No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the author.
Improving Care Quality and Reducing Disparities: Physicians' Roles
Abstract
For several decades, intense health care policy interest in clinical practice variation has inspired efforts to identify inappropriate variation, that is, differences in care delivery that are not attributable to clinical differences in disease or patient preferences. Practice variations associated with patient race, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, geography, and other factors not attributable to clinical manifestations are prevalent and reflect suboptimal return on our investment in health care. In addition, disparities in access to care may lead to inefficient and costly patterns of care and contribute to long-standing disparities in health status and outcomes. As the US population becomes increasingly diverse, there is growing urgency underlying the imperative to identify solutions to the challenges of “unequal treatment.”
... 10,11 One potentially effective approach to reducing disparities in outcomes is to improve individual clinicians' awareness of disparities and provide training to enable them to take action to address health care disparities within their organizations. 12 The importance of working with clinicians is supported by research suggesting that patient race may play a role, perhaps at an unconscious level, in clinicians' decision making. [13][14][15] In addition, many clinicians may be unaware of disparities in the health care system as a whole or among their own patients. ...
... Income related (12), affecting: ...
Interventions that improve clinicians' awareness of racial disparities and improve their communication skills are considered promising strategies for reducing disparities in health care. We report clinicians' views of an intervention involving cultural competency training and race-stratified performance reports designed to reduce racial disparities in diabetes outcomes.
Semistructured interviews were conducted with 12 physicians and 5 nurse practitioners who recently participated in a randomized intervention to reduce racial disparities in diabetes outcomes. Clinicians were asked open-ended questions about their attitudes towards the intervention, the causes of disparities, and potential solutions to them.
Thematic analysis of the interviews showed that most clinicians acknowledged the presence of racial disparities in diabetes control among their patients. They described a complex set of causes, including socioeconomic factors, but perceived only some causes to be within their power to change, such as switching patients to less-expensive generic drugs. The performance reports and training were generally well received but some clinicians did not feel empowered to act on the information. All clinicians identified additional services that would help them address disparities; for example, culturally tailored nutrition advice. Some clinicians challenged the premise of the intervention, focusing instead on socioeconomic factors as the primary cause of disparities rather than on patients' race.
The cultural competency training and performance reports were well received by many but not all of the clinicians. Clinicians reported the intervention alone had not empowered them to address the complex, root causes of racial disparities in diabetes outcomes.
... Primary care physicians could provide a more proactive service and actively seek such patients out. These considerations identify a challenge for society and health care organizations to find solutions for any "unequal management" issues [36]. A study on the impact of a major pay-for-performance initiative introduced in the UK primary care services in 2004 (which was expected to promote more proactive health care services) suggested that younger patients (<45 years old) with diabetes benefited less in terms of performance quality and outcomes than older patients, i.e. some age group disparities persisted [37]. ...
Background
An aging population means that chronic illnesses, such as diabetes, are becoming more prevalent and demands for care are rising. Members of primary care teams should organize and coordinate patient care with a view to improving quality of care and impartial adherence to evidence-based practices for all patients. The aims of the present study were: to ascertain the prevalence of diabetes in an Italian population, stratified by age, gender and citizenship; and to identify the rate of compliance with recommended guidelines for monitoring diabetes, to see whether disparities exist in the quality of diabetes patient management.
Methods
A population-based analysis was performed on a dataset obtained by processing public health administration databases. The presence of diabetes and compliance with standards of care were estimated using appropriate algorithms. A multilevel logistic regression analysis was applied to assess factors affecting compliance with standards of care.
Results
1,948,622 Italians aged 16+ were included in the study. In this population, 105,987 subjects were identified as having diabetes on January 1st, 2009. The prevalence of diabetes was 5.43% (95% CI 5.33-5.54) overall, 5.87% (95% CI 5.82-5.92) among males, and 5.05% (95% CI 5.00-5.09) among females. HbA1c levels had been tested in 60.50% of our diabetic subjects, LDL cholesterol levels in 57.50%, and creatinine levels in 63.27%, but only 44.19% of the diabetic individuals had undergone a comprehensive assessment during one year of care. Statistical differences in diabetes care management emerged relating to gender, age, diagnostic latency period, comorbidity and citizenship.
Conclusions
Process management indicators need to be used not only for the overall assessment of health care processes, but also to monitor disparities in the provision of health care.
