Factors Influencing Patient Satisfaction With Care and Surgical Outcomes for Total Hip and Knee Replacement.

INTRODUCTION: Although patient satisfaction with total joint arthroplasty has been a well-measured outcome, little is known about how preadmission and post-discharge care experiences affect patients' rating of satisfaction. OBJECTIVE: This work aimed to identify actionable factors associated with better ratings of overall care and surgical results. METHODS: A 36-item survey assessing care in the preoperative, perioperative, and post-discharge phases of care and across all phases was mailed to 7,031 patients who underwent primary unilateral elective total hip arthroplasty and total knee arthroplasty in 2018. Exploratory factor analysis identified 7 actionable domains. Stepwise logistic regression models identified domains associated with ratings of overall care and satisfaction with surgical outcome. RESULTS: Of the 3,026 (43%) patients who returned the survey; 2,814 (93%) rated their overall experience of care as very good or excellent and satisfaction with surgical results as ≥ 7 on a 10-point scale. In exploratory factor analysis, four factors predicted higher ratings of both overall care and surgical outcome: knowing what to do with symptoms and pain during recovery (factor 1), self-reported health (factor 3), knowing what to expect before surgery (factor 4), and shared decision making (factor 6). Coordinated information among providers (factor 2), home health experience (factor 5), and patient-provider relationships (factor 7) also predicted overall care ratings. CONCLUSION: Patient-centered quality improvement in total joint replacement care requires thinking of care across the entire episode, including before and after the hospital stay for surgery, in addition to perioperative care. The actionable factors identified from this study can be incorporated into total joint replacement care to improve patients' satisfaction with overall care and surgical results.

Assessing End-of-Life Care across Settings in an Integrated Health Care Delivery System.

Objective: To systematically capture patient- and family-centered data to understand variability and opportunities in end-of-life care delivery across settings in an integrated health care delivery system. Background: Improving the quality of end-of-life care requires assessing patient and family experiences across settings where care occurs, but we found no existing instrument suitable for this purpose. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional survey with 10,308 surviving respondents (usually next of kin) of decedents in five Kaiser Permanente operating regions. The survey included eight items from an existing validated survey and three original items. Results: The overall response rate was 26% (2631). Most respondents reported that they were knowledgeable about decedents' end-of-life care and preferences. Across regions, 80% of respondents reported overall end-of-life care as excellent or very good. The proportion of excellent and very good responses was 74-84% across regions for items assessing attributes of end-of-life care, with statistically significant differences (p < 0.05). The proportion of positive responses was 69-89%. Overall, end-of-life care was rated as excellent or very good for a greater proportion of patients who received palliative care, hospice care, or both (78-82%), compared to those who did not (69%, p < 0.05 for all). Discussion: Regions are using data to inform end-of-life care initiatives. Assessing patient and family experiences of end-of-life care across settings with a single survey was feasible and provided valuable information supporting quality improvement. The survey met our need for a general purpose survey on end-of-life care experience.

Using the PDQ-39 in routine care for Parkinson's disease.

INTRODUCTION: Using the 39-item Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) in routine care could efficiently identify symptoms that are most important to patients, but little evidence documents its use for this purpose. METHODS: A quality improvement pilot project using interviews with patients, caregivers, and providers. RESULTS: PDQ administration and scoring were successfully integrated into clinic workflows, and results were available for discussions during outpatient visits. Patients reported that completing the instrument helped them remember what to discuss with their provider, formulate specific questions, and identify factors affecting their quality of life. Caregivers found it useful for gaining insight into patients' daily needs. The neurologist reported it made provider-patient discussions more efficient by focusing on domains that were particularly concerning for patients. Ancillary care providers reported that PDQ-39 domain subscores efficiently provided a holistic view of patients' needs and supported setting short- and long-term goals. CONCLUSION: The PDQ-39 can be integrated into a busy clinical practice and its routine use is valuable for patients, caregivers, and providers.

Association of patient-reported care coordination with patient satisfaction.

