Background

While previous authors have emphasized the importance of integrating and reinforcing evidence-based medicine (EBM) skills in residency, there are few published examples of such curricula. We designed an EBM curriculum to train family practice interns in essential EBM skills for information mastery using clinical questions generated by the family practice inpatient service. We sought to evaluate the impact of this curriculum on interns, residents, and faculty.

Methods

Interns (n = 13) were asked to self-assess their level of confidence in basic EBM skills before and after their 2-week EBM rotation. Residents (n = 21) and faculty (n = 12) were asked to assess how often the answers provided by the EBM intern to the inpatient service changed medical care. In addition, residents were asked to report how often they used their EBM skills and how often EBM concepts and tools were used in teaching by senior residents and faculty. Faculty were asked if the EBM curriculum had increased their use of EBM in practice and in teaching.

Results

Interns significantly increased their confidence over the course of the rotation. Residents and faculty felt that the answers provided by the EBM intern provided useful information and led to changes in patient care. Faculty reported incorporating EBM into their teaching (92%) and practice (75%). Residents reported applying the EBM skills they learned to patient care (86%) and that these skills were reinforced in the teaching they received outside of the rotation (81%). All residents and 11 of 12 faculty felt that the EBM curriculum had improved patient care.

Conclusions

To our knowledge, this is the first published EBM curriculum using an individual block rotation format. As such, it may provide an alternative model for teaching and incorporating EBM into a residency program.

Background

The Patient-Centered Medical Home (PCMH) is a widely endorsed model of delivery system reform that emphasizes primary care. Pilot demonstration projects are underway in many states, sponsored by Medicare, Medicaid, major health plans and multi-payer coalitions.

Methods

In this paper we consider the development of a long-term policy-relevant research agenda on outcomes of the PCMH. We provide an overview of potential measures of PCMH impact, identify measurement challenges and recommend areas for further study. Although the PCMH should not be expected to solve every problem in the health care system, developing a research agenda for measuring outcomes of delivery system innovations such as the PCMH should be considered in the context of the larger effort to improve the US health care system, with the ultimate goal to improve population health.

Results

As a framework for our discussion, we have chosen the Institute of Medicine's six specific aims for 21st century health care: (1) safe, (2) effective, (3) patient-centered, (4) timely, (5) efficient and (6) equitable. In addition, we include potential areas of PCMH outcomes that do not easily fall under this framework and consider unintended consequences.

Conclusion

Multi-stakeholder involvement will be essential in developing a long-term policy-relevant research agenda for outcomes of the PCMH.

The Patient-Centered Medical Home (PCMH) is a widely endorsed model of delivery system reform that emphasizes primary care. Pilot demonstration projects are underway in many states, sponsored by Medicare, Medicaid, major health plans and multi-payer coalitions. In this paper we consider the development of a long-term policy-relevant research agenda on outcomes of the PCMH. We provide an overview of potential measures of PCMH impact, identify measurement challenges and recommend areas for further study. Although the PCMH should not be expected to solve every problem in the health care system, developing a research agenda for measuring outcomes of delivery system innovations such as the PCMH should be considered in the context of the larger effort to improve the US health care system, with the ultimate goal to improve population health. As a framework for our discussion, we have chosen the Institute of Medicine’s six specific aims for 21st century health care: (1) safe, (2) effective, (3) patient-centered, (4) timely, (5) efficient and (6) equitable. In addition, we include potential areas of PCMH outcomes that do not easily fall under this framework and consider unintended consequences. Multi-stakeholder involvement will be essential in developing a long-term policy-relevant research agenda for outcomes of the PCMH.