... One study showed that individual physicians achieved less favorable outcomes among their black than among their white patients [28]. These findings challenge society and health organizations to identify solutions for "unequal treatment" [29]. MHS has begun implementing interventions tailor-made for the Arab population [26]; see below for its organizationwide action plan. ...
The commitment to promoting equity in health is derived from the notion that all human beings have the right to the best attainable health. However, disparities in health care are well-documented. The objectives were to explore disparities in diabetes prevalence, care and control among diabetic patients. The study was conducted by Maccabi Healthcare Services (MHS), an Israeli HMO (health care plan).
Retrospective study. The dependent variables were diabetes prevalence, uptake of follow-up examinations, and disease control. The independent variables were socio-economic rank (SER), ethnicity (Arab vs non Arab), supplementary voluntary health insurance (SVHI), and immigration from Former Soviet Union (FSU) countries. Chi Square and Logistic Regression Models were estimated.
We analyzed 74,953 diabetes patients. Diabetes was more prevalent in males, lower SER patients, Arabs, immigrants and owners of SVHI. Optimal follow up was more frequent among females, lower SERs patients, non Arabs, immigrants and SVHI owners. Patients who were female, had higher SERs, non Arabs, immigrants and SVHI owners achieved better control of the disease. The multivariate analysis revealed significant associations between optimal follow up and age, gender (males), SER (Ranks 1-10), Arabs and SVHI (OR 1.02, 0.95, 1.15, 0.85 and 1.31, respectively); poor diabetes control (HbA1C > 9 gr%) was significantly associated with age, gender (males), Arabs, immigrants, SER (Ranks1-10) and SVHI (OR 0.96, 1.26, 1.38, 0.72, 1.37 and 0.57, respectively); significant associations with LDL control (< 100 gr%) were revealed for age, gender (males) and SVHI (OR 1.02, 1.30 and 1.44, respectively).
Disparities in diabetes prevalence, care and control were revealed according to population sub-group. MHS has recently established a comprehensive strategy and action plan, aimed to reduce disparities among members of low socioeconomic rank and Arab ethnicity, sub-groups identified in our study as being at risk for less favorable health outcomes.
A specific faculty development program for tutors to teach cross-cultural care in a preclinical gastrointestinal pathophysiology course with weekly longitudinal followup sessions was designed in 2007 and conducted in the same manner over a 6-yr period. Anonymous student evaluations of how "frequently" the course and the tutor were actively teaching cross-cultural care were performed. The statements "This tutor actively teaches culturally competent care" and "Issues of culture and ethnicity were addressed" were significantly improved over baseline 2004 data. These increases were sustained over the 6-yr period. A tutor's overall rating as a teacher was moderately correlated with his/her "frequently" actively teaching cross-cultural care (r = 0.385, P < 0. 001). Course evaluation scores were excellent and put the course into the group of preclinical courses with the top ratings. Students in the Race in Curriculum Group asked that the program be expanded to other preclinical courses. In conclusion, from 2007 to 2012, a faculty development program for teaching cross-cultural care consistently increased the discussion of cross-cultural care in the tutorial and course over each year beginning with 2007 compared with the baseline year of 2004. Our data suggest that cross-cultural care can be effectively integrated into pathophysiology tutorials and helps improve students' satisfaction and tutors' ratings. Teaching cross-cultural care in a pathophysiology tutorial did not detract from the course's overall evaluations, which remained in the top group over the 6-yr period.
Copyright © 2015 The American Physiological Society.
The purpose of this study was to determine the factor structure, internal consistency reliability, and validity of the Tucker Culturally Sensitive Health Care Clinic Environment Inventory-Patient Form (T-CSHCCEI-PF), a novel instrument designed to assess an aspect of health care often ignored in health care quality research: the cultural sensitivity of health care center policies and environment as perceived by adult, racially/ethnically diverse patients. Using ratings on this inventory by a culturally diverse national sample of adult patients (N = 1,639) from 67 health care sites across the United States, a confirmatory factor analysis of the T-CSHCCEI-PF was conducted, and its reliability and validity were determined. The T-CSHCCEI-PF was shown to be a reliable and valid inventory for culturally diverse patients to provide feedback to the administrators at their health care centers regarding the degree to which these centers have characteristics that are reflective of patient-centered culturally sensitive health care.
