Evaluation of the group health cooperative access initiative: study design challenges in estimating the impact of a large-scale organizational transformation.

Group Health Cooperative, Center for Health Studies, Washington, Seattle, USA.
Quality management in health care 01/2008; 17(4):292-303. DOI: 10.1097/01.QMH.0000338550.67393.a9
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The Institute of Medicine argues that poorly designed delivery systems are a major cause of low-quality care in the United States but does not present methods for evaluating whether its recommendations, when implemented by a health care organization, actually improve quality of care. We describe how time-series study designs using individual-level longitudinal data can be applied to address methodological challenges in our evaluation of the impact of the Group Health Cooperative "Access Initiative," an integrated set of 7 "patient-centered" reforms in its integrated delivery system that are consistent with the Institute of Medicine's recommendations. The methods may be generalizable to evaluating similar reforms in other integrated delivery systems with representative patient and physician data sources.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The authors examined whether Group Health's Access Initiative changed the utilization and costs of care among enrollees with diabetes. Using a single (one-group) interrupted time series design, repeated-measures generalized estimating equation models were used to estimate changes in utilization and costs during the Initiative rollout (2002-2003) and to compare the slopes (annual rates of change) for utilization and costs during the Pre-Initiative period (1998-2002) to the slopes during Full-Implementation (2003-2006) among 9,871 members continuously enrolled from 1997 to 2006 with type 1 or 2 diabetes. Total costs increased in Full-Implementation, but the annual change in total costs did not change. Primary care visits declined, but primary care contacts grew, largely from the Initiative's introduction of secure messaging. Specialty visits did not change; however, the Initiative may have increased emergency visits. To reduce emergency visits, future access initiatives should include proactive and comprehensive outpatient care for patients with diabetes.
    Medical Care Research and Review 05/2012; 69(5):519-39. DOI:10.1177/1077558712446705 · 2.57 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Quality improvement (QI) requires measurement, but medical schools rarely provide opportunities for students to measure their patient outcomes. The authors tested the feasibility and perceived impact of a quality metric report card as part of an Education-Centered Medical Home longitudinal curriculum. Student teams were embedded into faculty practices and assigned a panel of patients to follow longitudinally. Students performed retrospective chart reviews and reported deidentified data on 30 nationally endorsed QI metrics for their assigned patients. Scorecards were created for each clinic team. Students completed pre/post surveys on self-perceived QI skills. A total of 405 of their patients' charts were abstracted by 149 students (76% response rate; mean 2.7 charts/student). Median abstraction time was 21.8 (range: 13.1-37.1) minutes. Abstracted data confirmed that the students had successfully recruited a "high-risk" patient panel. Initial performance on abstracted quality measures ranged from 100% adherence on the use of beta-blockers in postmyocardial infarction patients to 24% on documentation of dilated diabetic eye exams. After the chart abstraction assignment, grand rounds, and background readings, student self-assessment of their perceived QI skills significantly increased for all metrics, though it remained low. Creation of an actionable health care quality report card as part of an ambulatory longitudinal experience is feasible, and it improves student perception of QI skills. Future research will aim to use statistical process control methods to track health care quality prospectively as our students use their scorecards to drive clinic-level improvement efforts.
    Academic medicine: journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges 08/2013; 88(10). DOI:10.1097/ACM.0b013e3182a36bb5 · 3.47 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The Institute of Medicine suggests redesigning health care to ensure safe, effective, timely, efficient, equitable, and patient-centered care. The concept of patient-centered access supports these goals. Group Health, a mixed-model health care system, attempted to improve patients' access to care through the following changes: (a) offering a patient Web site with patient access to patient-physician secure e-mail, electronic medical records, and health promotion information; (b) offering advanced access to primary physicians; (c) redesigning primary care services to enhance care efficiency; (d) offering direct access to physician specialists; and (e) aligning primary physician compensation through incentives for patient satisfaction, productivity, and secure messaging with patients. In the 2 years following the redesign, patients reported higher satisfaction with certain aspects of access to care, providers reported improvements in the quality of service given to patients, and enrollment in Group Health stayed aligned with statewide trends in health care coverage.
    Medical Care Research and Review 07/2009; 66(6):703-24. DOI:10.1177/1077558709338486 · 2.57 Impact Factor