Abstract Background Many patients with chronic disease do not reach goals for management of their conditions. Self-management support provided by medical assistant health coaches within the clinical setting may help to improve clinical outcomes, but most studies to date lack statistical power or methodological rigor. Barriers to large scale implementation of the medical assistant coach model include lack of clinician buy-in and the absence of a business model that will make medical assistant health coaching sustainable. This study will add to the evidence base by determining the effectiveness of health coaching by medical assistants on clinical outcomes and patient self-management, by assessing the impact of health coaching on the clinician experience, and by examining the costs and potential savings of health coaching. Methods/Design This randomized controlled trial will evaluate the effectiveness of clinic-based medical assistant health coaches to improve clinical outcomes and self-management skills among low-income patients with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes, hypertension, or hyperlipidemia. A total of 441 patients from two San Francisco primary care clinics have been enrolled and randomized to receive a health coach (n = 224) or usual care (n = 217). Patients participating in the health coaching group will receive coaching for 12 months from medical assistants trained as health coaches. The primary outcome is a change in hemoglobin A1c, systolic blood pressure, or LDL cholesterol among patients with uncontrolled diabetes, hypertension and hyperlipidemia, respectively. Self-management behaviors, perceptions of the health care team and clinician, BMI, and chronic disease self-efficacy will be measured at baseline and after 12 months. Clinician experience is being assessed through surveys and qualitative interviews. Cost and utilization data will be analyzed through cost-predictive models. Discussion Medical assistants are an untapped resource to provide self-management support for patients with uncontrolled chronic disease. Having successfully completed recruitment, this study is uniquely poised to assess the effectiveness of the medical assistant health coaching model, to describe barriers and facilitators to implementation, and to develop a business case for sustainability. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT-01220336

Purpose

Health coaching is effective for chronic disease self-management in the primary care safety-net setting, but little is known about the persistence of its benefits. We conducted an observational study evaluating the maintenance of improved cardiovascular risk factors following a health coaching intervention.

Methods

We performed a naturalistic follow-up to the Health Coaching in Primary Care Study, a 12-month randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing health coaching to usual care for patients with uncontrolled diabetes, hypertension, or hyperlipidemia. Participants were followed up 24 months from RCT baseline. The primary outcome was the proportion at goal for at least 1 measure (hemoglobin A1c, systolic blood pressure, or LDL cholesterol) that had been above goal at enrollment; secondary outcomes included each individual clinical goal. Chi-square tests and paired t-tests compared dichotomous and continuous measures.

Results

290 of 441 participants (65.8%) participated at both 12 and 24 months. The proportion of patients in the coaching arm of the RCT who achieved the primary outcome dropped only slightly from 47.1% at 12 to 45.9% at 24 months (P = .80). The proportion at goal for hemoglobin A1c dropped from 53.4% to 36.2% (P = .03). All other clinical metrics had small, nonsignificant changes between 12 and 24 months.

Conclusions

Results support the conclusion that most improved clinical outcomes persisted 1 year after the completion of the health coaching intervention.

Background

Peer health coaching is an effective method of enhancing self-management support in patients with diabetes. It is unclear whether peer health coaching is equally beneficial to all patients with poor glycemic control, or is most effective for subgroups of patients.

Objective

To examine whether the effect of peer health coaching on hemoglobin A1c (A1c) is modified by characteristics that are known to be associated with diabetes control.

Design

Sub-group analyses of randomized control trial.

Participants

Two hundred and ninety nine patients with diabetes receiving care in public health clinics who participated in a randomized controlled trial of peer health coaches.

Main measures

We examined whether the association between study group and change in A1c was modified by differences in patients' demographic, behavioral or psychosocial characteristics. Analyses were adjusted for co-variables associated with change in A1c.

Key results

The effect of coaching on patient A1c was modified by patients' level of self-management and degree of medication adherence as baseline (p=.02, and p=.03 respectively in adjusted models). For participants with "low" self-management (one standard deviation below the mean score), the usual care group experienced a slight increase in A1c (0.3 %), while the health coaching group experienced a decrease (-0.9 %). For participants with "high" self-management (one standard deviation above the mean score), both groups experienced a similar decrease in A1c (usual care group: -1.0 %; health coaching group: -1.1 %). Participants with "low" medication adherence in the usual care group experienced an increase in A1c (0.5 %), while the health coaching group experienced a decrease (-0.8 %). Participants with "high" medication adherence experienced similar decreases (usual care group: -1.1 %; health coaching group: -1.3 %).

Conclusion

Peer health coaching had a larger effect on lowering A1c in patients with low levels of medication adherence and self-management support than in patients with higher levels. Peer health coaching interventions may be most effective if targeted to high-risk patients with diabetes with poor glycemic control and with poor self-management and medication adherence.

