group; one out-of-hours care service) with home visits by general practitioners (control group; two out-of-hours care services) for 24 protocolised health problems. SETTING: Three out-of-hours primary care services in the East of the Netherlands. PARTICIPANTS: 1601 patients who received a home visit by a nurse practitioner (N = 386) or a general practitioner (N = 1215). Of these patients, 639 gave informed consent to be included in the protocol adherence assessment and follow-up record review (nurse practitioner: N = 358; general practitioner: N = 281). METHODS: Five nurse practitioners with experience in ambulance care were recruited and trained. From September 2016 to March 2017 the nurse practitioners took over home visits under supervision of a general practitioners. This was evaluated using: (1) data-extraction from the patient registration system, (2) follow-up record review in the patients' general practices, and (3) patient satisfaction survey. Two general practitioners independently assessed protocol adherence based on the extracted registration data. RESULTS: Nurse practitioners prescribed medication significantly less often than general practitioners (19.9% versus 30.6%), and referred patients significantly more often to the hospital (24.1% versus 15.9%). The mean length of the home visit was significantly longer for nurse practitioners (34.1 versus 21.1 min). Nurse practitioners adhered to the protocol significantly more often than general practitioners (84.9% versus 76.2%) and their medication prescribing was significantly more often appropriate (93.7% versus 79.5%). There were no differences in the number of missed diagnoses and complications. The number of follow-up contacts was also similar in both groups. Patient satisfaction was generally high and significantly higher for nurse practitioners on several items. CONCLUSIONS: Nurse practitioners with experience in ambulance care can safely, efficiently, and satisfactorily perform low complex out-of-hours primary care home visits. It is recommended to study the safety and efficiency of nurse practitioners' home visits in other regions and with nurse practitioners with different educational levels and different specialisations. In addition, we recommend to evaluate the cost-effectiveness and if it leads increased quality of care.

Patient and Health Care Provider Experiences With a Recently Introduced Patient Portal in an Academic Hospital in the Netherlands: Mixed Methods Study.

BACKGROUND: In the Netherlands, the health care system and related information technology landscape are fragmented. Recently, hospitals have started to launch patient portals. It is not clear how these portals are used by patients and their health care providers (HCPs). OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to explore the adoption, use, usability, and usefulness of a recently introduced patient portal in an academic hospital to learn lessons for the implementation of patient portals in a fragmented health care system. METHODS: A mixed methods study design was used. In the quantitative study arm, characteristics of patients who used the portal were analyzed, in addition to the utilization of the different functionalities of the portal. In the qualitative study arms, think-aloud observations were made to explore usability. Focus group discussions were conducted among patients and HCPs of the dermatology and ophthalmology outpatient departments. Thematic content analysis of qualitative data was carried out and overarching themes were identified using a framework analysis. RESULTS: One year after the introduction of the portal, 24,514 patients, 13.49% of all patients who visited the hospital, had logged in to the portal. Adoption of the portal was associated with the age group 45 to 75 years, a higher socioeconomic status, and having at least one medical diagnosis. Overarching themes from the qualitative analyses were (1) usability and user-friendliness of the portal, (2) HCP-patient communication through the portal, (3) usefulness of the information that can be accessed through the portal, (4) integration of the portal in care and work processes, and (5) HCP and patient roles and relationships. CONCLUSIONS: One year after the introduction of the patient portal, patients and HCPs who used the portal recognized the potential of the portal to engage patients in their care processes, facilitate patient-HCP communication, and increase patient convenience. Uncertainties among patients and HCPs about how to use the messaging functionality and limited integration of the portal in care and work processes are likely to have limited portal use and usefulness.