Try a new search

Format these results:

Searched for:

person:porteb02

in-biosketch:yes

Total Results:

37


Erratum: Clinical problem solving and social determinants of health: A descriptive study using unannounced standardized patients to directly observe how resident physicians respond to social determinants of health (Diagnosis (2020) 7: 3 (313-324) DOI: 10.1515/dx-2020-0002)

Wilhite, J A; Hardowar, K; Fisher, H; Porter, B; Wallach, A B; Altshuler, L; Hanley, K; Zabar, S R; Gillespie, C C
Corrigendum to: Jeffrey A. Wilhite*, Khemraj Hardowar, Harriet Fisher, Barbara Porter, Andrew B. Wallach, Lisa Altshuler, Kathleen Hanley, Sondra R. Zabar and Colleen C. Gillespie. Clinical problem solving and social determinants of health: a descriptive study using unannounced standardized patients to directly observe how resident physicians respond to social determinants of health. Diagnosis 2020, Volume 7, Issue 3, pages 313-324. https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__doi.org_10&d=DwIBAg&c=j5oPpO0eBH1iio48DtsedeElZfc04rx3ExJHeIIZuCs&r=CY_mkeBghQnUPnp2mckgsNSbUXISJaiBQUhM-Uz9W58&m=TyoCBAKzCpBZ4-uIICybN67eGKr9ePdBC-WexDhSuSM&s=-H9hUl6CWWk07_DiPQFbSmQyI2qWxw4tQLZIEBIpIVY&e= . 1515/dx-2020-0002. Unfortunately, a typographic error in the results portion of the abstract was missed during final stages of proofing and editing. The count of full elicitors should read as 38/68 rather than 28/68, and the % of negative elicitors is 23%. The corrected results read as follows: Residents fell into three groups when it came to clinical problem-solving around a housing trigger for asthma: those who failed to ask about housing and therefore did not uncover mold as a potential trigger (neglectors - 21%; 14/68); those who asked about housing in negative ways that prevented disclosure and response (negative elicitors - 23%, 16/68); and those who elicited and explored the mold issue (full elicitors - 56%; 38/68).
Copyright
EMBASE:2008498847
ISSN: 2194-8011
CID: 4674562

MIND THE GAP: TEACHING LIFELONG LEARNING THROUGH METACOGNITIVE AWARENESS [Meeting Abstract]

Horlick, Margaret; Cocks, Patrick M.; Porter, Barbara
ISI:000567143602339
ISSN: 0884-8734
CID: 4799322

Count your pennies: Costs of medical resident deviation from clinical practice guidelines in use of testing across 3 unannounced standardized patient cases [Meeting Abstract]

Cahan, E; Hanley, K; Wallach, A B; Porter, B; Altshuler, L; Zabar, S; Gillespie, C C
Background: Diagnostic tests account directly for 5% of healthcare costs, but influence decisions constituting 70% of health spending. Only 5% of ordered labs are actually " high value," depending on clinical circumstances. Low-value tests, defined as not appropriate for a given clinical scenario, are ordered in one in five clinic visits. Up to $ 750 billion is spent on these low-value tests, contributing to the estimated one-quarter to one-third of healthcare spending is on wasteful services. We sought to quantify test-specific low-value ordering behaviors in urban outpatient clinics across three standardized patient cases.
Method(s): Unannounced standardized patients (USPs-highly trained actors portraying patients with standardized case presentations) were introduced into medicine residents' primary care clinics in a large urban, safety net hospital over the past five years. The USPs simulated three common outpatient clinical scenarios: a " Well" visit, a visit with a chief complaint of " Fatigue," and a visit with a diagnosis of " Asthma." Diagnostic orders were extracted via retrospective chart review for these standardized visits. For each scenario, appropriateness of diagnostic testing was determined by reference to United States Preventative Services Task Force (USPSTF) and relevant specialty society clinical practice guidelines (CPGs). " Wasteful" (over-ordered) tests were defined as those not explicitly indicated for the given scenario. Costs were derived from GoodRx.com according to local ZIP codes.
Result(s): The most commonly wasteful tests for the Asthma case were CBC (8% of 170 visits) and Chem-7 (6%), though the relative risk of over-ordering TSH was 3.8x that of other scenarios. The most commonly over-ordered tests for the Fatigue case were LFTs (14% of 148 visits) and HBV (5%), with LFTs ordered up to 15-fold more frequently than in other scenarios. The most commonly over-ordered tests for the Well case were BMP (35% of 124 visits), CBC (15%), LFTs (15%), and HBV (11%) ordered at rates up to 6.3x, 2.0x, 14.2x, and 7.4x higher than other scenarios. Finally, the average per patient excess costs were $ 8.27 (+/-$ 1.76), $ 6.79 (+/-$ 4.5), and $ 23.5 (+/-$ 9.34) for Asthma, Fatigue, and Well cases respectively.
Conclusion(s): Inappropriateness in test ordering patterns were observed through USP simulated cases. Certain tests (CBC, BMP, LFTs, and HBV) were more likely used wastefully across cases. Between cases, specific tests were ordered in an inappropriate manner (such as TSH for Asthma, LFTs for Fatigue, and BMP for Well visits). The per patient direct cost of low value testing rose above $ 20 per visit for the Well visit, though the Fatigue case exhibited the most variation. Notably, this excludes downstream (indirect) costs inestimatable from standardized encounters alone. Knowledge of wasteful utilization patterns associated with specific clinical scenarios can guide interventions targeting appropriate use of testing
EMBASE:629003565
ISSN: 1525-1497
CID: 4052822

