PlanYourLifespan.org demonstrated efficacy in helping seniors plan for and communicate their health support needs. This free, nationally available tool may help individuals understand, plan, and communicate their options for their future support needs.

An exploratory, retrospective evaluation of Ambulatory Integration of the Medical and Social (AIMS), a care coordination model designed to integrate medical and non-medical needs of patients and delivered exclusively by social workers was conducted to examine mean utilization of costly health care services for older adult patients. Results reveal mean utilization of 30-day hospital readmissions, emergency department (ED) visits, and hospital admissions are significantly lower for the study sample compared to the larger patient population. Comparisons with national population statistics reveal significantly lower mean utilization of 30-day admissions and ED visits for the study sample. The findings offer preliminary support regarding the value of AIMS.

Background The nature of teamwork in healthcare is complex and interdisciplinary, and provider collaboration based on shared patient encounters is crucial to its success. Characterizing the intensity of working relationships with risk adjusted patient outcomes supplies insight into provider interactions in a hospital environment. Methods and Results We extracted four years of patient, provider, and activity data for encounters in an inpatient cardiology unit from Northwestern Medicine’s Enterprise Data Warehouse. We then created a provider-patient network to identify healthcare providers who jointly participated in patient encounters and calculated satisfaction rates for provider-provider pairs. We demonstrated the application of a novel parameter, the Shared Positive Outcome Ratio (SPOR), an objective composite measure that quantifies a given pair’s concentration of positive outcomes over a set of shared patients. We compared an observed collaboration network of 334 providers and 3,453 relationships to 1,000 networks with SPOR scores based on randomized outcomes and found 188 collaborative relationships between pairs of providers that showed significantly higher than expected patient satisfaction ratings. A group of 22 providers performed exceptionally in terms of patient satisfaction. Our results indicate high variability in collaboration scores across the network and highlight our ability to identify relationships with both higher and lower than expected scores across a set of shared patient encounters. Conclusions Satisfaction rates appear to vary across different teams of providers. Team collaboration can be quantified using a composite measure of collaboration across provider pairs. Tracking provider pair outcomes over a sufficient set of shared encounters may inform quality improvement strategies, such as optimizing team staffing, identifying characteristics and practices of high-performing teams, developing evidence-based team guidelines, and redesigning inpatient care processes.

Background The past decade has seen increasing opportunities and efforts to integrate quality improvement into health care. Practice facilitation is a proven strategy to support redesign and improvement in primary care practices that focuses on building organizational capacity for continuous improvement. Practice leadership, staff, and practice facilitators all play important roles in supporting quality improvement in primary care. However, little is known about their perspectives on the context, enablers, barriers, and strategies that impact quality improvement initiatives. Objective This study aimed to develop a framework to enable assessment of contextual factors, challenges, and strategies that impact practice facilitation, clinical measure performance, and the implementation of quality improvement interventions. We also illustrated the application of the framework using a real-world case study. Methods We developed the TITO (task, individual, technology, and organization) framework by conducting participatory stakeholder workshops and incorporating their perspectives to identify enablers and barriers to quality improvement and practice facilitation. We conducted a case study using a mixed methods approach to demonstrate the use of the framework and describe practice facilitation and factors that impact quality improvement in a primary care practice that participated in the Healthy Hearts in the Heartland study. Results The proposed framework was used to organize and analyze different stakeholders’ perspectives and key factors based on framework domains. The case study showed that practice leaders, staff, and practice facilitators all influenced the success of the quality improvement program. However, these participants faced different challenges and used different strategies. The framework showed that barriers stemmed from patients’ social determinants of health, a lack of staff and time, and unsystematic facilitation resources, while enablers included practice culture, staff buy-in, implementation of effective practice facilitation strategies, practice capacity for change, and shared complementary resources from similar, ongoing programs. Conclusions Our framework provided a useful and generalizable structure to guide and support assessment of future practice facilitation projects, quality improvement initiatives, and health care intervention implementation studies. The practice leader, staff, and practice facilitator all saw value in the quality improvement program and practice facilitation. Practice facilitators are key liaisons to help the quality improvement program; they help all stakeholders work toward a shared target and leverage tailored strategies. Taking advantage of resources from competing, yet complementary, programs as additional support may accelerate the effective achievement of quality improvement goals. Practice facilitation–supported quality improvement programs may be opportunities to assist primary care practices in achieving improved quality of care through focused and targeted efforts. The case study demonstrated how our framework can support a better understanding of contextual factors for practice facilitation, which could enable well-prepared and more successful quality improvement programs for primary care practices. Combining implementation science and informatics thinking, our TITO framework may facilitate interdisciplinary research in both fields.

Objective: Using Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) as an example quality improvement approach, our objective was to evaluate whether secondary use of orders, forms, and notes recorded by the electronic health record (EHR) during daily practice can enhance the accuracy of process maps used to guide improvement. We examined discrepancies between expected and observed activities and individuals involved in a high-risk process and devised diagnostic measures for understanding discrepancies that may be used to inform quality improvement planning.Methods: Inpatient cardiology unit staff developed a process map of discharge from the unit. We matched activities and providers identified on the process map to EHR data. Using four diagnostic measures, we analyzed discrepancies between expectation and observation.Results: EHR data showed that 35% of activities were completed by unexpected providers, including providers from 12 categories not identified as part of the discharge workflow. The EHR also revealed sub-components of process activities not identified on the process map. Additional information from the EHR was used to revise the process map and show differences between expectation and observation.Conclusion: Findings suggest EHR data may reveal gaps in process maps used for quality improvement and identify characteristics about workflow activities that can identify perspectives for inclusion in an FMEA. Organizations with access to EHR data may be able to leverage clinical documentation to enhance process maps used for quality improvement. While focused on FMEA protocols, findings from this study may be applicable to other quality activities that require process maps.