Patient-centered Medical Home Implementation Research Articles

Associations of the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) Clinician and Group Survey Scores with Interventions and Site, Provider, and Patient Factors: A Systematic Review of the Evidence.

Patient experience is a key aspect of care quality. Since the 2007 release of the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems Clinician and Group (CG-CAHPS) survey, no systematic review of factors associated with CG-CAHPS scores has been reported. We reviewed 52 peer-reviewed English language articles published in the United States using CG-CAHPS data. We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines and used the Checklist for Analytical Cross-Sectional Studies. We identified several interventions (eg, adding a care coordinator focused on chronic care management) associated with improved overall provider rating and 2 interventions (eg, peer shadow coaching) that improved provider communication scores. Studies evaluating the implementation of patient-centered medical homes or patient-reported outcomes found mixed results. We identified site-level factors (eg, better team communication) and provider-level factors (eg, physician empathy) associated with better patient experience. In contrast, patient-level factors (eg, medication adherence) found mixed associations with patient experience. Policymakers, clinicians, and healthcare leaders can leverage this evidence for quality improvement efforts and interventions supporting patient-centered care.

From the Editors.

From the Editors.

Identifying Individual and Clinic Characteristics Associated With Primary Care Provider Turnover During Implementation of the Veterans Health Administration Patient-Centered Medical Home.

Understanding which factors predict primary care provider (PCP) turnover can help organizations prepare for PCP shortages. We conducted a retrospective cohort study of Veteran Health Administration PCPs between 2012 and 2016. We analyzed whether 7 domains of the patient centered medical home (PCMH) implementation-including access, care coordination, comprehensiveness, self-management support, communication, shared decision-making, and team-based care-were associated with PCP turnover. We found that 2 domains of PCMH (access and self-management) were associated with lower turnover, which may reflect that practice cultures that support these characteristics may lower PCP turnover.

Practices and changes associated with patient-centered medical home transformation.

Knowing which patient-centered medical home (PCMH) care delivery changes and quality improvement (QI) practices further PCMH implementation isessential. We used the 2008-2017 National Committee of Quality Assurance (NCQA) PCMH directory of 15,188 primary care practices that received Level 1, 2, or 3 NCQA PCMH recognition to construct a stratified national sample of 105 practices engaged in PCMH transformation. We examined their QI practices and PCMH changes associated with PCMH transformation. We derived QI practice and PCMH change variables from semistructured interviews. Practice leaders completed the PCMH Assessment (PCMH-A) measuring the practice's degree of PCMH implementation, which is a proxy for patient-centeredness. Controlling for practice characteristics, we regressed PCMH-A scores on QI practice and PCMH change variables. Practices undergoing PCMH transformation nationwide most commonly made care delivery changes in access and continuity of care. To improve quality, practices most commonly engaged in discussing and targeting areas of patient experience improvement, trending performance, and conducting targeted QI. However, practices lower in patient-centeredness as measured by the PCMH-A were more likely to engage in efforts to improve patient experiences, such as reviewing patient experience data or engaging in 1-on-1 provider counseling related to patient interactions. Mature PCMH practices focused on changes in continuity of care. Practices undertake a wide variety of care delivery changes and QI practices simultaneously to meet PCMH requirements. The patient experience-specific QI practices and PCMH care delivery changes that practices make to improve patient-centeredness differ by years of PCMH recognition.

The Missed Opportunity of Patient-Centered Medical Homes to Thrive in an Asian Context.