Little is known about the relationship between care coordination directly assessed from the patient's perspective and patient satisfaction. This study applied multiple logistic regression models to examine associations between patient-reported care coordination and patient satisfaction among 1367 patients with diabetes. We found robust positive relationship between care coordination and patient satisfaction with overall chronic care (odds ratio [OR] = 1.78), one's regular doctor (OR = 1.85), and the way care was organized (OR = 1.98). Implications for health plans, providers, and future research are discussed.

Why do patients seek care at retail clinics, and what alternatives did they consider?

Retail clinics are an increasingly popular new model of ambulatory care. To understand why patients seek care at these clinics and what their experiences were like, the authors interviewed 61 patients at 6 retail clinics. Patients were satisfied with the overall experience and were attracted to retail clinics because of their convenient locations and fixed, transparent pricing. Patients who had a primary care physician (PCP) sought care at these clinics primarily because their PCPs were not available in a timely manner. If retail clinics had not been available, a quarter of patients report they would have gone to the emergency department. Retail clinics appear to be responding to the need for convenient, affordable, and consumer-centered care.

Efficiency and its measurement: what practitioners need to know.

OBJECTIVE: To help health professionals understand and evaluate the concept of efficiency and its measurement in practice. STUDY DESIGN: We reviewed conceptual and practical analyses of healthcare efficiency and its measurement and describe our findings. METHODS: We searched the following 3 sources: the MEDLINE and EconLit databases for articles published from 1990 to 2008 using the keywords efficiency, inefficiency, productivity, and economic profiling; seminal economic studies of efficiency identified in MEDLINE or EconLit or in economics reference materials; and the "gray literature" on efficiency measures developed by private organizations. RESULTS: An essential element of efficiency is that healthcare outputs are as large as possible given their inputs. An efficiency measure specifies outputs and inputs appropriate to the goals of the assessment. Participants in the healthcare system have differing perspectives about the goals of efficiency assessments, relevant outputs and inputs, and validity of measures. CONCLUSION: The broad meaning and the value of healthcare efficiency seem uncontroversial, yet any particular application may be confronted with conflicting perspectives and with practical challenges.

Preventing myocardial infarction and stroke with a simplified bundle of cardioprotective medications.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effect of promoting a bundle of fixed doses of a generic statin and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker (ACEI/ARB), delivered with minimal outpatient visits, laboratory testing, and dosage titration, to people with diabetes, coronary artery disease (CAD), or both in a large integrated healthcare system. STUDY DESIGN: Three-year observational study of 170,024 Kaiser Permanente members with diabetes, CAD, or both. METHODS: Using instrumental variable analysis, we assessed the impact of promoting the cardioprotective bundle on hospitalization rates for stroke and myocardial infarction (MI). RESULTS: In 2004 and 2005, 47,268 of 170,024 individuals received "low exposure" (medication possession on 1 to 365 days). Their risk of hospitalization for MI or stroke in 2006 was lowered by 15 events per 1000 person-years (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1, 30), preventing events in 726 people. Furthermore, 21,292 of 170,024 individuals received "high exposure" (medication possession on 366 to 730 days). Their risk of hospitalization for MI or stroke was reduced by 26 events per 1000 person-years (95% CI = 17, 34), preventing events in 545 people. CONCLUSION: A simplified method for bundling fixed doses of a generic statin and an ACEI/ARB was successfully implemented in a large, diverse population in an integrated healthcare delivery system, reducing the risk of hospitalization for MI and stroke.

Comparing costs and quality of care at retail clinics with that of other medical settings for 3 common illnesses.

