When the Process Is the Problem: Racial/Ethnic and Language Disparities in Care Management.

OBJECTIVES: Achieving health equity requires addressing disparities at every level of care delivery. Yet, little literature exists examining racial/ethnic disparities in processes of high-risk care management, a foundational tool for population health. This study sought to determine whether race, ethnicity, and language are associated with patient entry into and service intensity within a large care management program. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. METHODS: Subjects were 23,836 adult patients eligible for the program between 2015 and 2018. Adjusting for demographics, utilization, and medical risk, we analyzed the association between race/ethnicity and language and outcomes of patient selection, enrollment, care plan completion, and care management encounters. RESULTS: Among all identified as eligible by an algorithm, Asian and Spanish-speaking patients had significantly lower odds of being selected by physicians for care management [OR 0.74 (0.58-0.93), OR 0.79 (0.64-0.97)] compared with White and English-speaking patients, respectively. Once selected, Hispanic/Latino and Asian patients had significantly lower odds compared to White counterparts of having care plans completed by care managers [OR 0.69 (0.50-0.97), 0.50 (0.32-0.79), respectively]. Patients speaking languages other than English or Spanish had a lower odds of care plan completion and had fewer staff encounters than English-speaking counterparts [OR 0.62 (0.44-0.87), RR 0.87 (0.75-1.00), respectively]. CONCLUSIONS: Race/ethnicity and language-based disparities exist at every process level within a large health system's care management program, from selection to outreach. These results underscore the importance of assessing for disparities not just in outcomes but also in program processes, to prevent population health innovations from inadvertently creating new inequities.

Intensive care management of a complex Medicaid population: a randomized evaluation.

OBJECTIVES: Care management programs are employed by providers and payers to support high-risk patients and affect cost and utilization, with varied implementation. This study sought to evaluate the impact of an intensive care management program on utilization and cost among those with highest cost (top 5%) and highest utilization in a Medicaid accountable care organization (ACO) population. STUDY DESIGN: Randomized controlled quality improvement trial of intensive care management, provided by a nonprofit care management vendor, for Medicaid ACO patients at 2 academic centers. METHODS: Patients were identified using claims, chart review, and primary care validation, then randomly assigned 2:1 to intervention and control groups. Among 131 patients included in intent-to-treat analysis, 87 and 44 were randomly assigned to the intervention and control groups, respectively. Patients in the intervention group were eligible to receive intensive care management in the community/home setting and, in some cases, home-based primary care. Patients in the control group received standard of care, including practice-based care management. Prespecified primary outcome measures included total medical expense (TME), emergency department (ED) visits, and inpatient utilization. RESULTS: Relative to controls, patients randomly assigned to receive intensive care management had a $1933 smaller increase per member per month in TME (P = .04) and directionally consistent but nonsignificant reductions in ED visits (17% fewer; P = .40) and inpatient admissions (34% fewer; P = .29) in the 12 months post randomization compared with the 12 months prerandomization. CONCLUSIONS: Our study results support that targeted, intensive care management can favorably affect TME in a health system-based high-cost, high-risk Medicaid population. Further research is needed to evaluate the impact on additional clinical outcomes.

The essential role of population health during and beyond COVID-19.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has fundamentally changed how health care systems deliver services and revealed the tenuousness of care delivery based on face-to-face office visits and fee-for-service reimbursement models. Robust population health management, fostered by value-based contract participation, integrates analytics and agile clinical programs and is adaptable to optimize outcomes and reduce risk during population-level crises. In this article, we describe how mature population health programs in a learning health system have been rapidly leveraged to address the challenges of the pandemic. Population-level data and care management have facilitated identification of demographic-based disparities and community outreach. Telemedicine and integrated behavioral health have ensured critical primary care and specialty access, and mobile health and postacute interventions have shifted site of care and optimized hospital utilization. Beyond the pandemic, population health can lead as a cornerstone of a resilient health system, better prepared to improve public health and mitigate risk in a value-based paradigm.

Health systems as venture capital investors in digital health: 2011-2019.

