Physician impact on hospital admission and on mortality rates in the Medicare population.

OBJECTIVE. We assess the effect of variations in the supply and specialty distribution of physicians on admission rates for ambulatory care-sensitive conditions (ACS) and for all causes, and on mortality rates among Medicare beneficiaries of various health care service areas (HCSA). DATA SOURCES. For the Medicare beneficiaries, sources were the Health Care Financing Administration's 1992 enrollment and impatient (Part A) files for a 5 percent sample of that population; for the overall populations and for the medical resources of the HCSAs, the Area Resource File. STUDY DESIGN. This observational, cross-sectional study employed multiple linear regression to assess the influence of population characteristics and of the supply of physicians on hospital admissions, and Poisson regression in the analysis of the factors that affect mortality. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS. Physician supply levels vary nearly fourfold or more when comparing the top and bottom deciles of the HCSAs, Medicare admissions for ACS conditions vary about threefold, and admission rates for all causes and mortality rates vary about 1.5-fold. Physician supply levels and distributions have very little influence on ACS admission rates, and even less on the admissions for all causes and on mortality, except in HCSAs with very low physician supply levels (one-fourth the national average or less). However, these HCSAs account for only about 1 percent of the U.S. population. CONCLUSIONS. Physician supply levels and the proportions of specialists and generalists have negligible effects on health status as measured by mortality rates and by rates of admission for all causes and for conditions presumed to be sensitive to the adequacy of ambulatory care. Reductions in admissions for such conditions are not likely to be achieved through broadening of insurance to levels that exist under Medicare, nor through increases in the supply of physicians, nor, conversely, through a reduction in any presumed oversupply of physicians.     

No racial differences in mortality found among Veterans Health Administration out-patients

OBJECTIVE: Health care delivery systems that offer equal access to ambulatory care may hold promise for preventing and correcting racial disparities that exist in our health care system as a whole. We examined whether racial differences in mortality rates exist among patients receiving outpatient care within the Veterans Health Administration. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: This study used data from the 1998 National Survey of Ambulatory Care Patients, a prospective monitoring system of patient outcomes. We used an outpatient care system in the Veterans Health Administration. We followed 25,172 Whites and 3,517 African-Americans for 48 months. The main study outcome measures were unadjusted and adjusted mortality rates over a 48-month period. RESULTS: African-Americans had significantly lower unadjusted 48-month mortality rates than Whites (33 vs. 40 deaths per 1,000 person-year, hazard ratio, 0.84; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.75-0.95). After risk adjustment, the mortality rates became similar for African-Americans and Whites (hazard ratio, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.89-1.09). These findings were consistent across all time points evaluated during the 48-month follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: The lack of racial differences in mortality in patients receiving ambulatory care in the Veterans Health Administration is reassuring, given the emphasis on equal access within this health care system. This warrants further research to determine whether efforts to improve access in other settings have the potential to reduce racial disparities in health care.     

Managed care and patient ratings of the quality of specialty care among patients with pain or depressive symptoms

Background  

Managed care efforts to regulate access to specialists and reduce costs may lower quality of care. Few studies have examined whether managed care is associated with patient perceptions of the quality of care provided by physician and non-physician specialists. Aim is to determine whether associations exist between managed care controls and patient ratings of the quality of specialty care among primary care patients with pain and depressive symptoms who received specialty care for those conditions.     

Patterns of ambulatory care for AIDS patients, and association with emergency room use.