In recent years, there is growing interest internationally to implement patient-centered medical homes (PCMHs), and Singapore is no exception. However, studies understanding the influence of contextual policy factors on the implementation of PCMHs are limited. We conducted 10 semi-structured in-depth interviews with general practitioners working in seven out of the nine PCMHs. Audio recordings were transcribed and analyzed by two study team members in NVivo 12 Software using grounded theory techniques. Power dynamics between the stakeholders and lack of shared decision-making among them in selecting the locale of the PCMH and formulating the practice fee and pharmacy structure were the key factors which negatively affected the implementation of PCMHs on a larger scale. Over time, lack of funding to hire dedicated staff to transfer patients and misalignment of various stakeholders’ interest to other right-siting programs also resulted in low number of patients with chronic conditions and revenue. Countries seeking to implement a successful PCMH may benefit from building trust and relationship between stakeholders, engaging in shared decision-making, ongoing cost-efficiency efforts, and formulating a clear delineation of responsibilities between stakeholders. For a healthcare delivery model to succeed in the primary care landscape, policies should be developed keeping mind the realities of primary care practice.

Model Homes: Evaluating Approaches to Patient-centered Medical Home Implementation.

The patient-centered medical home (PCMH) model has been widely adopted, but the evidence on its effectiveness remains mixed. One potential explanation for these mixed findings is variation in how the model is implemented by practices. To identify the impact of different approaches to PCMH adoption on health care utilization in a long-term, geographically diverse sample of patients. Difference-in-differences evaluation of PCMH impact on cost and utilization. A total of 5,314,284 patient-year observations from the HealthCore Integrated Research Database, and 5943 practices which adopted the PCMH model in 14 states between 2011 and 2015. PCMH adoption, as defined by the National Committee for Quality Assurance. Six claims-based utilization measures, plus total health care expenditures. We employ hierarchical clustering to organize practices into groups based on their PCMH capabilities, then use generalized difference-in-differences models with practice or patient fixed effects to estimate the effect of PCMH recognition (overall and separately by the groups identified by the clustering algorithm) on utilization. PCMH adoption was associated with a >8% reduction in total expenditures. We find significant reductions in emergency department utilization and outpatient care, and both lab and imaging services. In our by-group results we find that while the reduction in outpatient care is significant across all 3 groups, the reduction in emergency department utilization is driven entirely by 1 group with enhanced electronic communications. The PCMH model has significant impact on patterns of health care utilization, especially when heterogeneity in implementation is accounted for in program evaluation.

Explaining racial-ethnic differences in hypertension and diabetes control among veterans before and after patient-centered medical home implementation.

Patient-centered medical homes (PCMH) are primary care delivery models that improve care access and population-level health outcomes, yet they have not been observed to narrow racial-ethnic disparities in the Veteran Health Administration (VHA) or other health systems. We aimed to identify and compare underlying drivers of persistent hypertension and diabetes control differences between non-Hispanic Black (Black) and Hispanic versus non-Hispanic White (White) patients before and after PCMH implementation in the VHA. Among Black and Hispanic versus White VHA primary care patients in 2009 (nhypertension = 26,906; ndiabetes = 21,141) and 2014 (nhypertension = 83,809; ndiabetes = 38,887), we retrospectively examined hypertension control (blood pressure<140/90) and diabetes control (hemoglobin A1c <9) obtained through random chart abstraction of patient health records nationally via VHA’s quality monitoring program. We fit linear probability regression models, adjusting for age, gender, comorbidity, and socioeconomic status (SES). Blinder-Oaxaca and Smith-Welch decomposition methods were used to parse out explained and unexplained contributors to health disparity between racial-ethnic groups pre- and post-PCMH implementation. Compared to White patients, hypertension and diabetes control remained significantly lower for Black (-6.2%[0.4%] and -3.1%[0.6%], respectively; p’s<0.001) and Hispanic (-1.4%[0.8%] and -4.0%[1.0%], respectively; p’s<0.001) patients following VHA PCMH implementation. Most racial-ethnic differences (55.7–92.3%; all p<0.05) were not attributed to age, gender, comorbidity, and SES. The contribution of explained versus unexplained factors did not significantly change over time. While many explanations for persistent racial-ethnic disparities in disease control among veterans exist, our study did not find that it was due to an influx of “sick” or “socioeconomically vulnerable” patients into the VHA following PCMH implementation. Instead, unexplained differences may be due to differential healthcare and community experiences (e.g., discrimination). Understanding underlying pathways leading to health disparities will better inform policy and clinical interventions to improve PCMH care delivery to racial-ethnic minority patients in health systems.