The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is a major achievement in improving access to health care services. However, evidence indicates that the nation could achieve greater improvements in health outcomes, at a lower cost, by shifting its focus to public health. By focusing nearly exclusively on health care, policy makers have chronically starved public health of adequate and stable funding and political support. The lack of support for public health is exacerbated by the fact that health care and public health are generally conceptualized, organized, and funded as two separate systems. In order to maximize gains in health status and to spend scarce health resources most effectively, health care and public health should be treated as two interactive parts of a single, unified health system. The core purpose of health reform ought to be the improvement of the population’s health. We propose five criteria that would significantly advance this goal: prevention and wellness, human resources, a strong and sustainable health infrastructure, robust performance measurement, and reduction of health disparities. Although the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act includes provisions addressing these criteria, population health is not a central focus of the reform. In order to guide health reform implementation and to inform future health reform efforts, we offer three major policy reforms: changing the environment to incentivize healthy behavioral choices, strengthening the public health infrastructure at the state and local levels, and developing a health-in-all policies strategy that would engage multiple agencies in improving health incomes. Adopting these reforms would facilitate integration and dramatically improve the population’s health, particularly when compared to the health gains likely to be realized from a continued focus on access to health care services.
Our study describes a faculty development program to encourage the integration of racial, cultural, ethnic, and socioeconomic factors such as obesity, inability to pay for essential medications, the use of alternative medicine, dietary preferences, and alcoholism in a gastrointestinal pathophysiology course.
We designed a 1-hour faculty development session with longitudinal reinforcement of concepts. The session focused on showing the relevance of racial, ethnic, cultural, and socioeconomic factors to gastrointestinal diseases, and encouraged tutors to take an active and pivotal role in discussion of these factors. The study outcome was student responses to course evaluation questions concerning the teaching of cultural and ethnic issues in the course as a whole and by individual tutorials in 2004 (pre-faculty development) and in 2006 to 2008 (post-faculty development).
Between 2004 and 2008, the proportion of students reporting that "Issues of culture and ethnicity as they affect topics in this course were addressed" increased significantly (P = .000). From 2006 to 2008, compared with 2004, there was a significant increase in the number of tutors who "frequently" taught culturally competent care according to 60% or greater of their tutorial students (P = .003). The tutor's age, gender, prior tutor experience, rank, and specialty did not significantly impact results.
An innovative faculty development session that encourages tutors to discuss racial, cultural, ethnic, and socioeconomic issues relevant to both care of the whole patient and to the pathophysiology of illness is both effective and applicable to other preclinical and clinical courses.
Health care report cards publicly report information about physician, hospital, and health plan quality in an attempt to improve that quality. Reporting quality information publicly is presumed to motivate quality improvement through 2 main mechanisms. First, public quality information allows patients, referring physicians, and health care purchasers to preferentially select high-quality physicians. Second, public report cards may motivate physicians to compete on quality and, by providing feedback and by identifying areas for quality improvement initiatives, help physicians to do so. Despite these plausible mechanisms of quality improvement, the value of publicly reporting quality information is largely undemonstrated and public reporting may have unintended and negative consequences on health care. These unintended consequences include causing physicians to avoid sick patients in an attempt to improve their quality ranking, encouraging physicians to achieve "target rates" for health care interventions even when it may be inappropriate among some patients, and discounting patient preferences and clinical judgment. Public reporting of quality information promotes a spirit of openness that may be valuable for enhancing trust of the health professions, but its ability to improve health remains undemonstrated, and public reporting may inadvertently reduce, rather than improve, quality. Given these limitations, it may be necessary to reassess the role of public quality reporting in quality improvement.
Overall quality of care and racial disparities in quality are important and related problems in health care, but their relationship has not been well studied. In the Medicare managed care program, broad improvements in quality have been accompanied by reduced racial gaps in processes of care, but substantial disparities in outcomes have persisted.
To assess variations among Medicare health plans in overall quality and racial disparity in 4 Health Plan Employer and Data Information Set (HEDIS) outcome measures, to determine whether high-performing plans exhibit smaller racial disparities, and to identify plans with high quality and low disparity.
We assessed the relationship between quality and racial disparity using multilevel multivariable regression models. The study sample included 431,573 individual-level observations in 151 Medicare health plans from 2002 to 2004.
Hemoglobin A(1c) of less than 9.5% or less than 9.0% for enrollees with diabetes; low-density lipoprotein cholesterol level of less than 130 mg/dL for enrollees with diabetes or after a coronary event; and blood pressure of less than 140/90 mm Hg for enrollees with hypertension.
