Faculty Bibliography

Importance/UNASSIGNED:Despite limited effectiveness of pay-for-performance (P4P), payers continue to expand P4P nationally. Objective/UNASSIGNED:To test whether increasing bonus size or adding the behavioral economic principles of increased social pressure (ISP) or loss aversion (LA) improves the effectiveness of P4P. Design, Setting, and Participants/UNASSIGNED:Parallel studies conducted from January 1 to December 31, 2016, consisted of a randomized clinical trial with patients cluster-randomized by practice site to an active control group (larger bonus size [LBS] only) or to groups with 1 of 2 behavioral economic interventions added and a cohort study comparing changes in outcomes among patients of physicians receiving an LBS with outcomes in propensity-matched physicians not receiving an LBS. A total of 8118 patients attributed to 66 physicians with 1 of 5 chronic conditions were treated at Advocate HealthCare, an integrated health system in Illinois. Data were analyzed using intention to treat and multiple imputation from February 1, 2017, through May 31, 2018. Interventions/UNASSIGNED:Physician participants received an LBS increased by a mean of $3355 per physician (LBS-only group); prefunded incentives to elicit LA and an LBS; or increasing proportion of a P4P bonus determined by group performance from 30% to 50% (ISP) and an LBS. Main Outcomes and Measures/UNASSIGNED:The proportion of 20 evidence-based quality measures achieved at the patient level. Results/UNASSIGNED:A total of 86 physicians were eligible for the randomized trial. Of these, 32 were excluded because they did not have unique attributed patients. Fifty-four physicians were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 groups, and 33 physicians (54.5% male; mean [SD] age, 57 [10] years) and 3747 patients (63.6% female; mean [SD] age, 64 [18] years) were included in the final analysis. Nine physicians and 864 patients were randomized to the LBS-only group, 13 physicians and 1496 patients to the LBS plus ISP group, and 11 physicians and 1387 patients to the LBS plus LA group. Physician characteristics did not differ significantly by arm, such as mean (SD) physician age ranging from 56 (9) to 59 (9) years, and sex (6 [46.2%] to 6 [66.7%] male). No differences were found between the LBS-only and the intervention groups (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] for LBS plus LA vs LBS-only, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.65-1.15; P = .31]; aOR for LBS plus ISP vs LBS-only, 0.95 [95% CI, 0.64-1.42; P = .81]; and aOR for LBS plus ISP vs LBS plus LA, 1.10 [95% CI, 0.75-1.61; P = .62]). Increased bonus size was associated with a greater increase in evidence-based care relative to the comparison group (risk-standardized absolute difference-in-differences, 3.2 percentage points; 95% CI, 1.9-4.5 percentage points; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance/UNASSIGNED:Increased bonus size was associated with significantly improved quality of care relative to a comparison group. Adding ISP and opportunities for LA did not improve quality. Trial Registration/UNASSIGNED:ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02634879.

While financial incentives to providers or patients are increasingly common as a quality improvement strategy, their impact on patient subgroups and health care disparities is unclear. To examine these patterns, we analyzed data from a randomized clinical trial of financial incentives to lower low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol levels in patients at risk for cardiovascular disease. Patients with higher baseline LDL experienced greater cholesterol reductions in the shared incentive arm (0.23 mg/dL per unit change in baseline LDL, 95% CI [-0.46, -0.00]) but were also less likely to have medication potency increases in the physician incentive arm ( OR = 0.98, 95% CI [0.97, 0.996]). Uninsured patients and those of race other than Black or White were less likely to have potency increases in the shared incentive arm ( OR = 0.15, 95% CI [0.03, 0.70] and OR = 0.09, 95% CI [0.01, 0.93], respectively). These findings suggest some differential response to incentives, particularly in the form of targeted medication changes.

