primary health care

The 10 Building Blocks of High-Performing Primary Care

Author/s: 
Bodenheimer, Thomas, Ghorob, Amireh, Willard-Grace, Rachel, Grumbach, Kevin

Our experiences studying exemplar primary care practices, and our work assisting other practices to become more patient centered, led to a formulation of the essential elements of primary care, which we call the 10 building blocks of high-performing primary care. The building blocks include 4 foundational elements-engaged leadership, data-driven improvement, empanelment, and team-based care-that assist the implementation of the other 6 building blocks-patient-team partnership, population management, continuity of care, prompt access to care, comprehensiveness and care coordination, and a template of the future. The building blocks, which represent a synthesis of the innovative thinking that is transforming primary care in the United States, are both a description of existing high-performing practices and a model for improvement.

Gen-Equip: Genetics Education for Primary Care

About us

The partners in this project currently work in six different European countries.  We have partners with expertise in primary care practice, genetics and adult education, as well as a patient support organisation.  The project was originally designed by Professor Heather Skirton, who has a background in nursing, midwifery and genetic counselling, and Dr Isa Houwink, a GP from the Netherlands.

Proton‐Pump Inhibitors and Long‐Term Risk of Community‐Acquired Pneumonia in Older Adults

Author/s: 
Zirk-Sadowski, Jan, Masoli, Jane A., Delgada, Joao, Hamilton, Willie, Strain, W. David, Henley, William, Melzer, David, Ble, Alessandro

Objectives

To estimate associations between long‐term use of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and pneumonia incidence in older adults in primary care.

Design

Longitudinal analyses of electronic medical records.

Setting

England

Participants

Individuals aged 60 and older in primary care receiving PPIs for 1 year or longer (N=75,050) and age‐ and sex‐matched controls (N=75,050).

Measurements

Net hazard ratios for pneumonia incidence in Year 2 of treatment were estimated using the prior event rate ratio (PERR), which adjusts for pneumonia incidence differences before initiation of treatment. Inverse probability weighted models adjusted for 78 demographic, disease, medication, and healthcare usage measures.

Results

During the second year after initiating treatment, PPIs were associated with greater hazard of incident pneumonia (PERR‐adjusted hazard ratio=1.82, 95% confidence interval=1.27–2.54), accounting for pretreatment pneumonia rates. Estimates were similar across age and comorbidity subgroups. Similar results were also obtained from propensity score– and inverse probability–weighted models.

Conclusion

In a large cohort of older adults in primary care, PPI prescription was associated with greater risk of pneumonia in the second year of treatment. Results were robust across alternative analysis approaches. Controversies about the validity of reported short‐term harms of PPIs should not divert attention from potential long‐term effects of PPI prescriptions on older adults.

Brief physician advice for problem alcohol drinkers. A randomized controlled trial in community-based primary care practices

Author/s: 
Fleming, Michael F., Barry, Kristen L., Manwell, Linda B., Johnson, Kristen, London, Richard

OBJECTIVE:

Project TrEAT (Trial for Early Alcohol Treatment) was designed to test the efficacy of brief physician advice in reducing alcohol use and health care utilization in problem drinkers.

DESIGN:

Randomized controlled clinical trial with 12-month follow-up.

SETTING:

A total of 17 community-based primary care practices (64 physicians) located in 10 Wisconsin counties.

PARTICIPANTS:

Of the 17695 patients screened for problem drinking, 482 men and 292 women met inclusion criteria and were randomized into a control (n=382) or an experimental (n=392) group. A total of 723 subjects (93%) participated in the 12-month follow-up procedures.

INTERVENTION:

The intervention consisted of two 10- to 15-minute counseling visits delivered by physicians using a scripted workbook that included advice, education, and contracting information.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:

Alcohol use measures, emergency department visits, and hospital days.

RESULTS:

There were no significant differences between groups at baseline on alcohol use, age, socioeconomic status, smoking status, rates of depression or anxiety, frequency of conduct disorders, lifetime drug use, or health care utilization. At the time of the 12-month follow-up, there were significant reductions in 7-day alcohol use (mean number of drinks in previous 7 days decreased from 19.1 at baseline to 11.5 at 12 months for the experimental group vs 18.9 at baseline to 15.5 at 12 months for controls; t=4.33; P<.001), episodes of binge drinking (mean number of binge drinking episodes during previous 30 days decreased from 5.7 at baseline to 3.1 at 12 months for the experimental group vs 5.3 at baseline to 4.2 at 12 months for controls; t=2.81; P<.001), and frequency of excessive drinking (percentage drinking excessively in previous 7 days decreased from 47.5% at baseline to 17.8% at 12 months for the experimental group vs 48.1% at baseline to 32.5% at 12 months for controls; t=4.53; P<.001). The chi2 test of independence revealed a significant relationship between group status and length of hospitalization over the study period for men (P<.01).

CONCLUSIONS:

This study provides the first direct evidence that physician intervention with problem drinkers decreases alcohol use and health resource utilization in the US health care system.