Pursuing the diagnostic odyssey: Patterns of resident test utilization differ for preventive versus diagnostic work-up [Meeting Abstract]

Cahan, E; Hanley, K; Porter, B; Wallach, A B; Altshuler, L; Zabar, S; Gillespie, C C
Background: Low-value tests, defined as inappropriate for a given clinical scenario, are ordered in one in five clinic visits. Residents tend to over-order diagnostic tests to "minimize uncertainty" of presenting cases, even though these tests are not useful according to Bayesian statistics; a pursuit deemed the "Ulysses syndrome". Simultaneously, evidence suggests residents misuse preventive tests in half of relevant clinical scenarios. We sought to quantify ordering behaviors in urban primary care clinics across three unannounced standardized cases.
Method(s): Unannounced standardized patients (USPs) were trained for standardized simulation of three clinical scenarios: a "Well" visit, a chief complaint of "Fatigue," and a diagnosis of "Asthma." USPs were introduced into medicine residents' clinics in an urban, safety-net hospital. All electronic orders were extracted via chart review. Scenario-specific appropriateness of diagnostic testing was determined by referencing United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) and society clinical practice guidelines (CPGs). "Preventive" tests (such as lipid panels or hemoglobin A1C) were derived from USPSTF guidelines whereas "Diagnostic" tests (such as pulmonary function testing for Asthma or heterophile antibodies for Fatigue) were from CPGs. "Excessive" tests were those not explicitly indicated for a given scenario in either USPSTF or CPGs (versus "indicated" tests).
Result(s): Indicated tests were ordered in 29% of Well (124 encounters), 16% of Fatigue (148 encounters), and 12% of Asthma (170 encounters) cases. One or more excessive tests were ordered in 44%, 22%, and 17% of Well, Fatigue, and Asthma encounters respectively. The distribution of indicated and excessive tests for preventive versus diagnostic purposes varied by case: In Well visits, the majority (71%) of excessive testing was in pursuit of a diagnosis, while three-quarters of indicated testing was for preventive purposes. In Fatigue and Asthma visits, the reverse patterns were true: the majority of indicated tests ordered were diagnostic (81% and 68%, respectively) while the majority of excessive tests were preventive (78% and 63%, respectively).
Conclusion(s): Introducing USPs to resident clinics revealed that, for patients presenting without a chief complaint (Well visit), residents successfully ordered less than one-third of indicated tests, and over 75% of inappropriately ordered tests pursued a diagnosis. For patients presenting with chief complaints (Fatigue and Asthma), rates of appropriate ordering were even lower (16% and 12%), and tended to overlook preventive care. In these cases, inappropriate tests tended to be ordered for preventive purposes. Awareness of resident mis-utilization of preventive and diagnostic testing in distinct clinical circumstances can guide educational efforts towards evidence-based care and resource stewardship
EMBASE:629002827
ISSN: 1525-1497
CID: 4053002

Are residents' test utilization patterns associated with their communication skills and patient centeredness? [Meeting Abstract]