BACKGROUND:Medication adherence after myocardial infarction remains low. Pharmacy claims have typically been used to measure medication adherence, but electronic pill bottles may offer additional information. OBJECTIVE:The main objectives of this study were to compare the association of adherence measured by prescription claims and remote monitoring technologies with cardiovascular events. RESEARCH DESIGN/METHODS:This study was a secondary analysis of a remote monitoring intervention to increase medication adherence in myocardial infarction patients. SUBJECTS/METHODS:In total, 682 myocardial infarction patients were randomized to the intervention group with both medical and pharmacy benefits. MEASURES/METHODS:Pharmacy claims adherence was measured using proportion of days covered (PDC) and GlowCap adherence (GC) was measured as the proportion of days the pill bottle was opened. We compared the association of PDC and GC adherence for statins with time to first vascular readmission or death and assessed model fit using Akaike information criterion and Bayesian information criterion and the likelihood ratio test. RESULTS:Higher PDC was significantly associated with a lower hazard rate for vascular readmissions or death (hazard ratio=0.435; P=0.009). There was also an association between GC adherence and vascular readmissions or death (hazard ratio=0.313; P≤0.001). Adding the GC adherence variable to the model using only PDC improved the model fit (likelihood ratio test, P=0.001), as well as vice versa (P=0.050). CONCLUSIONS:Pharmacy claims data provide useful but not complete data for medication adherence monitoring. New wireless technologies have the potential to provide additional data about clinical outcomes.

OBJECTIVE:The goal of this study was to develop and assess intra and inter-rater reliability and validity of a clinical evaluation tool for breast cancer related lymphedema, for use in the context of outcome evaluation in clinical trials DESIGN: Blinded repeated measures observational study. SETTING/METHODS:Outpatient research laboratory. PARTICIPANTS/METHODS:Breast cancer survivors with and without lymphedema (N=71). INTERVENTIONS/METHODS:Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE/METHODS:The assessment of Intraclass Correlations (ICCs) for the Breast Cancer related Lymphedema in the Upper Extremity (CLUE) standardized clinical evaluation tool. RESULTS:Intra-rater reliability for the CLUE tool was ICC: 0.88 (95% CI: 0.71, 0.96). Inter-rater reliability for the CLUE tool was ICC: 0.90 (95% CI: 0.79, 0.95). Concurrent validity of the CLUE score (Pearson's r) was 0.79 with perometric inter-limb difference, and 0.53 with the Norman Lymphedema overall score. CONCLUSIONS:The CLUE tool shows excellent inter- and intra-rater reliability. The overall CLUE score for the upper extremity also shows moderately strong concurrent validity with objective and subjective measures. This newly developed clinical, physical assessment of upper extremity lymphedema provides standardization and a single score that accounts for multiple constructs. Next steps include evaluation of sensitivity to change, which would establish usefulness to evaluate intervention efficacy.

Background/UNASSIGNED:Current guidelines recommend less aggressive target hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) levels based on older age and lower life expectancy for older adults with diabetes. The effectiveness of electronic health record (EHR) clinical decision support (CDS) in promoting guideline adherence is undermined by alert fatigue and poor workflow integration. Integrating behavioral economics (BE) and CDS tools is a novel approach to improving adherence to guidelines while minimizing clinician burden. Methods/UNASSIGNED: = 8), (2) a 2-h, design-thinking workshop to derive and refine initial module ideas, and (3) semi-structured group interviews at each site with clinic leaders and clinicians to elicit feedback on three proposed nudge module components (navigator section, inbasket refill protocol, medication preference list). Detailed field notes will be summarized by module idea and usability theme for rapid iteration. Frequency of firing and user action taken will be assessed in the first month of implementation via EHR reporting to confirm that module components and related reporting are working as expected as well as assess utilization. To assess the utilization and feasibility of the new tools and generate estimates of clinician compliance with the Choosing Wisely guideline for diabetes management in older adults, a 6-month, single-arm pilot study of the BE-EHR module will be conducted in six outpatient primary care clinics. Discussion/UNASSIGNED:We hypothesize that a low burden, user-centered approach to design will yield a BE-driven, CDS module with relatively high utilization by clinicians. The resulting module will establish a platform for exploring the ability of BE concepts embedded within the EHR to affect guideline adherence for other use cases.