BACKGROUND: Retail clinics are an increasingly popular source for medical care. Concerns have been raised about the effect of these clinics on the cost, quality, and delivery of preventive care. OBJECTIVE: To compare the care received at retail clinics for 3 acute conditions with that received at other care settings. DESIGN: Claims data from 2005 and 2006 from the health plan were aggregated into care episodes (units that included initial and follow-up visits, pharmaceuticals, and ancillary tests). After 2100 episodes (700 each) were identified in which otitis media, pharyngitis, and urinary tract infection (UTI) were treated first in retail clinics, these episodes were matched with other episodes in which these illnesses were treated first in physician offices, urgent care centers, or emergency departments. SETTING: Enrollees of a large Minnesota health plan. PATIENTS: Enrollees who received care for otitis media, pharyngitis, or UTI. MEASUREMENTS: Costs per episode, performance on 14 quality indicators, and receipt of 7 preventive care services at the initial appointment or subsequent 3 months. RESULTS: Overall costs of care for episodes initiated at retail clinics were substantially lower than those of matched episodes initiated at physician offices, urgent care centers, and emergency departments ($110 vs. $166, $156, and $570, respectively; P < 0.001 for each comparison). Prescription costs were similar in retail clinics, physician offices, and urgent care centers ($21, $21, and $22), as were aggregate quality scores (63.6%, 61.0%, and 62.6%) and patient's receipt of preventive care (14.5%, 14.2%, and 13.7%) (P > 0.05 vs. retail clinics). In emergency departments, average prescription costs were higher and aggregate quality scores were significantly lower than in other settings. LIMITATIONS: A limited number of quality measures and preventive care services were studied. Despite matching, patients at different care sites might differ in their severity of illness. CONCLUSION: Retail clinics provide less costly treatment than physician offices or urgent care centers for 3 common illnesses, with no apparent adverse effect on quality of care or delivery of preventive care. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: California HealthCare Foundation.

A systematic review of health care efficiency measures.

OBJECTIVE: To review and characterize existing health care efficiency measures in order to facilitate a common understanding about the adequacy of these methods. DATA SOURCES: Review of the MedLine and EconLit databases for articles published from 1990 to 2008, as well as search of the "gray" literature for additional measures developed by private organizations. STUDY DESIGN: We performed a systematic review for existing efficiency measures. We classified the efficiency measures by perspective, outputs, inputs, methods used, and reporting of scientific soundness. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We identified 265 measures in the peer-reviewed literature and eight measures in the gray literature, with little overlap between the two sets of measures. Almost all of the measures did not explicitly consider the quality of care. Thus, if quality varies substantially across groups, which is likely in some cases, the measures reflect only the costs of care, not efficiency. Evidence on the measures' scientific soundness was mostly lacking: evidence on reliability or validity was reported for six measures (2.3 percent) and sensitivity analyses were reported for 67 measures (25.3 percent). CONCLUSIONS: Efficiency measures have been subjected to few rigorous evaluations of reliability and validity, and methods of accounting for quality of care in efficiency measurement are not well developed at this time. Use of these measures without greater understanding of these issues is likely to engender resistance from providers and could lead to unintended consequences.

Retail clinics, primary care physicians, and emergency departments: a comparison of patients' visits.

In this study we compared the demographics of and reasons for visits in national samples of visits to retail clinics, primary care physicians (PCPs), and emergency departments (EDs). We found that retail clinics appear to be serving a patient population that is underserved by PCPs. Ten clinical problems such as sinusitis and immunizations encompass more than 90 percent of retail clinic visits. These same ten clinical problems make up 13 percent of adult PCP visits, 30 percent of pediatric PCP visits, and 12 percent of ED visits. Whether there will be a future shift of care from EDs or PCPs to retail clinics is unknown.

Redesigning health systems for quality: Lessons from emerging practices.

BACKGROUND: It has been five years since the Institute of Medicine (IOM) report, Crossing the Quality Chasm, proposed systemwide changes to transform our health care system. What progress has been made? What lessons have been learned? How should we move forward? METHODS: Semistructured telephone interviews were conducted with 16 health care providers and researchers at organizations involved in system redesign. The findings were supplemented with a focused literature review and discussions from a national expert meeting. RESULTS: Many promising and innovative examples of redesign were identified. However, even delivery systems that are redesigning care in pursuit of the six IOM aims face daunting challenges, reflecting the need to align system changes across multiple levels and to integrate redesign efforts with ongoing system features. Four success factors were reported by providers as crucial in overcoming redesign barriers: (1) directly involving top and middle-level leaders, (2) strategically aligning and integrating improvement efforts with organizational priorities, (3) systematically establishing infrastructure, process, and performance appraisal systems for continuous improvement, and (4) actively developing champions, teams, and staff. A framework that integrates these success factors to facilitate a systems approach to redesigning health care organizations and delivery systems for improved performance is provided. CONCLUSIONS: Successful system redesign requires coordinating and managing a complex set of changes across multiple levels rather than isolated projects.