Use of the Veterans' Choice Program and Attrition From Veterans Health Administration Primary Care.

Concerns over timely access and waiting times for appointments in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) spurred the push towards greater privatization. In 2014, VHA increased the provision of care from community providers through the Veterans' Choice Program (Choice). We examined the characteristics of patients and practices more likely to use Choice care and whether using Choice care affected patients' attrition from VHA primary care. We conducted a longitudinal study of VHA primary care users in the fiscal year 2015 and their attrition 2 years later. In the multivariate analysis, we examined whether attrition from VHA primary care was related to prior use of Choice care. A total of 1.4 million nonelderly patients diagnosed with chronic conditions. Choice outpatient care utilization was measured in the baseline year. Attrition was measured as not receiving any VHA primary care in 2 subsequent years. In our cohort, 93,710 (7%) patients used some Choice outpatient care, and these patients were more likely to be female, White or Hispanic, to have more primary care utilization at baseline, and to have long driving distances to VHA care. Practices which sent more patients out for Choice care had lower mean scores for patient-centered medical home implementation and longer mean waiting times for appointments. In the adjusted analysis, the probability of attrition was significantly lower (-0.009) among patients who used Choice outpatient care (0.036) versus patients who did not (0.044) (P<0.001). The use of community outpatient providers in the Choice program was associated with less attrition from VHA primary care.

Association of the Patient-Centered Medical Home Implementation with Chronic Disease Quality in Patients with Multimorbidity.

The patient-centered medical home (PCMH) was established in part to improve chronic disease management, yet evidence is limited for effects on patients with multimorbidity. To examine the association of Patient-Aligned Care Team (PACT) implementation, the Veterans Health Administration (VA) PCMH model, and care quality for multimorbid patients enrolled in VA primary care from 2012 to 2014. Retrospective cohort. 318,764 multimorbid (> 3 chronic diseases) patients receiving care in 917 clinics. PCMH implementation was measured using the PACT Implementation Progress Index (PI2) for clinics in 2012. The PI2 is a validated composite measure of administrative and survey data with higher scores associated with greater care quality. Quality outcomes from 2013 to 2014 were assessed from External Peer Review Program (EPRP) metrics. Outcomes included preventative care, chronic disease management, and mental health and substance use metrics. We used generalized estimating equations to model associations adjusting for patient and clinic characteristics. We also examined associations for a subgroup with > 5 chronic diseases. For one-third of metrics (5/15), greater implementation of PACT in 2012 was associated with higher predicted probability of meeting the quality metric in 2013-2014. This association persisted for only two metrics (diabetic glycemic control, P < 0.001; lipid control in ischemic heart disease, P = 0.02) among patients with > 5 chronic diseases. Multimorbid patients engaged in care from clinics with higher PCMH implementation received higher quality care across several quality domains, but this association was reduced in patients with > 5 chronic diseases.

Nationwide Qualitative Study of Practice Leader Perspectives on What It Takes to Transform into a Patient-Centered Medical Home.