Clinical performance on HEDIS outcome measures was 6.8% to 14.4% lower for black enrollees than for white enrollees (P<.001 for all). For each measure, more than 70% of this disparity was due to different outcomes for black and white individuals enrolled in the same health plan rather than selection of black enrollees into lower-performing plans. Health plans varied substantially in both overall quality and racial disparity on each of the 4 outcome measures. Adjusted correlations between overall quality and racial disparity were small and not statistically significant, ranging from 0.01 (blood pressure control) to -0.21 (cholesterol control in diabetes). Only 1 health plan achieved both high quality and low disparity on more than 1 measure.
In Medicare health plans, disparities vary widely and are only weakly correlated with the overall quality of care. Therefore, plan-specific performance reports of racial disparities on outcome measures would provide useful information not currently conveyed by standard HEDIS reports.
Pay-for-performance rewards health-care providers by paying them more if they succeed in meeting performance targets. A new contract for general practitioners in the United Kingdom represents the most radical shift towards pay-for-performance seen in any health-care system. The contract provides an important opportunity to address disparities in chronic disease management between ethnic and socioeconomic groups. We examined disparities in management of people with diabetes and intermediate clinical outcomes within a multiethnic population in primary care before and after the introduction of the new contract in April 2004.
We conducted a population-based longitudinal survey, using electronic general practice records, in an ethnically diverse part of southwest London. Outcome measures were prescribing levels and achievement of national treatment targets (HbA1c < or = 7.0%; blood pressure [BP] < 140/80 mm Hg; total cholesterol < or = 5 mmol/l or 193 mg/dl). The proportion of patients reaching treatment targets for HbA1c, BP, and total cholesterol increased significantly after the implementation of the new contract. The extents of these increases were broadly uniform across ethnic groups, with the exception of the black Caribbean patient group, which had a significantly lower improvement in HbA1c (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 0.75, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.57-0.97) and BP control (AOR 0.65, 95% CI 0.53-0.81) relative to the white British patient group. Variations in prescribing and achievement of treatment targets between ethnic groups present in 2003 were not attenuated in 2005.
Pay-for-performance incentives have not addressed disparities in the management and control of diabetes between ethnic groups. Quality improvement initiatives must place greater emphasis on minority communities to avoid continued disparities in mortality from cardiovascular disease and the other major complications of diabetes.
Little information is available regarding variations in diabetes mellitus (DM) outcomes by race at the level of individual physicians.
We identified 90 primary physicians caring for at least 5 white and 5 black adults with DM across 13 ambulatory sites and calculated rates of ideal control of hemoglobin A(1c) (HbA(1c)) (<7.0%), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) (<100 mg/dL), and blood pressure (<130/80 mm Hg). We fitted hierarchical linear regression models to measure the contributions to racial disparities of patient sociodemographic factors, comorbidities, and physician effects. Physician effects modeled the extent to which black patients achieved lower control rates than white patients within the same physician's panel ("within-physician" effect) vs the extent to which black patients were more likely than white patients to receive care from physicians achieving lower overall control rates ("between-physician" effect).
White patients (N = 4556) were significantly more likely than black patients (N = 2258) to achieve control of HbA(1c) (47% vs 39%), LDL-C (57% vs 45%), and blood pressure (30% vs 24%; P < .001 for all comparisons). Patient sociodemographic factors explained 13% to 38% of the racial differences in these measures, whereas within-physician effects accounted for 66% to 75% of the differences. Physician-level variation in disparities was not associated with either individual physicians' overall performance or their number of black patients with DM.
Racial differences in DM outcomes are primarily related to patients' characteristics and within-physician effects, wherein individual physicians achieve less favorable outcomes among their black patients than their white patients. Efforts to eliminate these disparities, including race-stratified performance reports and programs to enhance care for minority patients, should be addressed to all physicians.
By improving the process of care, quality improvement efforts have the potential to reduce race and sex disparities. However, little is known about whether reductions actually occur. National quality improvement activities targeting hemodialysis patients provide an opportunity to examine this issue.
To determine the effect of quality improvement efforts on race and sex disparities among hemodialysis patients.
Longitudinal study of 58 700 randomly selected hemodialysis patients from throughout the United States in 1993 through 2000.
Medicare-funded quality improvement project involving monitoring of patient outcomes, feedback of performance data, and education of clinicians at dialysis centers.
Changes in hemodialysis dose (Kt/V), anemia management (hemoglobin level), and nutritional status (albumin level).