An empirical assessment of high-performing medical groups: results from a national study.

The performance of medical groups is receiving increased attention. Relatively little conceptual or empirical work exists that examines the various dimensions of medical group performance. Using a national database of 693 medical groups, this article develops a scorecard approach to assessing group performance and presents a theory-driven framework for differentiating between high-performing versus low-performing medical groups. The clinical quality of care, financial performance, and organizational learning capability of medical groups are assessed in relation to environmental forces, resource acquisition and resource deployment factors, and a quality-centered culture. Findings support the utility of the performance scorecard approach and identification of a number of key factors differentiating high-performing from low-performing groups including, in particular, the importance of a quality-centered culture and the requirement of outside reporting from third party organizations. The findings hold a number of important implications for policy and practice, and the framework presented provides a foundation for future research.

What are the facilitators and barriers in physician organizations' use of care management processes?

BACKGROUND: Care management processes (CMPs) such as disease registries, reminder systems, performance feedback, case management, and self-management education can improve chronic illness care, yet 50% of physician organizations have instituted few if any CMPs. METHODS: Site-visit interviews were conducted with 158 leaders at 15 physician organizations, with 3 organizations (1 large medical group, 1 small medical group, and 1 independent practice association [IPA]) chosen randomly in most cases in each of five communities. RESULTS: Seven of the 15 organizations had implemented CMPs minimally or not at all. CMPs were most common for diabetes and least common for depression; no IPAs had achieved significant CMP implementation for any of the conditions. The two most commonly mentioned facilitators were strong leadership and organizational culture valuing quality. The top five barriers were poor financial situation, reimbursement that does not reward high quality, inadequate information technology, physician resistance, and physicians being too busy. DISCUSSION: Strong leadership and a quality-valuing culture are important facilitators of improved chronic care, but if insurers do not reward chronic care improvement, it is unlikely that CMPs will become permanently institutionalized in physician organizations.

External incentives, information technology, and organized processes to improve health care quality for patients with chronic diseases.

CONTEXT: Organized care management processes (CMPs) can improve health care quality for patients with chronic diseases. The Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of Sciences has called for public and private purchasers of health care to create incentives for physician organizations (POs) to use CMPs and for the government to assist POs in implementing information technology (IT) to facilitate CMP use. Research is lacking about the extent to which POs use CMPs or about the degree to which incentives, IT, or other factors are associated with their use. OBJECTIVES: To determine the extent to which POs with 20 or more physicians use CMPs and to identify key factors associated with CMP use for 4 chronic diseases (asthma, congestive heart failure, depression, and diabetes). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: One thousand five hundred eighty-seven US POs (medical groups and independent practice associations) with 20 or more physicians were identified using 5 large databases. One thousand one hundred four of these POs (70%) agreed to participate in a telephone survey conducted between September 2000 and September 2001. Sixty-four responding POs were excluded because they did not treat any of the 4 diseases, leaving 1040 POs. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Extent of use of CMPs as calculated on the basis of a summary measure, a PO care management index (POCMI; range, 0-6) and factors associated with CMP use. RESULTS: Physician organizations' mean use of CMPs was 5.1 of a possible 16; 50% used 4 or fewer. External incentives and clinical IT were most strongly associated with CMP use. Controlling for other factors, use of the 2 most strongly associated incentives-public recognition and better contracts for health care quality-was associated with use of 1.3 and 0.7 additional CMPs, respectively (P<.001 and P =.007). Each additional IT capability was associated with 0.37 additional CMPs (P<.001). However, 33% of POs reported no external incentives and 50% reported no clinical IT capability. CONCLUSIONS: The use of CMPs varies greatly among POs, but it is low on average. Government and private purchasers of health care may increase CMP use by providing external incentives for improvement of health care quality to POs and by assisting them in improving their clinical IT capability.