Despite widespread adoption of patient-centered medical home (PCMH), little is known about why practices pursue PCMH and what is needed to undergo transformation. Examine reasons practices obtained and maintained PCMH recognition and what resources were needed. Qualitative study of practice leader perspectives on PCMH transformation, based on a random sample of primary care practices engaged in PCMH transformation, stratified by US region, practice size, PCMH recognition history, and practice use of Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS®) PCMH survey. 105 practice leaders from 294 sampled practices (36% response rate). Content analysis of interviews with practice leaders to identify themes. Most practice leaders had local control of PCMH transformation decisions, even if practices adopted quality initiatives under the direction of an organization or network. Financial incentives, being in a statewide effort, and the intrinsic desire to improve care or experiences were the most common reasons practice leaders decided to obtain PCMH recognition and pursue associated care delivery changes. Leadership support and direction were highlighted as essential throughout PCMH transformation. Practice leaders reported needing specialized staff knowledge and significant resources to meet PCMH requirements, including staff knowledgeable about how to implement PCMH changes, track and monitor improvements, and navigate implementation of simultaneous changes, and staff with specific quality improvement (QI) expertise related to evaluating changes and scaling-up programs. PCMH efforts necessitated support and assistance to frontline, on-site practice leaders leading care delivery changes. Such change efforts should include financial incentives (e.g., direct payment or additional reimbursement), leadership direction and support, and internal or external staff with experience with the PCMH application process, implementation changes, and QI expertise in monitoring process and outcome data. Policies that recognize and meet the needs of on-site practice leaders will better promote primary care practice transformation and move practices further toward their PCMH transformation goals.

Association of Implementation and Social Network Factors With Patient Safety Culture in Medical Homes: A Coincidence Analysis.

The patient-centered medical home (PCMH) may provide a key model for ambulatory patient safety. Our objective was to explore which PCMH and patient safety implementation and social network factors may be necessary or sufficient for higher patient safety culture. This was a cross-case analysis study in 25 diverse U.S. PCMHs. Data sources included interviews of a clinician and an administrator in each PCMH, surveys of clinicians and staff, and existing data on the PCMHs' characteristics. We used coincidence analysis, a novel method based on set theory and Boolean logic, to evaluate relationships between factors and the implementation outcome of patient safety culture. The coincidence analysis identified 5 equally parsimonious solutions (4 factors), accounting for all practices with higher safety culture. Three solutions contained the same core minimally sufficient condition: the implementation factor leadership priority for patient safety and the social network factor reciprocity in advice-seeking network ties (advice-seeking relationships). This minimally sufficient condition had the highest coverage (5/7 practices scoring higher on the outcome) and best performance across solutions; all included leadership priority for patient safety. Other key factors included self-efficacy and job satisfaction and quality improvement climate. The most common factor whose absence was associated with the outcome was a well-functioning process for behavioral health. Our findings suggest that PCMH safety culture is higher when clinicians and staff perceive that leadership prioritizes patient safety and when high reciprocity among staff exists. Interventions to improve patient safety should consider measuring and addressing these key factors.

Patient Aligned Care Team (PACT) Performance in Urban and Rural VHA Primary Care Clinics: A Mixed Methods Study

To assess differences in Patient Aligned Care Team (PACT) performance between rural and urban primary care clinics within the Veterans Health Administration (VHA). An Explanatory Sequential Mixed Methods design was conducted using VHA administrative data to assess performance of a national sample of 891 VHA primary care clinics. Generalized Estimating Equations with repeated measures were used to estimate associations between rurality and process-oriented endpoints including: chronic disease management through telehealth; use of telephone visits, group visits or secured messaging; same-day access; continuity with primary care provider; and postdischarge follow-up. Qualitative data collected during on-site visits with 5 clinics were used to provide insights into PACT processes from the perspectives of staff in rural and urban clinics. After adjusting for patient- and practice-level characteristics, clinics located in large rural or small/isolated rural areas demonstrated difficulty enhancing access through use of telephone visits, group visits, or secured messaging and completing postdischarge follow-up calls, compared to urban clinics. Qualitative analysis indicated that staff from both rural and urban clinics reported similar barriers implementing these PACT processes. Both patient and staff behaviors and preferences impact implementation of these processes. Distance to care and access to high-speed Internet were also reported as barriers. This study contributes to the understanding of PACT performance in rural settings by highlighting ways contextual and behavioral factors relate to performance. Increasing implementation of patient-centered medical home (PCMH) models, such as PACT, will require additional attention to the complex relationships between the practice and surrounding context.