Provider health systems as venture capital investors in digital health are uniquely positioned in the industry. Little is known about the volume or characteristics of their investments and how these compare to other investors. From 2011 to 2019, we found that health systems made 184 investments in 105 companies. Compared with other investors, they were more likely to invest in companies focused on workflow, on-demand health services, and data infrastructure/interoperability.

Evaluating the use of locally-based health facility assessments in Afghanistan: a pilot study of a novel research method.

BACKGROUND: Through the Balanced Scorecard program there have been independent, annual and nationwide assessments of the Afghan health system from 2004 to 2013. During this period, Afghanistan remained in a dynamic state of conflict, requiring innovative approaches to health service evaluation in insecure areas. The primary objective of this pilot study was to evaluate the reliability of health facility assessments conducted by a novel, locally-based data collection method compared to a standard survey team. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, one standard survey team of clinicians and multiple rapidly trained locally-based survey teams of teachers conducted health facility assessments in Badghis province, Afghanistan from March - August, 2010. Outpatient facilities covered under the country's Basic Package of Health Services were eligible for inclusion. Both approaches attempted to survey as many health facilities as safely possible, up to 25 total facilities per method. Each facility assessed was scored on 23 health services indicators used to evaluate performance in the annual Balanced Scorecard national assessment. For facilities assessed by both survey methods, the indicator scores produced by each method were compared using Spearman's correlation coefficients and linear regression analysis with generalized estimating equations. RESULTS: The standard survey team was able to assess 11 facilities; the locally-based approach was able to assess these 11 facilities, as well as 13 additional facilities in areas of greater insecurity. Among the 11 facilities assessed by both approaches, 19 of 23 indicators were statistically similar by survey method (p < .05). Spearman's coefficients varied widely from (-0.39) to (0.71). The differences were greatest for items requiring specialized data collector knowledge on reviewing patient records, patient examination and counseling, and health worker reported satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS: This pilot study of a novel method of data collection in health facility assessments showed that an approach using locally-based survey teams provided markedly increased access to areas of insecurity. Though analysis was limited by small sample size, indicator scores used for facility evaluation were relatively comparable overall, but less reliable for items requiring clinical knowledge or when asking health worker opinions, suggesting that alternative approaches may be needed to assess these parameters in insecure environments.

An epidemiologic review of enteropathogens in Gaborone, Botswana: shifting patterns of resistance in an HIV endemic region.

BACKGROUND: The epidemiology of diarrheal disease in Botswana, an HIV endemic region, is largely unknown. Our primary objective was to characterize the prevalent bacterial and parasitic enteropathogens in Gaborone, Botswana. Secondary objectives included determining corresponding antimicrobial resistance patterns and the value of stool white and red blood cells for predicting bacterial and parasitic enteropathogens. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: A retrospective cross-sectional study examined laboratory records of stool specimens analyzed by the Botswana National Health Laboratory in Gaborone, Botswana from February 2003 through July 2008. In 4485 specimens the median subject age was 23 [interquartile range 1.6-34] years. Overall, 14.4% (644 of 4485) of samples yielded a pathogen. Bacteria alone were isolated in 8.2% (367 of 4485), parasites alone in 5.6% (253 of 4485) and both in 0.5% (24 of 4485) of samples. The most common bacterial pathogens were Shigella spp. and Salmonella spp., isolated from 4.0% (180 of 4485) and 3.9% (175 of 4485) of specimens, respectively. Escherichia coli (22 of 4485) and Campylobacter spp. (22 of 4485) each accounted for 0.5% of pathogens. Comparing antimicrobial resistance among Shigella spp. and Salmonella spp. between two periods, February 2003 to February 2004 and July 2006 to July 2008, revealed an increase in ampicillin resistance among Shigella spp. from 43% to 83% (p<0.001). Among Salmonella spp., resistance to chloramphenicol decreased from 56% to 6% (p<0.001). The absence of stool white and red blood cells correlated with a high specificity and negative predictive value. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: Most gastroenteritis stools were culture and microscopy negative suggesting that viral pathogens were the majority etiologic agents in this Botswana cohort. Shigella spp. and Salmonella spp. were the most common bacteria; Isospora spp. and Cryptosporidium spp. were the most common parasites. Resistance to commonly used antimicrobials is high and should be closely monitored.