Gillespie, C; Cahan, E; Hanley, K; Wallach, A B; Porter, B; Zabar, S
Background: It is well documented that few ordered tests are " high value" a significant percentage of those ordered are " low-value." Residency offers an opportunity to teach high-value care and educational interventions to do so have been effective. However, the relationship between high-value care and residents' ability to communicate effectively with patients has not been explored. Ability to establish rapport, gather information effectively, and be patient-centered may impact residents' use of tests. We hypothesize that residents with poor skills in these areas may order tests less efficiently.
Method(s): Unannounced Standardized Patients (USPs) were introduced into residents' primary care clinics in a large urban, safety net hospital to portray 3 clinical scenarios: a well visit, a chief complaint of fatigue, and a diagnosis of asthma. Orders were extracted via chart review. Appropriateness of orders was determined by reference to United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) and clinical practice guidelines. Excessive tests were defined as not explicitly indicated for the scenario-indicated tests were the converse. Number of excessive and % of indicated tests were calculated across the 3 visits for 48 residents. Communication skills in information gathering (5 items) and developing a relationship (6 items) and a patient-centeredness score (4 items: took a personal interest, answered all my questions) were computed as % of behaviorally anchored items rated as " well done" and included in regression models predicting test utilization.
Result(s): On average, residents ordered 15% of indicated tests (SD 9%, 0-38%) across the 3 visits and a mean of 1.3 unnecessary tests (SD 1.7, 0-6). In the regression model, the 3 skills explained 16% of variation in unnecessary tests (p=.047). Information gathering explained the greatest share (8%, p=.041). With all 3 variables in the model, patient-centeredness was positively associated with unnecessary tests (Std Be-ta=.42, p=.016) and information gathering was negatively associated with unnecessary tests (Std Beta=-.34, p=.041). Mirroring these Results, superutilizers (10 residents ordering > =3 excessive tests) had lower information gathering and relationship development scores than other residents (66% vs 75% and 72% vs 76%) but higher patient centeredness scores (80% vs 74%)-although differences were not significant.
Conclusion(s): Our findings suggest that information gathering skills may have a small influence on residents' ordering of excessive tests. Further research with larger samples (adequate power) will help clarify the effect sizes. If our Results stand, interventions for high-value care should include information gathering skills and residency programs should continue to reinforce core communication skills training. In addition, our finding that patient centeredness was associated with ordering unnecessary tests suggests that residency programs could caution residents about conflating ordering of tests with patient-centeredness
EMBASE:629002627
ISSN: 1525-1497
CID: 4053032

Using a group observed standardized clinical experience (GOSE) to teach motivational interviewing [Meeting Abstract]

Porter, B; Crotty, K J; Moore, S J; Dognin, J; Horlick, M
Needs and Objectives: Didactic training in motivation interviewing (MI) lacks efficacy, because opportunities to practice skills while being directly observed are rare. The goal of our educational innovation was to train interns in the advanced communication skills of motivation interviewing through a group observed standardized clinical experience (GOSCE). Our Learning Objectives were as follows: After an experiential learning session on MI, interns will be able to: 1. Identify opportunities to use MI with patients 2. Recognize "change talk" from a patient as an opportunity to use MI techniques 3. Use MI techniques when discussing behavior change with a patient Setting and Participants: 46 internal medicine interns in an academic internal medicine residency program. Description: Each session began with a 20 minute review of MI for behavior change given by a psychologist trained in Motivational Interviewing. Then, interns participated in a 3 station, one-hour long Group Observed Standardized Clinical Exercise (GOSCE). Interns worked in teams of 3, and for each station, one of the 3 interns was the active physician, while the other 2 observed the encounter. Each intern had an opportunity to be the active physician for a case. Each case was observed by one or two faculty members, one of whom was a psychologist trained in MI. After a 10 minute interaction with the standardized patient, the active physician received feedback on their MI skills and debriefed the encounter with the faculty and their peers. After the 3 cases, the session concluded with a group debrief and summary of the experience. Interns completed a retrospective pre/post survey to assess the impact of the session. Evaluation: Residents reported statistically significant improvement in all domains, including confidence with identifying opportunities to use MI, comfort using reflective and summary statements during MI, and likelihood of using motivational interviewing in future patient encounters. Qualitative comments after the session reflect that residents developed an appreciation for silence as a tool during MI, felt comfortable with tools such as decisional balance, and recognized the value of patient centered-ness during MI. Discussion/Reflection/Lessons Learned: Our interprofessional educational team (psychologists and internists) provided different perspective for both learners and our internal medicine faculty. Our residents appreciated practicing skills and receiving feedback in real time. This academic year (one year after the intern GOSCE), these same learners will participate in an OSCE that includes a case requiring motivational internviewing skills, and we will evaluate the durability of motivation interviewing skills taught during this session. We are interested in expanding opportunities to use GOSCE as a low stakes skills practice and development tool
EMBASE:629002123
ISSN: 1525-1497
CID: 4053102

Provider "hotspotters: "individual residents demonstrate different patterns of test utilization across 3 standardized cases [Meeting Abstract]

