Use of an Electronic Problem List by Primary Care Providers and Specialists

BACKGROUND

Accurate patient problem lists are valuable tools for improving the quality of care, enabling clinical decision support, and facilitating research and quality measurement. However, problem lists are frequently inaccurate and out-of-date and use varies widely across providers.

OBJECTIVE

Our goal was to assess provider use of an electronic problem list and identify differences in usage between medical specialties.

DESIGN

Chart review of a random sample of 100,000 patients who had received care in the past two years at a Boston-based academic medical center.

PARTICIPANTS

Counts were collected of all notes and problems added for each patient from 1/1/2002 to 4/30/2010. For each entry, the recording provider and the clinic in which the entry was recorded was collected. We used the Healthcare Provider Taxonomy Code Set to categorize each clinic by specialty.

MAIN MEASURES

We analyzed the problem list use across specialties, controlling for note volume as a proxy for visits.

KEY RESULTS

A total of 2,264,051 notes and 158,105 problems were recorded in the electronic medical record for this population during the study period. Primary care providers added 82.3% of all problems, despite writing only 40.4% of all notes. Of all patients, 49.1% had an assigned primary care provider (PCP) affiliated with the hospital; patients with a PCP had an average of 4.7 documented problems compared to 1.5 problems for patients without a PCP.

CONCLUSIONS

Primary care providers were responsible for the majority of problem documentation; surgical and medical specialists and subspecialists recorded a disproportionately small number of problems on the problem list.     

Transitioning to Breast Cancer Survivorship: Perspectives of Patients,Cancer Specialists,and Primary Care Providers

BACKGROUND

Limited research exists regarding views of patients, oncology specialists, and primary care providers (PCPs) concerning breast cancer survivorship care.

OBJECTIVE

To qualitatively explore the needs and priorities of breast cancer survivors, oncology specialists, and PCPs.

METHODS

Focus groups were conducted of survivors (21 in 5 groups), PCPs (15 in 2 groups), and oncology specialists (16 in 2 groups). One survivor group consisted of four African-Americans. Discussions used a semi-structured guide, were transcribed verbatim, and were analyzed qualitatively. Groups explored transitions to follow-up, communication, patient needs, and provider roles.

RESULTS

Survivors form intense relationships with specialists for reassurance and expertise. Many believed PCPs lacked necessary oncology expertise. Survivors reported psychosocial and communication issues. African-Americans cited concerns about access to care and clinical trials, as well as taboos to discussing cancer. Specialists reported that they struggle with discharging survivors due to protective relationships. PCPs were concerned about time and training to provide survivorship care and communication problems with oncologists. Written survivorship care plans were regarded by all groups as possibly helpful, but insufficient to ease the transition.

CONCLUSIONS

Breast cancer patients may experience difficulties transitioning to survivorship, including ongoing psychosocial issues. African-American patients may face additional and unique barriers to successful survivorship. Oncology specialists may have concerns about discharging cherished patients. These findings suggest a psychological component that may influence the use of written survivorship care plans. PCPs may need additional training and greater access to specialists in order to care for survivors.

     

Improved PrEP Awareness and Use among Trans Women in San Francisco,California

AIDS and Behavior - Transgender women face a serious risk of HIV infection. Despite this, there is limited knowledge and use of Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP). We measured the continuity of...     

Screening,Diagnosis, Treatment,and Management of Hepatitis C: A Novel,Comprehensive, Online Resource Center for Primary Care Providers and Specialists

Current initiatives focusing on hepatitis C (HCV) screening and diagnosis, together with the advent of oral interferon (IFN)-free treatment regimens have prompted Elsevier Multimedia Publishing and the American Journal of Medicine (AJM) to develop a novel, comprehensive, online Resource Center dedicated to providing both primary care providers and specialists with the latest information on the screening, diagnosis, treatment, and management of HCV. To date, only 25% of infected patients have been diagnosed and only 5% cured. With the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the US Prevention Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendation of one-time screening for all individuals born between 1945 and 1965, and the availability of safe and effective therapy, it is anticipated that primary care providers and community practices will become increasingly responsible for the screening, diagnosis, and management of infected patients, as well as providing access to care by specialists when needed. The AJM Hepatitis C Resource Center site will have two major channels; one channel tailored to specifically address the needs of internal medicine physicians and other primary care providers, and one channel tailored to address the needs of specialists including hepatologists, gastroenterologists, and infectious disease specialists. Systematic surveys of these clinician audiences are being conducted by Elsevier to assess educational gaps, and ensure that the content of each channel of the Resource Center satisfies the needs of the intended audiences. In a recent Elsevier survey of primary care physicians (PCPs) who had screened and/or participated in the care of patients with HCV within 6 months of participating in the survey, 60% of PCPs stated that they were not very confident or only somewhat confident about screening patients for chronic HCV infection. A recent Elsevier survey of specialists revealed low levels of satisfaction with the treatment options available in 2013, with “no therapy” being selected for up to 38% of patients. This survey also showed that experience with newly-approved options for HCV including IFN-free regimens is currently limited, but the likelihood that a variety of patient types will be treated with these options is high. This provides an impetus for educational opportunities focusing on optimizing treatments for the different HCV genotypes and for patients with comorbidities. Further results of the PCP and specialist surveys will be published on the Resource Center. Each channel of the Resource Center will be comprised of a variety of specific communication elements, which are open to sponsorship, and include roundtable panel discussions, case studies, and direct links to relevant original research, review articles, and guidelines. All Resource Center components are peer-reviewed for publication on the Resource Center by the AJM Editorial Office and the Resource Center Guest Editor, Edward Lebovics, MD. The AJM Hepatitis C Resource Center will be accessible from the AJM online home page (http://www.amjmed.com) and will be launched immediately prior to the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD) Liver Meeting to be held from November 7 to 11, 2014 in Boston, Massachusetts.     