Greater patient-centered medical home implementation was associated with lower attrition from VHA primary care

BackgroundPatient-centered medical home models such as the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) Patient Aligned Care Team (PACT) model aim to improve primary care through accessible, comprehensive, continuous team-based care. Practices that adhere to patient-centered medical home principles have been found to exhibit higher patient satisfaction, possibly leading to higher retention of patients longitudinally and reducing attrition from care. We examined whether greater PACT implementation was related to lower attrition from VHA primary care. MethodsA national cohort of 1.5 million nonelderly patients with chronic conditions and using VHA primary care in the baseline year (fiscal year 2015) was identified. Attrition was measured as not receiving primary care over two subsequent years. PACT implementation in 863 VHA primary care practices was measured by the PACT Implementation Progress Index (Pi2) across 8 domains. ResultsOverall, the attrition rate was 4.4%. Predicted attrition was highest for patients treated in practices with the lowest PACT implementation scores (4.8%) compared to 4.0% among patients in practices with the highest PACT implementation scores (difference = -0.8 (95% CI: -1.3, -0.2)). Better performance on most PACT domains was significantly associated with lower attrition. ConclusionsPrimary care practices that facilitate easier access to providers as well as provide more seamless care coordination, better communication with providers, and support for self-management appear to positively affect patients’ decisions to stay in VHA care. ImplicationsProvision of accessible, comprehensive, team-based primary care, as measured in this study, is likely to be a determinant of patient retention in VHA care. Level of evidence3.

Assessing fidelity to evidence-based quality improvement as an implementation strategy for patient-centered medical home transformation in the Veterans Health Administration

BackgroundEffective implementation strategies might facilitate patient-centered medical home (PCMH) uptake and spread by targeting barriers to change. Evidence-based quality improvement (EBQI) is a multi-faceted implementation strategy that is based on a clinical-researcher partnership. It promotes organizational change by fostering innovation and the spread of those innovations that are successful. Previous studies demonstrated that EBQI accelerated PCMH adoption within Veterans Health Administration primary care practices, compared with standard PCMH implementation. Research to date has not documented fidelity to the EBQI implementation strategy, limiting usefulness of prior research findings. This paper develops and assesses clinical participants’ fidelity to three core EBQI elements for PCMH (EBQI-PCMH), explores the relationship between fidelity and successful QI project completion and spread (the outcome of EBQI-PCMH), and assesses the role of the clinical-researcher partnership in achieving EBQI-PCMH fidelity.MethodsNine primary care practice sites and seven across-sites, topic-focused workgroups participated (2010–2014). Core EBQI elements included leadership-frontlines priority-setting for QI, ongoing access to technical expertise, coaching, and mentoring in QI methods (through a QI collaborative), and data/evidence use to inform QI. We used explicit criteria to measure and assess EBQI-PCMH fidelity across clinical participants. We mapped fidelity to evaluation data on implementation and spread of successful QI projects/products. To assess the clinical-researcher partnership role in EBQI-PCMH, we analyzed 73 key stakeholder interviews using thematic analysis.ResultsSeven of 9 sites and 3 of 7 workgroups achieved high or medium fidelity to leadership-frontlines priority-setting. Fidelity was mixed for ongoing technical expertise and data/evidence use. Longer duration in EBQI-PCMH and higher fidelity to priority-setting and ongoing technical expertise appear correlated with successful QI project completion and spread. According to key stakeholders, partnership with researchers, as well as bi-directional communication between leaders and QI teams and project management/data support were critical to achieving EBQI-PCMH fidelity.ConclusionsThis study advances implementation theory and research by developing measures for and assessing fidelity to core EBQI elements in relationship to completion and spread of QI innovation projects or tools for addressing PCMH challenges. These results help close the gap between EBQI elements, their intended outcome, and the finding that EBQI-PCMH resulted in accelerated adoption of PCMH.

