Patients' Perceptions of Integrated Care Among Medicare Beneficiaries by Level of Need for Health Services.

Requirements for integrating care across providers, settings, and over time increase with patients' needs. Health care providers' ability to offer care that patients experience as integrated may vary among patients with different levels of need. We explore the variation in patients' perceptions of integrated care among Medicare beneficiaries based on the beneficiary's level of need using ordinary least square regression for each of four high-need groups: beneficiaries (a) with complex chronic conditions, (b) with frailties, (c) below 65 with disability, and (d) with any (of the first three) high needs. We control for beneficiary demographics and other factors affecting integrated care, and we conduct sensitivity analyses controlling for multiple individual chronic conditions. We find significant positive associations with level of need for provider support for self-directed care and medication and home health management. Controlling for multiple individual chronic conditions reduces effect sizes and number of significant relationships.

Understanding memorably negative provider care delivery experiences: Why patient experiences matter for providers.

BACKGROUND: Negative experiences contribute to provider dissatisfaction and burnout. Prior research suggests that negative experiences have greater impact on individuals than positive experiences. METHODS: Interviews were conducted with surgical and oncology care providers (107 MDs, 253 non-MDs) working in 10 geographically diverse, academic and community hospitals across the U.S. Using a thematic network approach, we identified core themes describing drivers of memorably negative experiences. We applied logistic regression with adjustments for multiple comparisons to evaluate the relationship between demographic characteristics and types of experiences. RESULTS: We identified 13 themes from 360 experiences and from these, developed a framework describing how work culture, environment, individual factors, and patient experiences lead to memorably, negative provider experiences. Providers most frequently described negative work environment experiences (158/360) and poor communication experiences with patients and other care professionals (151/360). Across themes, one third of respondents attributed memorably negative experiences to patient experiences (119/360). Midwest providers described patient centeredness more than other providers (OR = 3.9, p < 0.001). Providers from the Northeast, MDs compared to non-MDs, and providers with 15+ years of work experience identified negative insurance-related experiences more frequently (OR = 0.2, P = 0.007; OR = 2.9, P = 0.002 OR = 4.2, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: We offer a framework for understanding negative experiences among providers. Our study suggests that across a broad set of causes, improving patient experiences could substantially improve the negative, memorable experiences of providers. IMPLICATIONS: Addressing negative patient experiences may have the double benefit of improving patient care and reducing provider burnout. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

Differences in patient perceptions of integrated care among black, hispanic, and white Medicare beneficiaries.

OBJECTIVE: This study sought to identify potential disparities among racial/ethnic groups in patient perceptions of integrated care (PPIC) and to explore how methodological differences may influence measured disparities. DATA SOURCE: Data from Medicare beneficiaries who completed the 2015 Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey (MCBS) and were enrolled in Part A benefits for an entire year. STUDY DESIGN: We used 4-point measures of eight dimensions of PPIC and assessed differences in dimensions among racial/ethnic groups. To estimate differences, we applied a "rank and replace" method using multiple regression models in three steps, balancing differences in health status among racial groups and adjusting for differences in socioeconomic status. We reran all analyses with additional SES controls and using standard multiple variable regression. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: Not applicable. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We found several significant differences in perceived integrated care between Black versus White (three of eight measures) and Hispanic versus White (one of eight) Medicare beneficiaries. On average, Black beneficiaries perceived more integrated support for self-care than did White beneficiaries (mean difference = 0.14, SE = 0.06, P =.02). Black beneficiaries perceived more integrated specialists' knowledge of past medical history than did White beneficiaries (mean difference = 0.12, SE = 0.06, P =.01). Black and Hispanic beneficiaries also each reported, on average, 0.18 more integrated medication and home health management than did White beneficiaries (P <.01 and P <.01). These findings were robust to sensitivity analyses and model specifications. CONCLUSIONS: There exist some aspects of care for which Black and Hispanic beneficiaries may perceive greater integrated care than non-Hispanic White beneficiaries. Further studies should test theories explaining why racial/ethnic groups perceive differences in integrated care.

Puerto Rico Health System Resilience After Hurricane Maria: Implications for Disaster Preparedness in the COVID-19 Era.

