When activation changes, what else changes? the relationship between change in patient activation measure (PAM) and employees' health status and health behaviors.

OBJECTIVE: To test whether changes in the patient activation measure (PAM) are related to changes in health status and healthy behaviors. METHODS: Data for this secondary analysis were taken from a group-randomized, controlled trial comparing a traditional health promotion program for employees with an activated consumer program and a control program. The study population included 320 employees (with and without chronic disease) from two U.S. companies: a large, integrated health care system and a national airline. Survey and biometric data were collected in Spring 2005 (baseline) and Spring 2007 (follow-up). RESULTS: Change in PAM was associated with changes in health behaviors at every level (1-4), especially at level 4. Changes related to overall risk score and many of its components: aerobic exercise, safety, cancer risk, stress and mental health. Other changes included frequency of eating breakfast and the likelihood of knowing about health plans and how they compare. CONCLUSION: Level 4 of patient activation is not an end-point. People are capable of continuing to make significant change within this level. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Interventions should be designed to encourage movement from lower to higher levels of activation. Even people at the most activated level improve health behaviors.

The ACTIVATE study: results from a group-randomized controlled trial comparing a traditional worksite health promotion program with an activated consumer program.

PURPOSE. This study compares a traditional worksite-based health promotion program with an activated consumer program and a control program DESIGN. Group randomized controlled trial with 18-month intervention. SETTING. Two large Midwestern companies. SUBJECTS. Three hundred and twenty employees (51% response). INTERVENTION. The traditional health promotion intervention offered population-level campaigns on physical activity, nutrition, and stress management. The activated consumer intervention included population-level campaigns for evaluating health information, choosing a health benefits plan, and understanding the risks of not taking medications as prescribed. The personal development intervention (control group) offered information on hobbies. The interventions also offered individual-level coaching for high risk individuals in both active intervention groups. MEASURES. Health risk status, general health status, consumer activation, productivity, and the ability to evaluate health information. ANALYSIS. Multivariate analyses controlled for baseline differences among the study groups. RESULTS. At the population level, compared with baseline performance, the traditional health promotion intervention improved health risk status, consumer activation, and the ability to recognize reliable health websites. Compared with baseline performance, the activated consumer intervention improved consumer activation, productivity, and the ability to recognize reliable health websites. At the population level, however, only the activated consumer intervention improved any outcome more than the control group did; that outcome was consumer activation. At the individual level for high risk individuals, both traditional health coaching and activated consumer coaching positively affected health risk status and consumer activation. In addition, both coaching interventions improved participant ability to recognize a reliable health website. Consumer activation coaching also significantly improved self-reported productivity. CONCLUSION. An effective intervention can change employee health risk status and activation both at the population level and at the individual high risk level. However, program engagement at the population level was low, indicating that additional promotional strategies, such as greater use of incentives, need to be examined. Less intensive coaching can be as effective as more intensive, albeit both interventions produced modest behavior change and retention in the consumer activation arm was most difficult. Further research is needed concerning recruitment and retention methods that will enable populations to realize the full potential of activated consumerism.

Measuring self-management of patients' and employees' health: further validation of the Patient Activation Measure (PAM) based on its relation to employee characteristics.

OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the Patient Activation Measure (PAM) in relation to personal characteristics in employed populations. Further validate the PAM for use in improving clinical or employer-based health-intervention programs. METHODS: Data for analysis were taken from baseline survey information and health screenings collected during a randomized, controlled trial testing two different health promotion programs. Study population included 625 employees (predominantly white collar) from two companies in the northern Midwest of the United States: a large, integrated health care system and a national airline. RESULTS: PAM's psychometric properties are robust in two employed populations. Activation is directly related not only to health status, but also to job performance measures. The strong positive relationship of PAM to measures of healthy behavior, health information-seeking and readiness-to-change further validate the measure. Commonly, a difference of 5 points on the PAM separated healthy from less healthy behaviors. CONCLUSION: Activation can be understood in a broader population health context and need not be restricted to people with chronic illnesses. The study provides guidance on how to interpret PAM scores. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: The PAM can be used as part of any health-intervention program designed to improve patients' or employees' self-management skills, whether the program is clinic-based or employer-based.

Beyond health information technology: critical factors necessary for effective diabetes disease management.

