Background

Despite widespread adoption of patient-centered medical home (PCMH), little is known about why practices pursue PCMH and what is needed to undergo transformation.

Objective

Examine reasons practices obtained and maintained PCMH recognition and what resources were needed.

Design

Qualitative study of practice leader perspectives on PCMH transformation, based on a random sample of primary care practices engaged in PCMH transformation, stratified by US region, practice size, PCMH recognition history, and practice use of Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS®) PCMH survey.

Participants

105 practice leaders from 294 sampled practices (36% response rate).

Approach

Content analysis of interviews with practice leaders to identify themes.

Results

Most practice leaders had local control of PCMH transformation decisions, even if practices adopted quality initiatives under the direction of an organization or network. Financial incentives, being in a statewide effort, and the intrinsic desire to improve care or experiences were the most common reasons practice leaders decided to obtain PCMH recognition and pursue associated care delivery changes. Leadership support and direction were highlighted as essential throughout PCMH transformation. Practice leaders reported needing specialized staff knowledge and significant resources to meet PCMH requirements, including staff knowledgeable about how to implement PCMH changes, track and monitor improvements, and navigate implementation of simultaneous changes, and staff with specific quality improvement (QI) expertise related to evaluating changes and scaling-up programs.

Conclusion

PCMH efforts necessitated support and assistance to frontline, on-site practice leaders leading care delivery changes. Such change efforts should include financial incentives (e.g., direct payment or additional reimbursement), leadership direction and support, and internal or external staff with experience with the PCMH application process, implementation changes, and QI expertise in monitoring process and outcome data. Policies that recognize and meet the needs of on-site practice leaders will better promote primary care practice transformation and move practices further toward their PCMH transformation goals.

Objectives

To examine how primary care practices use the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) survey and its patient-centered medical home (PCMH) items during their PCMH transition.

Study design

Qualitative study of practices' use of patient experience data during PCMH transformation, based on a random sample of primary care practices engaged in PCMH transformation, stratified by region, practice size, PCMH recognition history, and use of the CAHPS PCMH survey.

Methods

We interviewed 105 practice leaders from 294 sampled practices (36% response rate) and used content analysis to identify themes about uses of patient experience data for practice improvement during PCMH transformation.

Results

Patient experience data were used primarily to assess and track improvements toward PCMH goals and as quality improvement (QI) metrics. CAHPS measures were used most often to discuss best practices, share data with patient advisory councils, and improve provider performance. The CAHPS PCMH survey helped practices improve patient-centeredness, particularly in coordinating care and supporting patient self-management and communication. The CAHPS PCMH items that assisted practices most were about patient self-management and provider referrals. Most practice leaders using the CAHPS PCMH survey felt that its items were actionable for standardizing PCMH changes or making structural changes. Practices administering CAHPS surveys focused on a more diverse set of QI areas.

Conclusions

CAHPS surveys were considered actionable for PCMH transformation and used in standardizing and coordinating care. The CAHPS PCMH items were considered integral to the continuous QI needed for moving beyond formal PCMH recognition and maximizing transformation. This supports the National Committee for Quality Assurance's recommendation to administer the CAHPS or CAHPS PCMH survey for PCMH transformation.

Context

Achieving high-quality patient-centered care requires assessing patient and family experiences to identify opportunities for improvement. With the Child Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems Survey, hospitals can assess performance and make national comparisons of inpatient pediatric experiences. However, using patient and family experience data to improve care remains a challenge.

Objective

We reviewed the literature on best practices for monitoring performance and undertaking activities aimed at improving pediatric patient and family experiences of inpatient care.

Data sources

We searched PubMed, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and PsychINFO.

Study selection

We included (1) English-language peer-reviewed articles published from January 2000 to April 2019; (2) articles based in the United States, United Kingdom, or Canada; (3) articles focused on pediatric inpatient care; (4) articles describing pediatric patient and family experiences; and (5) articles including content on activities aimed at improving patient and family experiences. Our review included 25 articles.

Data extraction

Two researchers reviewed the full article and abstracted specific information: country, study aims, setting, design, methods, results, Quality Improvement (QI) initiatives performed, internal reporting description, best practices, lessons learned, barriers, facilitators and study implications for clinical practice, patient-experience data collection, and QI activities. We noted themes across samples and care settings.