Brief physician and nurse practitioner-delivered counseling for high-risk drinking. Results at 12-month follow-up

Author/s: 
Reiff-Hekking, Sarah, Ockene, Judith K., Hurley, Thomas G.

BACKGROUND:

The objective of this study was to determine the effects of a brief primary care provider-delivered counseling intervention on the reduction of alcohol consumption by high-risk drinkers. The intervention was implemented as part of routine primary care medical practice.

METHODS:

We performed a controlled clinical trial with 6- and 12-month follow-up. Three primary care practices affiliated with an academic medical center were randomly assigned to special intervention (SI) or usual care (UC). A total of 9,772 primary care patients were screened for high-risk drinking. A fourth site was added later. From the group that was screened, 530 high-risk drinkers entered into the study, with 447 providing follow-up at 12 months. The intervention consisted of brief (5-10 minute) patient-centered counseling plus an office system that cued providers to intervene and provided patient educational materials.

RESULTS:

At 12-month follow-up, after controlling for baseline differences in alcohol consumption, SI participants had significantly larger changes (P=.03) in weekly alcohol intake compared to UC (SI=-5.7 drinks per week; UC=-3.1 drinks per week), and of those who changed to safe drinking at 6 months more SI participants maintained that change at 12 months than UC.

CONCLUSIONS:

Project Health provides evidence that screening and very brief (5-10 minute) advice and counseling delivered by a patient's personal physician or nurse practitioner as a routine part of a primary care visit can reduce alcohol consumption by high-risk drinkers.

Keywords 

Primary care intervention to reduce alcohol misuse ranking its health impact and cost effectiveness

Author/s: 
Solberg, Leif I., Maciosek, Michael V., Edwards, Nichol M.

BACKGROUND:

The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) has recommended screening and behavioral counseling interventions in primary care to reduce alcohol misuse. This study was designed to develop a standardized rating for the clinically preventable burden and cost effectiveness of complying with that recommendation that would allow comparisons across many recommended services.

METHODS:

A systematic review of the literature from 1992 through 2004 to identify relevant randomized controlled trials and cost-effectiveness studies was completed in 2005. Clinically preventable burden (CPB) was calculated as the product of effectiveness times the alcohol-attributable fraction of both mortality and morbidity (measured in quality-adjusted life years or QALYs), for all relevant conditions. Cost effectiveness from both the societal perspective and the health-system perspective was estimated. These analyses were completed in 2006.

RESULTS:

The calculated CPB was 176,000 QALYs saved over the lifetime of a birth cohort of 4,000,000, with a range in sensitivity analysis from -43% to +94% (primarily due to variation in estimates of effectiveness). Screening and brief counseling was cost-saving from the societal perspective and had a cost-effectiveness ratio of $1755/QALY saved from the health-system perspective. Sensitivity analysis indicates that from both perspectives the service is very cost effective and may be cost saving.

CONCLUSIONS:

These results make alcohol screening and counseling one of the highest-ranking preventive services among the 25 effective services evaluated using standardized methods. Since current levels of delivery are the lowest of comparably ranked services, this service deserves special attention by clinicians and care delivery systems.

Keywords 

Helping Patients Who Drink Too Much: A Clinician's Guide

Author/s: 
National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism

Why screen for heavy drinking?

  • At-risk drinking and alcohol problems are common. About 3 in 10 U.S. adults drink at levels that elevate their risk for physical, mental health, and social problems. Of these heavy drinkers, about 1 in 4 currently has alcohol abuse or dependence.All heavy drinkers have a greater risk of hypertension, gastro - intestinal bleeding, sleep disorders, major depression, hemorrhagic stroke, cirrhosis of the liver, and several cancers. 
  • Heavy drinking often goes undetected. In a recent study of primary care practices, for example, patients with alcohol dependence received the recommended quality of care, including assessment and referral to treatment, only about 10 percent of the time.
  • Patients are likely to be more receptive, open, and ready to change than you expect. Most patients don’t object to being screened for alcohol use by clinicians and are open to hearing advice afterward. In addition, most primary care patients who screen positive for heavy drinking or alcohol use disorders show some motivational readiness to change, with those who have the most severe symptoms being the most ready.
  • You’re in a prime position to make a difference. Clinical trials have demonstrated that brief interventions can promote significant, lasting reductions in drinking levels in at-risk drinkers who aren’t alcohol dependent.8 Some drinkers who are dependent will accept referral to addiction treatment programs. Even for patients who don’t accept a referral, repeated alcohol-focused visits with a health care provider can lead to significant improvement.
  • If you’re not already doing so, we encourage you to incorporate alcohol screening and intervention into your practice. With this Guide, you have what you need to begin.
Keywords 

Six Building Blocks: A Team-Based Approach to Improving Opioid Management in Primary Care

Most patients taking opioids for chronic pain are managed by primary care providers and their staff. Many practices are looking for help in managing their patients using chronic opioid therapy. To meet this need, AHRQ funded the Six Building Blocks project  through grant number R18HS0237850. Additional funding was provided by Washington State Department of Health subcontract (HED23124) of Cooperative U17CE002734, funded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Subscribe to primary health care