GERD-Related Health Care Utilization, Therapy, and Reasons for Transfer of GERD Patients Between Primary Care Providers and Gastroenterologists in a US Managed Care Setting

Purpose

Patient flow between primary care physicians and gastroenterologists in the continuum of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) care is poorly understood. Using administrative claims data from a large US health plan linked with data abstracted from medical records, we examined: health care resource utilization for GERD subjects treated by primary care physicians (PCPs) and gastroenterologists (GEs), determinants of GERD subject transfer between these physician types, and reasons for GERD therapy change.

Results

Within a sample of 169,884 patients, 211,043 PCP-based episodes of care and 40,304 GE-based episodes of care were developed. In unadjusted comparisons, GE episodes were characterized by more endoscopic procedures, on average (50.5/100 episodes), compared with PCP episodes (6.3/100, P < 0.001). Multivariate analysis showed that patients with esophagitis had 57.3% higher odds (P < 0.01) of transfer from PCP to GE compared with patients without esophagitis; patients with esophageal stricture had 98.6% higher odds (P < 0.01) of PCP-GE transfer. Patients with endoscopy during a first GE episode had 32.2% higher odds of transfer to a PCP (P < 0.01). The principal reasons for change in GERD therapy were no change or worsening of symptoms (51.7% of PCP charts; 9.5% of GE charts) and lack of response to therapy (51.7% of PCP charts, 26.2% of GE charts).

Conclusion

Resource utilization varies greatly based on the physician’s specialty. We infer that timely transfer of GERD patients to gastroenterologists when empiric treatment is insufficient may lead to more efficient clinical management.     

Primary Care Residents Lack Comfort and Experience with Alcohol Screening and Brief Intervention: A Multi-Site Survey

BACKGROUND

Approximately one in six adults in the United States (U.S.) binge drinks. The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommends that primary care physicians screen patients for such hazardous alcohol use, and when warranted, deliver a brief intervention.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to determine primary care residents’ current practices, perceived barriers and confidence with conducting alcohol screening and brief interventions (SBI).

DESIGN

This was a multi-site, cross-sectional survey conducted from March 2010 through December 2012.

PARTICIPANTS

We invited all residents in six primary care residency programs (three internal medicine programs and three family medicine programs) to participate. Of 244 residents, 210 completed the survey (response rate 86 %).

MAIN MEASURES

Our survey assessed residents’ alcohol screening practices (instruments used and frequency of screening), perceived barriers to discussing alcohol, brief intervention content, and self-rated ability to help hazardous drinkers. To determine the quality of brief interventions delivered, we examined how often residents reported including the three key recommended elements of feedback, advice, and goal-setting.

KEY RESULTS

Most residents (60 %, 125/208) reported “usually” or “always” screening patients for alcohol misuse at the initial clinic visit, but few residents routinely screened patients at subsequent acute-care (17 %, 35/208) or chronic-care visits (33 %, 68/208). Only 19 % (39/210) of residents used screening instruments capable of detecting binge drinking. The most frequently reported barrier to SBI was lack of adequate training (54 %, 108/202), and only 21 % (43/208) of residents felt confident they could help at -risk drinkers. When residents did perform a brief intervention, only 24 % (49/208) “usually” or “always” included the three recommended elements.

