How Are We Doing? A Scoping Review of Published Patient-Centered Outcomes Research in United States Student-Run Free Clinics.

Phenomenon: Student-run free clinics (SRFCs) serve an integral role in most United States (US) medical schools and contribute substantially to literature on the quality of care to uninsured persons. There has been substantial growth over the past decade of scholarly work produced by SRFCs as they have increased in size and number. Research on patient care outcomes informs better care structures for patients, however there is no current synthesis of patient care outcomes research among SRFCs. This article provides an overview of SRFC research on patient outcomes to understand current research domains and to identify gaps in the literature. Approach: We completed a scoping review by searching Scopus, PubMed, and Journal of Student Run Clinics in June 2021. All peer-reviewed, English-language articles focused on patient-centered outcomes at SRFCs in the US were included. Two independent reviewers performed title, abstract, and full-text screening of relevant works, and eight reviewers conducted data extraction. Descriptive data analysis was performed along with relevant content analysis of patient-centered outcomes. Findings: The search strategy identified 784 studies, of which 87 met inclusion criteria. Most studies were published within the last six years (81.6%), located in California, New York, or Florida (43.7%), and intervention based (33.3%). Many studies (46.0%) had a specific disease of focus of which diabetes was the most researched(19.5%). Patient-centered studies were the leading focus of the study aims (40.2%), where key findings demonstrated primarily improved outcomes in clinic metrics post-intervention (36.8%) or equivalent/better clinical performance than national metrics (20.7%). Insights: This review brings to light gaps in the literature reporting research in SRFCs and can be applied to other low-resource settings. Future efforts to expand SRFC outcomes research should focus on community relationship building, understanding institutional support, and ensuring education on best practices for research within SRFCs. Doing so informs patient care improvement as SRFCs continue to operate as safety net clinics for marginalized populations.

Controlling Pharmaceutical Costs in a Student-Run Free Clinic in a Resource-Limited Patient Setting.

Our institution's student-run free clinic has been able to offer medication at no out-of-pocket cost to all patients since it opened in 2004. We have employed two strategies to manage prescription drug costs while simultaneously increasing medication coverage: (1) using Patient Drug Assistance Programs (PDAPs) and (2) developing an institutional-level partnership with pharmaceutical charities for medication subsidization. In this study, we aimed to analyze the financial impact of these measures on the clinic.A query of clinic data over the past 5 years identified 299 active PDAPs, corresponding to 299 fully-subsidized prescriptions. In 2017, there were 35 active PDAPs, increasing to 52 (2018), 62 (2019), and 82 (2020) before a decline to 68 PDAPs in 2021. The company affiliated with the most PDAPs varied annually: GlaxoSmithKline (2017), Lilly (2018, 2019, 2020), and both GlaxoSmithKline and Lilly (2021). The most frequent medications were sitagliptin (2017), insulin (2018, 2019), albuterol (2017, 2018), and dulaglutide (2020, 2021).In addition, data extracted from the private company subsidization program was analyzed for the year 2021. Program membership was $10,000 for institution-wide medication subsidization for all uninsured patients in the hospital system. In total, the clinic was able to acquire 220 medications with a 96% subsidy, corresponding to a direct clinic cost of $2,101.28. Comparatively, the market value of these medications was $52,401.51.Utilization of free drug acquisition programs and partnerships with pharmaceutical charities allowed for an increase in cost-savings and medications provided. Although the process for applying for medication assistance programs is complex, these programs serve as powerful tools for providing medications that may otherwise be unavailable due to cost. Other clinics and healthcare settings with uninsured patients should consider these programs as a means to ease medication cost burden.

Using Nurse Practitioner Co-Management to Reduce Hospitalizations and Readmissions Within a Home-Based Primary Care Program.

Nurse practitioner (NP) co-management involves an NP and physician sharing responsibility for the care of a patient. This study evaluates the impact of NP co-management for clinically complex patients in a home-based primary care program on hospitalizations, 30-day hospital readmissions, and provider satisfaction. We compared preenrollment and postenrollment hospitalization and 30-day readmission rates of home-bound patients active in the Nurse Practitioner Co-Management Program within the Mount Sinai Visiting Doctors Program (MSVD) (n = 87) between January 1, 2012, and July 1, 2013. Data were collected from electronic medical records. An anonymous online survey was administered to all physicians active in the MSVD in July 2013 (n = 13).After enrollment in co-management, patients have lower annual hospitalization rates (1.26 vs. 2.27, p = .005) and fewer patients have 30-day readmissions (5.8% vs. 17.2%, p = .004). Eight of 13 physicians feel "much" or "somewhat" less burned out by their work after implementation of co-management. The high level of provider satisfaction and reductions in annual hospitalization and readmission rates among high-risk home-bound patients associated with NP co-management may yield not only benefits for patients, caregivers, and providers but also cost savings for institutions.

Characterizing the high-risk homebound patients in need of nurse practitioner co-management.

By providing more frequent provider visits, prompt responses to acute issues, and care coordination, nurse practitioner (NP) co-management has been beneficial for the care of chronically ill older adults. This paper describes the homebound patients with high symptom burden and healthcare utilization who were referred to an NP co-management intervention and outlines key features of the intervention. We compared demographic, clinical, and healthcare utilization data of patients referred for NP co-management within a large home-based primary care (HBPC) program (n = 87) to patients in the HBPC program not referred for co-management (n = 1027). A physician survey found recurrent hospitalizations to be the top reason for co-management referral and a focus group with nurses and social workers noted that co-management patients are typically those with active medical issues more so than psychosocial needs. Co-management patients are younger than non-co-management patients (72.31 vs. 80.30 years old, P < 0.001), with a higher mean Charlson comorbidity score (3.53 vs. 2.47, P = 0.0001). They have higher baseline annual hospitalization rates (2.27 vs. 0.61, P = 0.0005) and total annual home visit rates (13.1 vs. 6.60, P = 0.0001). NP co-management can be utilized in HBPC to provide intensive medical management to high-risk homebound patients.