The Dissenter’s Viewpoint: There Has to Be a Better Way to Measure a Medical Home

The patient-centered medical home (PCMH) is widely touted as the current pathway to high-quality primary care practice. Many payers and institutions are using the formal National Committee for Quality Assurance (NCQA) PCMH tool to evaluate practices. Practices commonly feel pressured financially to achieve NCQA recognition. As 2 small high-functioning innovative primary care practices, we describe the actual process of using this tool and assess its utility using a framework based on patient experience of care, costs, and population health. We both attained certification as Level 3 PCMHs but conclude that NCQA’s tool mismatches form and function, is costly and wasteful, and may succeed more in documentation of policies than in supporting improved outcomes in practices.     

The impact of patient‐centered medical homes on medication adherence?

Accreditation of providers helps resolve the pervasive information asymmetries in health care markets. However, meeting accreditation standards typically involves flexibility in implementation, leading to heterogeneity in performance. For example, the patient‐centered medical home (PCMH) is a leading model for recognizing high‐performing primary care practices. Flexibility in PCMH implementation allows for varying degrees of emphasis on processes designed to enhance medication adherence. To assess the impact of the PCMH on adherence, we combine 6 years of detailed patient claims data with a novel dataset containing detailed practice‐level PCMH attributes. We study the effects of the number and configuration of adherence‐relevant capabilities, using variation in the timing of PCMH adoption to estimate its impact. While PCMH adoption improved overall medication adherence, when combining claims data with the unique recognition data detailing what PCMH capabilities were adopted, we find that these gains are concentrated among patients in practices that adopted more adherence‐relevant capabilities. Despite mixed evidence in the literature concerning costs and utilization, our results indicate that PCMH recognition improves medication adherence.     

Total Cost of Care Lower among Medicare Fee‐for‐Service Beneficiaries Receiving Care from Patient‐Centered Medical Homes

Objective

To compare health care utilization and payments between NCQA-recognized patient-centered medical home (PCMH) practices and practices without such recognition.

Data Sources

Medicare Part A and B claims files from July 1, 2007 to June 30, 2010, 2009 Census, 2007 Health Resources and Services Administration and CMS Utilization file, Medicare''s Enrollment Data Base, and the 2005 American Medical Association Physician Workforce file.

Study Design

This study used a longitudinal, nonexperimental design. Three annual observations (July 1, 2008–June 30, 2010) were available for each practice. We compared selected outcomes between practices with and those without NCQA PCMH recognition.

Data Collection Methods

Individual Medicare fee-for-service (FFS) beneficiaries and their claims and utilization data were assigned to PCMH or comparison practices based on where they received the plurality of evaluation and management services between July 1, 2007 and June 30, 2008.

Principal Findings

Relative to the comparison group, total Medicare payments, acute care payments, and the number of emergency room visits declined after practices received NCQA PCMH recognition. The decline was larger for practices with sicker than average patients, primary care practices, and solo practices.

Conclusions

This study provides additional evidence about the potential of the PCMH model for reducing health care utilization and the cost of care.     

Elements of the Patient-Centered Medical Home in Family Practices in Virginia

PURPOSE The patient-centered medical home (PCMH) is a widely accepted theory of a practice model to improve quality of care, patient satisfaction, and access to primary care services. This study explores existing elements of the PCMH and characteristics of family practices in Virginia.METHOD We developed and administered a survey questionnaire to capture information on practice characteristics and PCMH elements. We randomly sampled 700 family medicine offices in Virginia from a population of practices derived from the Virginia Board of Medicine Practitioner Information Database. We used a mixed-mode survey, allowing practices in the sample to respond by mail or Internet or at a regional family medicine conference.RESULTS The survey resulted in a response rate of 56%, with 342 office locations participating in the study. Most practices reported continuity-of-care processes (87%) and clinical guidelines (77%). Fewer reported use of patient surveys (48%), electronic medical record for internal coordination (38%), community linkages for care (31%), and clinical performance measurement (28%). A small number reported patient registries for multiple diseases (19%). Very few practices exhibited all elements outlined in the PCMH model (1%). Practice size (number of physicians) is significantly related to PCMH model alignment.CONCLUSIONS Most family practices in Virginia exhibit some elements of the PCMH model. Full implementation of the PCMH model is low. Baseline information on practice characteristics, prevalence of PCMH, and challenges of small practices should be considered in guiding efforts, evaluating progress, and developing policies for care model reform.     