BACKGROUND: Every year, Puerto Rico faces a hurricane season fraught with potentially catastrophic structural, emotional and health consequences. In 2017, Puerto Rico was hit by Hurricane Maria, the largest natural disaster to ever affect the island. Several studies have estimated the excess morbidity and mortality following Hurricane Maria in Puerto Rico, yet no study has comprehensively examined the underlying health system weaknesses contributing to the deleterious health outcomes. METHODS: A qualitative case study was conducted to assess the ability of the UPR health system to provide patient care in response to Hurricane Maria. An established five key resilience framework and inductive analysis was used to identify factors that affected health system resilience. Thirteen Emergency Medicine Physicians, Family Medicine Physicians, and Hospital Administrators in a University of Puerto Rico (UPR) Community Hospital were interviewed as part of our study. RESULTS: Of the five key resiliency components, three domains were notably weak with respect to UPR resiliency. Prior to the Hurricane, key personnel at the UPR hospital were unaware of the limited capacity of back-up generators at hospitals and were ill-prepared to transfer ICU patients to appropriate hospitals. Post Hurricane, the hospital faced self-regulation challenges when triaging the provision of Hurricane-related emergency services with delivering core health services, in particular for patients with chronic conditions. Finally, during and after the Hurricane, integration of patient care coordination between the UPR hospital ambulances, neighboring hospitals, and national and state government was suboptimal. The two remaining resiliency factors, addressing diverse needs and system adaptiveness in a time of crisis, were seen as strengths. CONCLUSIONS: Hurricane Maria exposed weaknesses in the Puerto Rican health system, notably the lack of awareness about the limited capacity of backup generators, poor patient care coordination, and interruption of medical care for patients with chronic conditions. As in other countries, the current COVID epidemic is taxing the capacity of the Puerto Rico health system, which could increase the likelihood of another health system collapse should another hurricane hit the island. Therefore, a resilience framework is a useful tool to help health systems identify areas of improvement in preparation for possible natural disasters.

Community engagement for health system resilience: evidence from Liberia's Ebola epidemic.

The importance of community engagement (CE) for health system resilience is established in theoretical and empirical literature. The practical dimensions of how to operationalize theory and implement its principles have been less explored, especially within low-resource crisis settings. It is therefore unclear how CE is drawn upon and how, if at all, it facilitates health system resilience in times of health system crises. To address this critical gap, we adapt and apply existing theoretical CE frameworks to analyse qualitative data from 92 in-depth interviews and 16 focus group discussions collected with health system stakeholders in Liberia in the aftermath of the 2014-15 Ebola outbreak. Health system stakeholders indicated that CE was a crucial contributing factor in addressing the Ebola epidemic in Liberia. Multiple forms of CE were used during the outbreak; however, only some forms were perceived as meaningful, such as the formation of community-based surveillance teams. To achieve meaningful CE, participants recommended that communities be treated as active participants in-as opposed to passive recipients of-health response efforts and that communication platforms for CE be established ahead of a crisis. Participant responses highlight that meaningful CE led to improved communication with and increased trust in health authorities and programming. This facilitated health system response efforts, leading to a fortuitous cycle of increased trust, improved communication and continued meaningful CE-all necessary conditions for health system resilience. This study refines our understanding of CE and demonstrates the ways in which meaningful CE and trust work together in mutually reinforcing and beneficial ways. These findings provide empirical evidence on which to base policies and programmes aimed at improving health system resilience in low-resource settings to more effectively respond to health system crises.

Beyond the crisis: did the Ebola epidemic improve resilience of Liberia's health system?

Resilience was widely identified as a critical attribute for strong health systems following the 2014-15 West Africa Ebola epidemic. In Liberia, Sierra Leone and Guinea, struggles to control the disease and suspension of the operation of many health services demonstrated that health systems must plan for resilience long before a crisis. However, the operational elements of resilience and ways that a crisis experience can shape resilience are not well described in the literature. To understand how a health system adapts to crisis and how the priorities of different health system actors influence this response we conducted interviews with global, national, and local respondents in Liberia between July and September 2015 (n = 108), several months after the country was first declared Ebola-free. We found that health system resilience functions prioritized by global and national actors improved to a greater extent than those valued by community leaders and local health actors over the course of the epidemic. Although the Ebola epidemic stimulated some positive adaptations in Liberia's health system, building a truly resilient health system will require longer-term investments and sustained attention long beyond the crisis.

Time From Infection to Disease and Infectiousness for Ebola Virus Disease, a Systematic Review.

We systematically reviewed the literature to estimate the incubation and latent periods of Ebola virus disease. We found limited epidemiological data from individuals with discrete 1-day exposures. Available data suggest that the incubation and latent periods may differ, and mathematical models may be improved by distinguishing between the two periods.