Purpose

A randomized controlled trial found that patients with diabetes had lower HbA1c levels after 6 months of peer health coaching than patients who did not receive coaching. This paper explores whether the peer coaches in that trial, all low-income patients with diabetes, mastered and utilized an evidence-based health coaching training curriculum. The curriculum included 5 core features: ask-tell-ask, closing the loop, know your numbers, behavior-change action plans, and medication adherence counseling.

Methods

This paper includes the results of exams administered to trainees, exit surveys performed with peer coaches who completed the study and those who dropped out, observations of peer coaches meeting with patients, and analysis of in-depth interviews with peer coaches who completed the study.

Results

Of the 32 peer coach trainees who completed the training, 71.9% lacked a college degree; 25.0% did not graduate from high school. The 26 trainees who passed the exams attended 92.7% of training sessions compared with 80.6% for the 6 trainees who did not pass. Peer coaches who completed the study wanted to continue peer coaching work and had confidence in their abilities despite their not consistently employing the coaching techniques with their patients. Quotations describe coaches' perceptions of the training.

Conclusions

Of low-income patients with diabetes who completed the evidenced-based health coaching training, 81% passed written and oral exams and became effective peer health coaches, although they did not consistently use the techniques taught.

PURPOSE: Health coaching is effective for chronic disease self-management in the primary care safety-net setting, but little is known about the persistence of its benefits. We conducted an observational study evaluating the maintenance of improved cardiovascular risk factors following a health coaching intervention. METHODS: We performed a naturalistic follow-up to the Health Coaching in Primary Care Study, a 12-month randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing health coaching to usual care for patients with uncontrolled diabetes, hypertension, or hyperlipidemia. Participants were followed up 24 months from RCT baseline. The primary outcome was the proportion at goal for at least 1 measure (hemoglobin A1c, systolic blood pressure, or LDL cholesterol) that had been above goal at enrollment; secondary outcomes included each individual clinical goal. Chi-square tests and paired t-tests compared dichotomous and continuous measures. RESULTS: 290 of 441 participants (65.8%) participated at both 12 and 24 months. The proportion of patients in the coaching arm of the RCT who achieved the primary outcome dropped only slightly from 47.1% at 12 to 45.9% at 24 months (P = .80). The proportion at goal for hemoglobin A1c dropped from 53.4% to 36.2% (P = .03). All other clinical metrics had small, nonsignificant changes between 12 and 24 months. CONCLUSIONS: Results support the conclusion that most improved clinical outcomes persisted 1 year after the completion of the health coaching intervention.

Background

Increasing the cultural competence of physicians and other health care providers has been suggested as one mechanism for reducing health disparities by improving the quality of care across racial/ethnic groups. While cultural competency training for physicians is increasingly promoted, relatively few studies evaluating the impact of training have been published.

Methods

We recruited 53 primary care physicians at 4 diverse practice sites and enrolled 429 of their patients with diabetes and/or hypertension. Patients completed a baseline survey which included a measure of physician culturally competent behaviors. Cultural competency training was then provided to physicians at 2 of the sites. At all 4 sites, physicians received feedback in the form of their aggregated cultural competency scores compared to the aggregated scores from other physicians in the practice. The primary outcome at 6 months was change in the Patient-Reported Physician Cultural Competence (PRPCC) score; secondary outcomes were changes in patient trust, satisfaction, weight, systolic blood pressure, and glycosylated hemoglobin. Multiple analysis of variance was used to control for differences patient characteristics and baseline levels of the outcome measure between groups.

Results

Patients had a mean of 2.8 + 2.2 visits to the study physician during the study period. Changes in all outcomes were similar in the "Training + Feedback" group compared to the "Feedback Only" group (PRPCC: 3.7 vs.1.8; trust: -0.7 vs. -0.2 ; satisfaction: 1.9 vs. 2.5; weight: -2.5 lbs vs. -0.7 lbs; systolic blood pressure: 1.7 mm Hg vs. 0.1 mm Hg; glycosylated hemoglobin 0.02% vs. 0.07%; p = NS for all).

Conclusion

The lack of measurable impact of physician training on patient-reported and disease-specific outcomes in the current has several possible explanations, including the relatively limited nature of the intervention. We hope that the current study will help provide a basis for future studies, using more intensive interventions with different provider groups.