Association of High-Cost Health Care Utilization With Longitudinal Changes in Patient-Centered Medical Home Implementation

In 2010, the US Veterans Health Administration (VHA) implemented one of the largest patient-centered medical home (PCMH) models in the United States, the Patient Aligned Care Team initiative. Early evaluations demonstrated promising associations with improved patient outcomes, but limited evidence exists on the longitudinal association of PCMH implementation with changes in health care utilization. To determine whether a change in PCMH implementation is associated with changes in emergency department (ED) visits, hospitalizations for ambulatory care-sensitive conditions (ACSCs), or all-cause hospitalizations. This cohort study used national patient-level data from the VHA and Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services between October 1, 2012, and September 30, 2015. A total of 1 650 976 patients from 897 included clinics were divided into 2 cohorts: patients younger than 65 years who received primary care at VHA sites affiliated with a VHA ED and patients 65 years or older who were enrolled in both VHA and Medicare services. Clinics were categorized on improvement or decline in PCMH implementation based on their Patient Aligned Care Team implementation progress index (Pi2) score. Change in the number of ED visits, ACSC hospitalizations, and all-cause hospitalizations among patients at each clinic site. The study included a total of 1 650 976 patients, of whom 581 167 (35.20%) were younger than 65 years (mean [SD] age, 49.03 [10.28] years; 495 247 [85.22%] men) and 1 069 809 (64.80%) were 65 years or older (mean [SD] age, 74.64 [7.41] years; 1 050 110 [98.16%] men). Among patients younger than 65 years, there were fewer ED visits among patients seen at clinics that had improved PCMH implementation (110.8 fewer visits per 1000 patients; P < .001) and clinics that had somewhat worse implementation (69.0 fewer visits per 1000 patients; P < .001) compared with clinics that had no change in Pi2 score. There were no associations of change in Pi2 scores with all-cause hospitalizations or ACSC hospitalizations among patients younger than 65 years. In patients 65 years or older, those seen at clinics that had somewhat worse PCMH implementation experienced fewer ED visits (20.1 fewer visits per 1000 patients; P = .002) and all-cause hospitalizations (12.4 fewer hospitalizations per 1000 patients; P = .007) compared with clinics with no change in Pi2 score. There was no association between change in Pi2 score with ACSC hospitalizations among patients 65 years or older. There were no consistent associations of change in Pi2 score with high-cost health care utilization. This finding highlights the key differences in measuring PCMH implementation longitudinally compared with cross-sectional study designs.

The Patient-Centered Medical Home and the Challenge of Evaluating Complex Interventions

High-Cost Health Care Utilization and Longitudinal Changes in Patient-Centered Medical Home Implementation

Impact of Healthcare Delivery System Type on Clinical, Utilization, and Cost Outcomes of Patient-Centered Medical Homes: a Systematic Review.

As healthcare reimbursement shifts from being volume to value-focused, new delivery models aim to coordinate care and improve quality. The patient-centered medical home (PCMH) model is one such model that aims to deliver coordinated, accessible healthcare to improve outcomes and decrease costs. It is unclear how the types of delivery systems in which PCMHs operate differentially impact outcomes. We aim to describe economic, utilization, quality, clinical, and patient satisfaction outcomes resulting from PCMH interventions operating within integrated delivery and finance systems (IDFS), government systems including Veterans Administration, and non-integrated delivery systems. We searched PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Embase from 2004 to 2017. Observational studies and clinical trials occurring within the USA that met PCMH criteria (as defined by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality), addressed ambulatory adults, and reported utilization, economic, clinical, processes and quality of care, or patient satisfaction outcomes. Sixty-four studies were included. Twenty-four percent were within IDFS, 29% were within government systems, and 47% were within non-IDFS. IDFS studies reported decreased emergency department use, primary care use, and cost relative to other systems after PCMH implementation. Government systems reported increased primary care use relative to other systems after PCMH implementation. Clinical outcomes, processes and quality of care, and patient satisfaction were assessed heterogeneously or infrequently. Published articles assessing PCMH interventions generally report improved outcomes related to utilization and cost. IDFS and government systems exhibit different outcomes relative to non-integrated systems, demonstrating that different health systems and populations may be particularly sensitive to PCMH interventions. Both the definition of PCMH interventions and outcomes measured are heterogeneous, limiting the ability to perform direct comparisons or meta-analysis.