Spreading a patient-centered medical home redesign: a case study

Health care leaders and policymakers are turning to the patient-centered medical home (PCMH) model to contain costs, improve the quality of care, and create a more positive primary care work environment. We describe how Group Health, an integrated delivery system, developed and implemented a PCMH intervention that included standardized structural and practice level changes. This intervention was spread to a diverse set of 26 primary care practices in 14 months using Lean Management principles. Group Health's experience provides valuable insights that can be used to improve the design and implementation of future PCMH models.     

Initial Lessons From the First National Demonstration Project on Practice Transformation to a Patient-Centered Medical Home

The patient-centered medical home (PCMH) is emerging as a potential catalyst for multiple health care reform efforts. Demonstration projects are beginning in nearly every state, with a broad base of support from employers, insurers, state and federal agencies, and professional organizations. A sense of urgency to show the feasibility of the PCMH, along with a 3-tiered recognition process of the National Committee on Quality Assurance, are influencing the design and implementation of many demonstrations. In June 2006, the American Academy of Family Physicians launched the first National Demonstration Project (NDP) to test a model of the PCMH in a diverse national sample of 36 family practices. The authors make up an independent evaluation team for the NDP that used a multimethod evaluation strategy, including direct observation, in-depth interviews, chart audit, and patient and practice surveys. Early lessons from the real-time qualitative analysis of the NDP raise some serious concerns about the current direction of many of the proposed PCMH demonstration projects and point to some positive opportunities. We describe 6 early lessons from the NDP that address these concerns and then offer 4 recommendations for those assisting the transformation of primary care practices and 4 recommendations for individual practices attempting transformation.     

The Patient‐Centered Medical Home and Patient Experience

Objective

To examine the relationship between practices'' reported use of patient-centered medical home (PCMH) processes and patients'' perceptions of their care experience.

Data Source

Primary survey data from 393 physician practices and 1,304 patients receiving care in those practices.

Study Design

This is an observational, cross-sectional study. Using standard ordinary least-squares and a sample selection model, we estimated the association between patients'' care experience and the use of PCMH processes in the practices where they receive care.

Data Collection

We linked data from a nationally representative survey of individuals with chronic disease and two nationally representative surveys of physician practices.

Principal Findings

We found that practices'' use of PCMH processes was not associated with patient experience after controlling for sample selection as well as practice and patient characteristics.

Conclusions

In our study, which was large, but somewhat limited in its measures of the PCMH and of patient experience, we found no association between PCMH processes and patient experience. The continued accumulation of evidence related to the possibilities of the PCMH, how PCMH is measured, and how the impact of PCMH is gauged provides important information for health care decision makers.     

Small and medium-size physician practices use few patient-centered medical home processes

The patient-centered medical home has become a prominent model for reforming the way health care is delivered to patients. The model offers a robust system of primary care combined with practice innovations and new payment methods. But scant information exists about the extent to which typical US physician practices have implemented this model and its processes of care, or about the factors associated with implementation. In this article we provide the first national data on the use of medical home processes such as chronic disease registries, nurse care managers, and systems to incorporate patient feedback, among 1,344 small and medium-size physician practices. We found that on average, practices used just one-fifth of the patient-centered medical home processes measured as part of this study. We also identify internal capabilities and external incentives associated with the greater use of medical home processes.     

Achieving Value in Primary Care: The Primary Care Value Model

The patient-centered medical home (PCMH) model provides a compelling vision for primary care transformation, but studies of its impact have used insufficiently patient-centered metrics with inconsistent results. We propose a framework for defining patient-centered value and a new model for value-based primary care transformation: the primary care value model (PCVM). We advocate for use of patient-centered value when measuring the impact of primary care transformation, recognition, and performance-based payment; for financial support and research and development to better define primary care value-creating activities and their implementation; and for use of the model to support primary care organizations in transformation.     