Results

We identified 10 themes of best practice. The 4 most common were (1) use evidence-based approaches, (2) maintain an internal system that communicates information and performance on patient and family experiences to staff and hospital leadership, (3) use experience survey data to initiate and/or evaluate QI interventions, and (4) identify optimal times (eg, discharge) and modes (eg, print) for obtaining patient and family feedback. These correspond to adult inpatient best practices.

Conclusions

Both pediatric and adult inpatient best practices rely on common principles of culture change (such as evidence-based clinical practice), collaborative learning, multidisciplinary teamwork, and building and/or supporting a QI infrastructure that requires time, money, collaboration, data tracking, and monitoring. QI best practices in both pediatric and adult inpatient settings commonly rely on identifying drivers of overall ratings of care, rewarding staff for successful implementation, and creating easy-to-use and easy-to-access planning and QI tools for staff.

Background and objectives

Health care organizations track patient experience data, identify areas of improvement, monitor provider performance, and assist providers in improving their interactions with patients. Some practices use one-on-one provider counseling ("shadow coaching") to identify and modify provider behaviors. A recent evaluation of a large shadow coaching program found statistically significant improvements in coached providers' patient experience scores immediately after being coached. This study aimed to examine the content of the recommendations given to those providers aimed at improving provider-patient interactions, characterize these recommendations, and examine their actionability.

Methods

Providers at a large, urban federally qualified health center were selected for coaching based on Clinician and Group Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CG-CAHPS) patient experience scores (92 of 320 providers), shadowed by a trained peer coach for a half to full day and received recommendations on how to improve interactions with their patients. We coded 1082 recommendations found in the 92 coaching reports.

Results

Reports contained an average of 12 recommendations. About half encouraged consistency of existing behaviors and half encouraged new behaviors. Most recommendations related to behaviors of the provider rather than support staff and targeted actions within the examination room rather than other spaces (eg, waiting room). The most common recommendations mapped to behavioral aspects of provider communication. Most recommendations targeted verbal rather than nonverbal communication behaviors. Most recommendations were actionable (ie, specific, descriptive), with recommendations that encouraged new behaviors being more actionable than those that encouraged existing actions.

Conclusions

Patient experience surveys are effective at identifying where improvement is needed but are not always informative enough to instruct providers on how to modify and improve their interactions with patients. Analyzing the feedback given to coached providers as part of an effective shadow-coaching program provides details about implementation on shadow-coaching feedback. Recommendations to providers aimed at improving their interactions with patients need to not only suggest the exact behaviors defined within patient experience survey items but also include recommended behaviors indirectly associated with those measured behaviors. Attention needs to be paid to supplementing patient experience data with explicit, tangible, and descriptive (ie, actionable) recommendations associated with the targeted, measured behaviors. Research is needed to understand how recommendations are put into practice by providers and what motivates and supports them to sustain changed behaviors.

Background and objectives

Delivering care as a patient-centered medical home (PCMH) is being widely adopted across the United States by primary care practices to better meet patient needs. A key PCMH element is measuring patient experience for practice improvement. The National Committee for Quality Assurance (NCQA) PCMH recognition program requires practices to both measure patient experience and engage in continuous practice/quality improvement to attain PCMH recognition and then throughout full PCMH transformation. The NCQA recommends but does not require that practices administer the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) clinician and group patient experience survey (CG-CAHPS) plus 14 CAHPS PCMH items, known as the CAHPS PCMH survey. We examine aspects of patient experience measured by practices with a varying number of years on their journey of PCMH transformation.

Methods

We randomly selected practices from the 2008-2017 NCQA directory of practices that had applied for PCMH recognition based on region, physician count, number of years and level of PCMH recognition, and use of the CG-CAHPS PCMH survey. We collected characteristics of the practices from practice leader(s) knowledgeable about the practice's PCMH history and patient experience data. We confirmed the patient experience surveys used during their PCMH history and requested copies of their non-CAHPS survey(s). For practices not administering the recommended CG-CAHPS survey (53/105 practices), we obtained and coded the content of their non-CAHPS surveys (68%; 36/53). We mapped the patient experience domains and specific measures to the CG-CAHPS survey (versions 2.0 and 3.0), CAHPS PCMH item set (versions 2.0 and 3.0), and the available CG-CAHPS supplemental items.