CONCLUSIONS

A minority of residents in this multi-site study appropriately screen or intervene with at-risk alcohol users. To equip residents to effectively address hazardous alcohol use, there is a critical need for educational and clinic interventions to support alcohol-related SBI.KEY WORDS: alcohol screening, SBIRT, residency training, primary care screening, brief intervention, alcohol SBI     

The Impact of HIV-Related Stigma on HIV Care and Prevention Providers

Abstract

Very little is known about the extent to which HIV care and prevention providers who work for U.S. community-based organizations are affected by the types of stigma that have been well documented as impacting those living with HIV and those who provide direct care to these individuals. To explore the existence and characteristics of this phenomenon, the HIV Provider Stigma Scale was developed and administered to 795 HIV service providers in 47 U.S. states. Stigma levels were higher among those whose sexual orientation was reported as heterosexual and those who had worked in the HIV field for less than 5 years. Those with the highest levels of stigma also reported decreased levels of social and occupational functioning. The extent to which the social stigmas of HIV and AIDS impact those who work professionally in the field could have important implications for the continued sustainability of the workforce, particularly in areas of the world with still developing HIV service infrastructures.     

Attitudes toward HIV Health Care Providers scale: development and validation

Patient attitudes toward their health care providers can play an important role in determining health behavior change. The frequency of contact with health care professionals and disease stigma makes assessing patients' perception of this relationship of particular interest in an HIV medical population. While past general satisfaction and attitude tools have been used to assess this construct, there is a need for an assessment tool specific to patient attitudes in an HIV setting. This study was designed to validate the Attitudes toward HIV Health Care Provider scale (AHHCP) in an HIV medical population. Principal components analysis of the AHHCP yielded a two-factor structure accounting for 53.3% of the total variance in attitudes toward health care providers. The two factors represented items concerning Professionalism and Emotional Support. The AHHCP was found to have good internal consistency (0.92) and convergent validity with a measure of patient satisfaction (r = 0.59). The results of the present study suggest that the AHHCP is a reliable and valid instrument for use in assessing patient attitudes toward their health care providers.     

Burnout among Primary Care Providers and Staff: Evaluating the Association with Practice Adaptive Reserve and Individual Behaviors

BackgroundWorkplace burnout among healthcare professionals is a critical public health concern. Few studies have examined organizational and individual factors associated with burnout across healthcare professional groups.ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to examine the association between practice adaptive reserve (PAR) and individual behavioural response to change and burnout among healthcare professionals in primary care.DesignThis cross-sectional study used survey data from 154 primary care practices participating in the EvidenceNOW Heart of Virginia Healthcare initiative.ParticipantsWe analysed data from 1279 healthcare professionals in Virginia. Our sample included physicians, advanced practice clinicians, clinical support staff and administrative staff.Main MeasuresWe used the PAR instrument to measure organizational capacity for change and the Change Diagnostic Index© (CDI) to measure individual behavioural response, which achieved a 76% response rate. Logistic regression analysis was used to estimate the effects of PAR and CDI on burnout.Key ResultsAs organizational capacity for change increased, burnout in healthcare professionals decreased by 51% (OR: 0.49; 95% CI, 0.33, 0.73). As healthcare professionals showed improved response toward change, burnout decreased by 84% (OR: 0.16; 95% CI, 0.11, 0.23). Analysis by healthcare professional type revealed a significant association between high organizational capacity for change, positive response to change and low burnout among administrative staff (OR: 2.92; 95% CI, 1.37, 6.24). Increased hours of work per week was associated with higher odds of burnout (OR: 1.07; 95% CI, 1.05, 1.10) across healthcare professional groups.ConclusionAs transformation efforts in primary care continue, it is critical to understand the influence of these initiatives on healthcare professionals’ well-being. Efforts to reduce burnout among healthcare professionals are needed at both a system and organizational level. Building organizational capacity for change, supporting providers and staff during major change and consideration of individual workload may reduce levels of burnout.Supplementary InformationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11606-020-06367-z.KEY WORDS: adaptive reserve, burnout, practice transformation, primary care, well-being     

Assessment of PrEP Awareness,PrEP Discussion with a Provider,and PrEP Use by Transmission Risk Group with an Emphasis on the Southern United States

The number of new HIV diagnoses is highest in the South. Many persons who might benefit from pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) are not engaged in the HIV PrEP continuum of care. We analyzed National HIV Behavioral Surveillance data to assess engagement in the PrEP continuum of care among persons with increased HIV risk. We compared PrEP awareness, discussion with a clinical provider, and use among persons living in the South to those living elsewhere in the United States. PrEP awareness was lowest among heterosexual persons (7%), highest among men who have sex with men (85%), and 26% among persons who inject drugs. PrEP use was low among each population (≤ 35% for all cycles). There was limited evidence of differences in PrEP use between persons in southern and non-southern U.S. Efforts are needed to increase use of PrEP among each of the groups with increased HIV risk.

     

Project SLIP: Implementation of a PrEP Screening and Linkage Intervention in Primary Care

AIDS and Behavior - Nearly a decade after becoming formally available in the U.S., HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) remains underutilized by populations at risk for HIV acquisition. The next...