OBJECTIVE. We examined the association of patterns of ambulatory care for AIDS patients with any use of the emergency room (ER) and the monthly rate of ER visits in the six months after AIDS diagnosis. DATA SOURCES/STUDY SETTING. The study population was obtained from the New York State Medicaid HIV/AIDS Research Data Base and includes patients diagnosed with AIDS from 1983 to 1990. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS. To examine patterns of care and ER use not leading to hospitalization, we studied patients who survived at least six months after their first AIDS-defining diagnosis. The data base included person level information on visits to different provider sites and patient demographic and clinical characteristics. STUDY DESIGN. We defined the dominant provider as the site delivering the majority of ambulatory care for patients with a minimum of four ambulatory visits in the six months after AIDS diagnosis. Dominant providers were classified by specialty and setting: generalist physician; general medicine clinic; AIDS specialty clinic; and other specialty clinic or physician (e.g., cardiology). Patients without a dominant provider were grouped into those with four or more visits and those with fewer than four visits. Regression analysis was used to estimate relationships between ER use and patterns of ambulatory care and patient demographic and severity of illness characteristics. PRINCIPAL RESULTS. The study population included 9,155 AIDS patients aged 13 to 60 years at diagnosis, continuously Medicaid-enrolled, and surviving at least six months after AIDS diagnosis. Among those with four or more visits (56 percent), over 70 percent had a dominant provider. Overall, 39 percent of the study population visited the ER while, in the group with four or more visits, 53 percent of those without a dominant provider had an ER visit. Patients without a dominant provider were estimated to have 32 percent higher odds of ER use than patients with a dominant provider. Among patients with a dominant provider, patients with a generalist or primary care clinic dominant site of care were estimated respectively to have 18 percent and 23 percent lower odds than patients with an AIDS specialty clinic as the dominant site of care. Drug users had higher odds of ER use, as did women. CONCLUSIONS. In this Medicaid AIDS population, a dominant provider delivering the majority of a patient's care was associated with less use of the ER by the patient. Among patients with a dominant provider, ER use was lowest for those with a primary care provider. Further examination of the type and availability of ambulatory services in AIDS specialty clinics and primary care settings, as well as more detailed information on patient characteristics, may reveal reasons for these patterns of ER use.     

International Consensus Definition of a Serious Infection in a Geriatric Patient Presenting to Ambulatory Care

Early recognition and prompt treatment of a serious infection is important to optimize prognosis in older patients. The current evidence base underpinning this early recognition in ambulatory care is scattered and haphazard, calling for new research to strengthen clinical practice. Before embarking on such studies, it is important to seek consensus on what constitutes a serious infection in older patients presenting to ambulatory care. We conducted a 4-round e-Delphi study seeking consensus among medical professionals who deliver clinical care to older patients using online questionnaires and feedback. Twenty-two specialists in emergency care, general practice, geriatrics, and infectious diseases from 10 different countries participated in our study. We constructed 18 statements from the answers to the open questions in round 1, which were then rated by the participants in 2 consecutive rounds. After assessing the level of agreement, consensus, and stability, the following definition was preferred by 94% of the participants: “A serious infection in a geriatric patient presenting to ambulatory care is an infection with a high risk of complications, functional decline, and/or mortality, requiring a prompt diagnostic and therapeutic approach in the appropriate care setting. The most important determinants of the choice of setting are the level of emergency, the geriatric profile of the patient (frailty status, functional status, and comorbidities), and the patients’ level of autonomy and personal preferences. Factors such as the feasibility of home care, the potential consequences of delayed or suboptimal treatment and infection specific treatment requirements should be weighed as well when choosing the appropriate care setting.” Based on consensus among 22 clinicians working in 10 different countries, we propose a definition for serious infections in geriatric patients presenting to ambulatory care. This will form the basis of future studies in this domain.     

Unlocking specialists' attitudes toward primary care gatekeepers.