Results

Whether or not practices administered the CG-CAHPS items, most of them addressed topics contained in the CG-CAHPS survey such as Access to care, Provider communication, Office staff helpfulness/courteousness, Care coordination, and Shared decision-making. The most common CAHPS measures included were Office staff helpfulness/courteousness and Provider communication. Common non-CAHPS measures included were Ease of scheduling, Being informed about delays, and Provider helpfulness/courteousness.

Conclusion

NCQA PCMH practices included CAHPS items on their patient experience surveys even if they did not administer the full CG-CAHPS survey or the recommended CAHPS PCMH survey. To enhance the usefulness of patient experience surveys for practices undergoing PCMH changes, additional CAHPS measures could be developed related to key areas of PCMH change, including expanded access to care (ie, after-hours and weekend visits, ease of scheduling, being informed about delays), use of shared decision-making, and improvements in provider communication (ie, the provider is courteous, communication by other clinical staff members with the patient). These additional measures would assist practice leaders in capturing the breadth and depth of their PCMH transformation and its influence on providing more patient-centered care. Developing such items would help standardize the measurement of changes related to patient experience during PCMH transformation. Research is needed to determine whether a CAHPS survey is the best source of this information.

Background

Effective doctor communication is critical to positive doctor-patient relationships and predicts better health outcomes. Doctor communication is the strongest predictor of patient ratings of doctors, but the most important aspects of communication may vary by specialty.

Objective

To determine the importance of five aspects of doctor communication to overall physician ratings by specialty.

Design

For each of 28 specialties, we calculated partial correlations of five communication items with a 0-10 overall physician rating, controlling for patient demographics.

Patients

Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems Clinician and Group (CG-CAHPS®) 12-month Survey data collected 2005-2009 from 58,251 adults at a 534-physician medical group.

Main measures

CG-CAHPS includes a 0 ("Worst physician possible") to 10 ("Best physician possible") overall physician rating. Five doctor communication items assess how often the physician: explains things; listens carefully; gives easy-to-understand instructions; shows respect; and spends enough time.

Key results

Physician showing respect was the most important aspect of communication for 23/28 specialties, with a mean partial correlation (0.27, ranging from 0.07 to 0.44 across specialties) that accounted for more than four times as much variance in the overall physician rating as any other communication item. Three of five communication items varied significantly across specialties in their associations with the overall rating (p < 0.05).

Conclusions

All patients valued respectful treatment; the importance of other aspects of communication varied significantly by specialty. Quality improvement efforts by all specialties should emphasize physicians showing respect to patients, and each specialty should also target other aspects of communication that matter most to their patients. The results have implications for improving provider quality improvement and incentive programs and the reporting of CAHPS data to patients. Specialists make important contributions to coordinated patient care, and thus customized approaches to measurement, reporting, and quality improvement efforts are important.

Objectives

Knowing which patient-centered medical home (PCMH) care delivery changes and quality improvement (QI) practices further PCMH implementation is essential.

Study design

We used the 2008-2017 National Committee of Quality Assurance (NCQA) PCMH directory of 15,188 primary care practices that received Level 1, 2, or 3 NCQA PCMH recognition to construct a stratified national sample of 105 practices engaged in PCMH transformation. We examined their QI practices and PCMH changes associated with PCMH transformation.

Methods

We derived QI practice and PCMH change variables from semistructured interviews. Practice leaders completed the PCMH Assessment (PCMH-A) measuring the practice's degree of PCMH implementation, which is a proxy for patient-centeredness. Controlling for practice characteristics, we regressed PCMH-A scores on QI practice and PCMH change variables.

Results

Practices undergoing PCMH transformation nationwide most commonly made care delivery changes in access and continuity of care. To improve quality, practices most commonly engaged in discussing and targeting areas of patient experience improvement, trending performance, and conducting targeted QI. However, practices lower in patient-centeredness as measured by the PCMH-A were more likely to engage in efforts to improve patient experiences, such as reviewing patient experience data or engaging in 1-on-1 provider counseling related to patient interactions. Mature PCMH practices focused on changes in continuity of care.

Conclusions

Practices undertake a wide variety of care delivery changes and QI practices simultaneously to meet PCMH requirements. The patient experience-specific QI practices and PCMH care delivery changes that practices make to improve patient-centeredness differ by years of PCMH recognition.