BACKGROUND: Electronic health records (EHRs) have been implemented throughout the United States with varying degrees of success. Past EHR implementation experiences can inform health systems planning to initiate new or expand existing EHR systems. Key "critical success factors," e.g., use of disease registries, workflow integration, and real-time clinical guideline support, have been identified but not fully tested in practice. METHODS: A pre/postintervention cohort analysis was conducted on 495 adult patients selected randomly from a diabetes registry and followed for 6 years. Two intervention phases were evaluated: a "low-dose" period targeting primary care provider (PCP) and patient education followed by a "high-dose" EHR diabetes management implementation period, including a diabetes disease registry and office workflow changes, e.g., diabetes patient preidentification to facilitate real-time diabetes preventive care, disease management, and patient education. RESULTS: Across baseline, "low-dose," and "high-dose" postintervention periods, a significantly greater proportion of patients (a) achieved American Diabetes Association (ADA) guidelines for control of blood pressure (26.9 to 33.1 to 43.9%), glycosylated hemoglobin (48.5 to 57.5 to 66.8%), and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (33.1 to 44.4 to 56.6%) and (b) received recommended preventive eye (26.2 to 36.4 to 58%), foot (23.4 to 40.3 to 66.9%), and renal (38.5 to 53.9 to 71%) examinations or screens. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of a fully functional, specialized EHR combined with tailored office workflow process changes was associated with increased adherence to ADA guidelines, including risk factor control, by PCPs and their patients with diabetes. Incorporation of previously identified "critical success factors" potentially contributed to the success of the program, as did use of a two-phase approach.

Early experience with employee choice of consumer-directed health plans and satisfaction with enrollment.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the initial impact of offering consumer-defined health plan (CDHP) options on employees. DATA SOURCES/STUDY SETTING: A mail survey of 4,680 employees in the corporate offices of Humana Inc. in June 2001. STUDY DESIGN: The study was a cross-sectional mail survey of employees aged 18 and older who were eligible for health care benefits. The survey was conducted following open enrollment. The primary outcome is the choice of consumer-directed health plan or not; the secondary outcome is satisfaction with the enrollment process. Important covariates include sociodemographic characteristics (age, gender, race, educational level, exempt or nonexempt status, type of coverage), health status, health care utilization, and plan design preferences. DATA COLLECTION METHODS: A six-page questionnaire was mailed to the home of each employee, followed by a reminder postcard and two subsequent mailings to nonrespondents. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: The response rate was 66.2 percent. Seven percent selected one of the two new plan options. Because there were no meaningful differences between employees choosing either of the two new options, these groups were combined in multivariate analysis. A logistic regression modeled the likelihood of choosing the novel plan options. Those selecting the new plans were less likely to be black (odds ratio [OR] 0.46), less likely to have only Humana coverage (OR 0.30), and more likely to have single coverage (OR 1.77). They were less likely to have a chronic health problem (OR 0.56) and more likely to have had no recent medical visits (OR 3.21). They were more likely to believe that lowest premiums were the most important plan attribute (OR 2.89) and to think there were big differences in the premiums of available plans (OR 5.19). Employees in fair or poor health were more likely to have a difficult time during the online enrollment process. They were more likely to find the communications very helpful (OR 0.42) and the benefits information very understandable (OR 0.38). They were less likely to feel that they had enough time to make their enrollment decision (OR 0.47). CONCLUSIONS: Employees who were attracted to the new CDHP plan options valued the attributes that distinguished these plans from other choices. The shift to consumer-defined plans and to the electronic provision of information, however, requires a significant increase in the communication support for all employees, but particularly for those in fair or poor health whose information needs are the most complex and individualized.

Which enrollees bypass their gatekeepers in a point-of-service plan?

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Like Health Maintenance Organizations, point-of-service (POS) health plans use primary care gatekeepers, and they permit self-referral to specialists at increased costs to the enrollee. The main objective of this study was to contrast patients who self-referred with those referred by their primary care physician. RESEARCH DESIGN: We conducted a cross-sectional telephone survey of 606 recent users of specialists in a large Midwestern POS health plan; response rate was 65%. We compared 148 enrollees who self-referred with 458 who had a physician referral. RESULTS: Self-referral was most common among those with a long-term relationship with a specialist (odds ratio [OR] = 2.08) and those dissatisfied with their primary care physician (OR = 3.65), and was rare among those with a long-standing relationship with a primary care physician (OR = 0.46). Most self-referred enrollees (68%) thought paying the additional cost for self-referral was worthwhile, and they were more dissatisfied with the quality and variety of the plan's specialist network. CONCLUSIONS: Continuity with a single physician influences how patients access specialty care. Expanding the panel of specialists in-network and encouraging long-term relationships with primary care physicians are likely to limit self-referral in a POS plan.