OBJECTIVES: Many managed care plans rely on primary care physicians to act as gatekeepers, which may increase tension between these physicians and specialists. We surveyed specialist physicians in California to determine whether their attitudes toward primary care gatekeepers differed depending on how the specialists were paid and the settings in which they practiced. STUDY DESIGN: We performed a cross-sectional survey using a mailed questionnaire. The predictors of specialist attitudes toward gatekeepers were measured using chi-square, the t test, and regression analyses. POPULATION: A probability sample of 1492 physicians in urban counties in California in the specialties of cardiology, endocrinology, gastroenterology, general surgery, neurology, ophthalmology, and orthopedics was used. OUTCOMES: We used questions about specialists' attitudes toward primary care physicians in the gatekeeper role. A summary score of attitudes was developed. RESULTS: A total of 979 physicians completed the survey (66%). Attitudes toward primary care physicians were mixed. Relative to nonsalaried physicians, those who were salaried had a somewhat more favorable attitude toward gatekeepers (P = .13), as did physicians with a greater percentage of practice income derived from capitation (P =.002). CONCLUSIONS: Specialists' attitudes toward the coordinating role of primary care physicians are influenced by the practice setting in which the specialists work and by financial interests that may be threatened by referral restrictions. Policies that promote alternatives to fee for service and shift specialty practice toward more organized group settings may generate a common sense of purpose among primary care physicians and specialists.     

Specialist and Generalist Care for Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus

The incidence of diabetes mellitus (both type 1 and type 2) is growing to epidemic proportions, with an expected combined worldwide prevalence of 220 million by the year 2010. A subsequent increase in the incidence of diabetes complications is likely to follow if present trends continue, placing an increased burden on already troubled healthcare systems. While there are many identified biologic mechanisms for the development of diabetes complications, there has been little exploration of healthcare provider issues and their contribution to these outcomes. One area of research with few data is the influence of diabetes specialty care on outcomes in type 1 diabetic patients. Evidence demonstrates that both process delivery and outcomes are better in individuals with typel diabetes who are cared for by diabetes specialists compared with generalists. For example, those receiving care from diabetes specialists were more likely to receive diabetes education, to be treated with intensive insulin therapy (>2 injections/day), and to receive an eye examination compared with those receiving generalist care. Additionally, lower rates of proliferative retinopathy were observed in those receiving specialist care. Recent evidence also demonstrates that there are lower incidences of neuropathy, overt nephropathy, and coronary artery disease in those patients who spend a higher proportion of the duration of their diabetes in specialist care. Based on these observations, it is recommended that attempts be made to replicate the favorable characteristics of specialty care in the primary care setting. Healthcare systems should ensure the availability of access to diabetes specialists, as well as ancillary healthcare professionals including diabetes educators, with increased emphasis placed on coordinated care.     

The relationship between primary care and life chances.

Many researchers criticize clinical medicine for its failure to improve mortality rates. But in their critiques, few distinguish primary care from expensive, high-technology specialized care. This research is concerned with the empirical relationship between the availability of health services resources (i.e., primary care, specialty care, hospital beds) and certain "life chances," as measured by overall and disease-specific mortality rates, and life expectancy. The model shows a significant direct association between primary care and favorable mortality outcomes, though the same does not hold true for variables such as hospital beds or physician specialists. There should be greater emphasis on prevention-oriented primary care as a mechanism for health improvement and cost control.     

Interdisciplinary diabetes care teams operating on the interface between primary and specialty care are associated with improved outcomes of care: findings from the Leuven Diabetes Project

Background  

Type 2 diabetes mellitus is a complex, progressive disease which requires a variety of quality improvement strategies. Limited information is available on the feasibility and effectiveness of interdisciplinary diabetes care teams (IDCT) operating on the interface between primary and specialty care. A first study hypothesis was that the implementation of an IDCT is feasible in a health care setting with limited tradition in shared care. A second hypothesis was that patients who make use of an IDCT would have significantly better outcomes compared to non-users of the IDCT after an 18-month intervention period. A third hypothesis was that patients who used the IDCT in an Advanced quality Improvement Program (AQIP) would have significantly better outcomes compared to users of a Usual Quality Improvement Program (UQIP).     

Specialists visiting rural general practices in Norway

The amount of ambulatory care shared between general practitioners and specialists varies widely, especially in Scandinavia. The policy of encouraging specialists to consult through referral in primary medical care has been recommended by governments for many years. One such study in Norway has been most encouraging.