Challenges and Strategies in Serving the Uninsured in Nashville, Tennessee

The patient-centered medical home (PCMH) is being promoted as a cornerstone for transforming primary care. Physician organizations (POs) are playing a more prominent role by facilitating practices' transformation to PCMH. Using a framework of organizational integration, we investigate the changing relationship between POs and practices through qualitative interviews. Through increased integration, POs can support both the big-picture and day-to-day activities of practice transformation. Most PO-practice unit connections reflected new areas of engagement-competencies that POs were not developing in the past-that are proving integral to the broad-scale practice change of PCMH implementation.     

Is consistent primary care within a patient-centered medical home related to utilization patterns and costs?

The patient-centered medical home (PCMH) is seen as an important vehicle for providing consistent primary care and achieving cost savings through care coordination. We used health plan administrative data to evaluate utilization and cost among enrollees who attended a PCMH compared with those who fragmented their care. Controlling for demographic differences, PCMH attendees made significantly fewer primary care and specialist visits than other groups, and associated professional fees were significantly lower than for enrollees receiving less consistent primary care.     

Recommendations for a Mixed Methods Approach to Evaluating the Patient-Centered Medical Home

PURPOSE

There is a strong push in the United States to evaluate whether the patient-centered medical home (PCMH) model produces desired results. The explanatory and contextually based questions of how and why PCMH succeeds in different practice settings are often neglected. We report the development of a comprehensive, mixed qualitative-quantitative evaluation set for researchers, policy makers, and clinician groups.

METHODS

To develop an evaluation set, the Brown Primary Care Transformation Initiative convened a multidisciplinary group of PCMH experts, reviewed the PCMH literature and evaluation strategies, developed key domains for evaluation, and selected or created methods and measures for inclusion.

RESULTS

The measures and methods in the evaluation set (survey instruments, PCMH meta-measures, patient outcomes, quality measures, qualitative interviews, participant observation, and process evaluation) are meant to be used together. PCMH evaluation must be sufficiently comprehensive to assess and explain both the context of transformation in different primary care practices and the experiences of diverse stakeholders. In addition to commonly assessed patient outcomes, quality, and cost, it is critical to include PCMH components integral to practice culture transformation: patient and family centeredness, authentic patient activation, mutual trust among practice employees and patients, and transparency, joy, and collaboration in delivering and receiving care in a changing environment.

CONCLUSIONS

This evaluation set offers a comprehensive methodology to enable understanding of how PCMH transformation occurs in different practice settings. This approach can foster insights about how transformation affects critical outcomes to achieve meaningful, patient-centered, high-quality, and cost-effective sustainable change among diverse primary care practices.     

Are Primary Care Practices Ready to Become Patient‐Centered Medical Homes?

Purpose: To measure the readiness of rural primary care practices to qualify as patient‐centered medical homes (PCMHs), one step toward participating in changes underway in health care finance and delivery. Methods: We used the 2008 Health Tracking Physician Survey to compare PCMH readiness scores among metropolitan and nonmetropolitan primary care practices. The National Committee on Quality Assurance (NCQA) assessment system served as a framework to assess the PCMH capabilities of primary care practices based on their services, processes, and policies. Findings: We found little difference between urban and rural practices. Approximately 41% of all primary care practices offer minimal or no PCMH services. We also found that large practices score higher on standards primarily related to information technology and care management. Conclusions: Achieving the benefits of the PCMH model in small rural practices may require additional national promotion, technical assistance, and financial incentives.     

The Cost of Sustaining a Patient-Centered Medical Home: Experience From 2 States

PURPOSE

As medical practices transform to patient-centered medical homes (PCMHs), it is important to identify the ongoing costs of maintaining these “advanced primary care” functions. A key required input is personnel effort. This study’s objective was to assess direct personnel costs to practices associated with the staffing necessary to deliver PCMH functions as outlined in the National Committee for Quality Assurance Standards.

METHODS

We developed a PCMH cost dimensions tool to assess costs associated with activities uniquely required to maintain PCMH functions. We interviewed practice managers, nurse supervisors, and medical directors in 20 varied primary care practices in 2 states, guided by the tool. Outcome measures included categories of staff used to perform various PCMH functions, time and personnel costs, and whether practices were delivering PCMH functions.

RESULTS

Costs per full-time equivalent primary care clinician associated with PCMH functions varied across practices with an average of $7,691 per month in Utah practices and $9,658 in Colorado practices. PCMH incremental costs per encounter were $32.71 in Utah and $36.68 in Colorado. The average estimated cost per member per month for an assumed panel of 2,000 patients was $3.85 in Utah and $4.83 in Colorado.