The proportion of all patients with an adequate hemodialysis dose increased 2-fold. In 1993, 46% of white patients and 36% of black patients received an adequate hemodialysis dose compared with 2000 when the proportions were 87% and 84%, respectively. Thus, the gap between white and black patients decreased from 10% to 3% (P<.001). The gap between female and male patients decreased from 23% to 9% over the same period (P =.008). The proportion of all patients with adequate hemoglobin levels increased 3-fold. The proportion of all patients with adequate albumin levels remained unchanged. Race and sex disparities in anemia management and nutritional status did not change significantly.
Quality improvement efforts have a variable impact on race and sex disparities in health outcomes. Further work is needed to determine how quality improvement methods can be targeted to reduce health disparities.
Disparities in health care have been described extensively in the literature. The next step in resolving this national problem is to develop the necessary infrastructure for monitoring and tracking disparities. The congressionally mandated National Healthcare Disparities Report begins to build this infrastructure. The 2003 report addressed many of the methodological challenges inherent in measuring disparities. The recently released 2004 report continues the process by summarizing the status of U.S. health care disparities and beginning to track changes over time. Both reports emphasize the need to integrate activities to reduce disparities and to improve the quality of health care.
Since 1997, all managed-care plans administered by Medicare have reported on quality-of-care measures from the Health Plan Employer Data and Information Set (HEDIS). Studies of early data found that blacks received care that was of lower quality than that received by whites. In this study, we assessed changes over time in the overall quality of care and in the magnitude of racial disparities in nine measures of clinical performance.
In order to compare the quality of care for elderly white and black beneficiaries enrolled in Medicare managed-care plans who were eligible for at least one of nine HEDIS measures, we analyzed 1.8 million individual-level observations from 183 health plans from 1997 to 2003. For each measure, we assessed whether the magnitude of the racial disparity had changed over time with the use of multivariable models that adjusted for the age, sex, health plan, Medicaid eligibility, and socioeconomic position of beneficiaries on the basis of their area of residence.
During the seven-year study period, clinical performance improved on all measures for both white enrollees and black enrollees (P<0.001). The gap between white beneficiaries and black beneficiaries narrowed for seven HEDIS measures (P<0.01). However, racial disparities did not decrease for glucose control among patients with diabetes (increasing from 4 percent to 7 percent, P<0.001) or for cholesterol control among patients with cardiovascular disorders (increasing from 14 percent to 17 percent; change not significant, P=0.72).
The measured quality of care for elderly Medicare beneficiaries in managed-care plans improved substantially from 1997 to 2003. Racial disparities declined for most, but not all, HEDIS measures we studied. Future research should examine factors that contributed to the narrowing of racial disparities on some measures and focus on interventions to eliminate persistent disparities in the quality of care.
Society invests billions of dollars in the development of new drugs and technologies but comparatively little in the fidelity of health care, that is, improving systems to ensure the delivery of care to all patients in need. Using mathematical arguments and a nomogram, we demonstrate that technological advances must yield dramatic, often unrealistic increases in efficacy to do more good than could be accomplished by improving fidelity. In 2 examples (the development of anti-platelet agents and statins), we show that enhanced efficacy failed to achieve the health gains that would have occurred by delivering older agents to all eligible patients. Society's huge investment in technological innovations that only modestly improve efficacy, by consuming resources needed for improved delivery of care, may cost more lives than it saves. The misalignment of priorities is driven partly by the commercial interests of industry and by the public's appetite for technological breakthroughs, but health outcomes ultimately suffer. Health, economic, and moral arguments make the case for spending less on technological advances and more on improving systems for delivering care.
Very little is known about rank-and-file physicians' views on pay-for-performance (P4P) and public reporting. In a national survey of general internists, we found strong potential support for financial incentives for quality, but less support for public reporting. Large majorities of respondents stated that these programs will result in physicians' avoiding high-risk patients and will divert attention from important types of care for which quality is not measured. Public and private policymakers might avoid a physician backlash and better succeed at improving health care quality if they consider these concerns when designing P4P and public reporting programs.
This article has no abstract; the first 100 words appear below.
During the time I have been practicing medicine, the dominant ethos seems to have changed. We have gone from doing the right thing for the patient no matter what to doing the right thing for the patient as long as it doesn't hurt our hospital or practice or the insurance company too much. Years ago, I started receiving report cards from insurers that told me how I was doing relative to other practitioners in terms of hospital utilization, medications, referrals to specialists, and other cost measures. My numbers were usually good, and I could pat myself on the back for . . .
Source Information
Dr. Vonnegut is a pediatrician in Quincy, MA.