Association of the Implementation of the Patient-Centered Medical Home with Quality of Life in Patients with Multimorbidity.

The patient-centered medical home (PCMH) has clinical benefits for chronic disease care, but the association with patient-reported outcomes such as health-related quality of life (HRQoL) is unexplored in patients with multimorbidity (two or more chronic diseases). To examine if greater clinic-level PCMH implementation was associated with higher HRQoL in multimorbid adults. A retrospective cohort study. Twenty-two thousand ninety-five multimorbid patients who received primary care at 944 Veterans Health Administration (VHA) clinics. Our exposure was the Patient Aligned Care Team Implementation Progress Index (PI2) for the clinic in 2012, a previously validated composite measure of PCMH implementation. Higher PI2 scores indicate better performance within eight PCMH domains. Outcomes were patient-reported HRQoL measured by the physical and mental component scores (PCS and MCS) from the Short Form-12 patient experiences survey in 2013-2014. Interaction of the outcomes with total hospitalizations and primary care visit count was also examined. Generalized estimating equations were used for main models after adjusting for patient and clinic characteristics. The cohort average age was 68 years, mostly male (96%), and had an average of 4.4 chronic diagnoses. Compared with patients seen at the lowest scoring clinics for PCMH implementation, care in the highest scoring clinics was associated with a higher adjusted marginal mean PCS (42.3 (95% CI 41.3-43.4) versus 40.3 (95% CI 39.1-41.5), P = 0.01), but a lower MCS (35.2 (95% CI 34.4-36.1) versus 36.0 (95% CI 35.3-36.8), P = 0.17). Patients with prior hospitalizations seen in clinics with higher compared with lower PI2 scores had a 2.7 point greater MCS (95% CI 0.6-4.8; P = 0.01). Multimorbid patients seen in clinics with greater PCMH implementation reported higher physical HRQoL, but lower mental HRQoL. The association between PCMH implementation and mental HRQoL may depend on complex interactions with disease severity and prior hospitalizations.

Commentaries on health services research

Commentaries on health services research

Does the Patient-centered Medical Home Model Change Staffing and Utilization in the Community Health Centers?

Few studies have looked under the hood of practice redesign to understand whether and, if so, how staffing changed with the adoption of patient-centered medical home (PCMH), and whether these staffing changes impacted utilization. To examine the workforce transformation occurring in community health centers that have achieved PCMH status, and to assess the relationship of those changes to utilization, as measured by the number of visits. Using a difference-in-differences approach, we compared staffing and utilization outcomes in 450 community health centers that had adopted a PCMH model between 2007 and 2013 to a matched sample of 243 nonadopters located in the 50 states and the District of Columbia. We found that adopting a PCMH model was significantly associated with a growth in use of advanced practice staff (nurse practitioners and physician assistants) [0.53 full-time equivalent (FTE), 8.77%; P<0.001], other medical staff (medical assistants, nurse aides, and quality assurance staff) (1.23 FTE, 7.46%; P=0.001), mental health/substance abuse staff (0.73 FTE, 17.63%; P=0.005), and enabling service staff (case managers and health educators) (0.36 FTE, 6.14%; P=0.079), but not primary care physicians or nurses. We did not observe a significant increase in utilization, as measured in total number of visits per year. However, the visits marginally attributed to advanced practice staff (539 FTE, 0.89%; P=0.037) and mental health/substance abuse staff (353 FTE, 0.59%; P=0.051) significantly increased. Our findings suggest that the implementation of PCMH actively reengineers staff composition and this, in turn, results in changes in marginal utilization by each staff type.