CONCLUSIONS

Identifying costs of maintaining PCMH functions will contribute to effective payment reform and to sustainability of transformation. Maintenance and ongoing support of PCMH functions require additional time and new skills, which may be provided by existing staff, additional staff, or both. Adequate compensation for ongoing and substantial incremental costs is critical for practices to sustain PCMH functions.     

Medical Home Characteristics and Quality of Diabetes Care in Safety Net Clinics

We examined associations between patient-centered medical home (PCMH) characteristics and quality of diabetes care in 15 safety net clinics in five states. Surveys among clinic directors assessed PCMH characteristics using the Safety Net Medical Home Scale. Chart audits among 864 patients assessed diabetes process and outcome measures. We modeled the odds of the patient receiving performance measures as a function of total PCMH score and of PCMH subscales and covariates. PCMH characteristics had mixed, inconsistent associations with the quality of diabetes care. The PCMH model may require refinement in design and implementation to improve diabetes care among vulnerable populations.     

Michigan's Physician Group Incentive Program Offers A Regional Model For Incremental 'Fee For Value' Payment Reform

Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan partnered with providers across the state to create an innovative, "fee for value" physician incentive program that would deliver high-quality, efficient care. The Physician Group Incentive Program rewards physician organizations-formal groups of physicians and practices that can accept incentive payments on behalf of their members-based on the number of quality and utilization measures they adopt, such as generic drug dispensing rates, and on their performance on these measures across their patient populations. Physicians also receive payments for implementing a range of patient-centered medical home capabilities, such as patient registries, and they receive higher fees for office visits for incorporating these capabilities into routine practice while also improving performance. Taken together, the incentive dollars, fee increases, and care management payments amount to a potential increase in reimbursement of 40?percent or more from Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan for practices designated as high-performing patient-centered medical homes. At the same time, we estimate that implementing the patient-centered medical home capabilities was associated with $155?million in lower medical costs in program year 2011 for Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan members. We intend to devote a higher percentage of reimbursement over time to communities of caregivers that offer high-value, system-based care, and a lower percentage of reimbursement to individual physicians on a service-specific basis.     

Health IT–Enabled Care Coordination: A National Survey of Patient-Centered Medical Home Clinicians

PURPOSE

Health information technology (IT) offers promising tools for improving care coordination. We assessed the feasibility and acceptability of 6 proposed care coordination objectives for stage 3 of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services electronic health record incentive program (Meaningful Use) related to referrals, notification of care from other facilities, patient clinical summaries, and patient dashboards.

METHODS

We surveyed physician-owned and hospital/health system–affiliated primary care practices that achieved patient-centered medical home recognition and participated in the Meaningful Use program, and community health clinics with patient-centered medical home recognition (most with certified electronic health record systems). The response rate was 35.1%. We ascertained whether practices had implemented proposed objectives and perceptions of their importance. We analyzed the association of organizational and contextual factors with self-reported use of health IT to support care coordination activities.

RESULTS

Although 78% of the 350 respondents viewed timely notification of hospital discharges as very important, only 48.7% used health IT systems to accomplish this task. The activity most frequently supported by health IT was providing clinical summaries to patients, in 76.6% of practices; however, merely 47.7% considered this activity very important. Greater use of health IT to support care coordination activities was positively associated with the presence of a nonclinician responsible for care coordination and the practice’s capacity for systematic change.

CONCLUSIONS

Even among practices having a strong commitment to the medical home model, the use of health IT to support care coordination objectives is not consistent. Health IT capabilities are not currently aligned with clinicians’ priorities. Many practices will need financial and technical assistance for health IT to enhance care coordination.     

A house is not a home: keeping patients at the center of practice redesign

The "patient-centered medical home" has been promoted as an enhanced model of primary care. Based on a literature review and interviews with practicing physicians, we find that medical home advocates and physicians have somewhat different, although not necessarily inconsistent, expectations of what the medical home should accomplish-from greater responsiveness to the needs of all patients to increased focus on care management for patients with chronic conditions. As the medical home concept is further developed, it will be important to not overemphasize redesign of practices at the expense of patient-centered care, which is the hallmark of excellent primary care.