Cahan, E; Hanley, K; Porter, B; Wallach, A B; Altshuler, L; Gillespie, C C; Zabar, S
Background: Inter-provider variability is a major source of low-value care. The dissemination of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) has targeted this variability, yet 44% of physicians are non-adherent to CPG. This may be due to factors including exceptionalism and incentive misalignment that present a conflict between comprehensiveness and prudence in work-up. A subset of super-utilizers are notable outliers: fewer than 0.5% of physicians account for 10% of healthcare costs. Super-utilizers order labs, request consults, order imaging, and prescribe medications at rates 30%, 140%, 14%, and 25% higher than the general population. We sought to quantify provider-specific low-value test ordering behaviors across three cases.
Method(s): Unannounced standardized patients (USPs) were trained for standardized simulation of three clinical scenarios: a "Well" visit, a chief complaint of "Fatigue," and a diagnosis of "Asthma." USPs were introduced into medicine residents' clinics in a large urban, safety-net hospital. Diagnostic orders were extracted via retrospective chart review. Scenario-specific appropriateness of diagnostic testing was determined by referencing United States Preventative Services Task Force (USPSTF) and specialty society CPGs. "Excessive" tests were those not explicitly indicated for a given scenario in either USPSTF or society CPGs (versus "indicated" tests). "Discretionary" tests were those conditionally indicated, pending patient-specific factors (such as hemoglobin A1C, pending BMI).
Result(s): One or more excessive tests were ordered in 44%, 22%, and 17% of Well (n=124), Fatigue (n=148), and Asthma (n=148) encounters respectively. Percent of orders that were excessive were 18%, 8%, and 10%, respectively. On average, 1.3 (+/-1.7) excessive orders were made. Within each case, rates of excessive ordering were positively correlated with rates of indicated and discretionary ordering, and negatively correlated with rates of omitting indicated tests. For example, in Fatigue, the correlation between excessive and indicated orders was 0.38, between excessive and discretionary orders rates was 0.59, and between excessive and omitted-indicated tests was-0.25 (all p< 0.05). A similar, statistically-significant pattern was found for the other two cases. 10 (21%) and 4 (8%) of 48 residents completing all scenarios demonstrated excessive ordering at rates atleast 1 and 2 standard deviations above the mean, respectively.
Conclusion(s): Introducing USPs representing clinical scenarios revealed marked inter-provider variability. Positive associations between rates of excessive, discretionary and indicated ordering suggest tendencies for comprehensiveness over prudence. Over one-fifth of residents completing all 3 cases were high-utilizers, and nearly one in ten were super-utilizers. Awareness of provider-level ordering tendencies can guide education and interventions supporting appropriate diagnostic use
EMBASE:629001938
ISSN: 1525-1497
CID: 4053132

Using Unannounced Standardized Patients to Explore Variation in Care for Patients With Depression

Zabar, Sondra; Hanley, Kathleen; Watsula-Morley, Amanda; Goldstein, Jenna; Altshuler, Lisa; Dumorne, Heather; Wallach, Andrew; Porter, Barbara; Kalet, Adina; Gillespie, Colleen
Background /UNASSIGNED:Physicians across specialties need to be skilled at diagnosing and treating depression, yet studies show underrecognition and inadequate treatment. Understanding the reasons requires specifying the influence of patient presentation, screening, and physician competence. Objective /UNASSIGNED:We deployed an unannounced standardized patient (SP) case to assess clinic screening and internal medicine (IM) residents' practices in identifying, documenting, and treating depression. Methods /UNASSIGNED:The SP represented a new patient presenting to the outpatient clinic, complaining of fatigue, with positive Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ) items 2 and 9 and a family history of depression. The SPs assessed clinic screening and IM resident practices; appropriate treatment was assessed through chart review and defined as the resident doing at least 1 of the following: prescribing a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI), making a referral, or scheduling a 2-week follow-up. Results /UNASSIGNED:< .001). Conclusions /UNASSIGNED:The use of unannounced SPs helps identify targets for training residents to provide evidence-based treatment of depression.
PMCID:6008039
PMID: 29946385
ISSN: 1949-8357
CID: 4450112

Ambulatory care visits increase emergency room visits and admissions in an urban, resident-run clinic [Meeting Abstract]

Reich, H; Nwogu, N; Garcia-Jimenez, M D; Fisher, E; Tan, M; Porter, B; Wallach, A B; Kalet, A
Background: Conflicting data exists on the relationship between outpatient visits and emergency department (ED) visit and admission rates. While some have shown outpatient access prevents ED visits and admissions, others show that factors such as continuity are more important. A mental health diagnosis is consistently cited as a factor associated with increased inpatient utilization. There is little published data about resident-run outpatient clinics and their outcomes, including how these ambulatory contacts affect ED visit and admission rates. Methods: The medical record was used to collect data for all patients seen at least once in the primary care resident clinic at a large, public New York City hospital over the course of 1 academic year. We counted the number of outpatient visits per patient, regardless of type, including both primary care visits and clinic visits for all medical and surgical subspecialties. We controlled for the level of health of each patient using locally developed scores. Our primary outcomes were total number of ED visits and total number of inpatient admissions; secondary outcomes were inpatient length of stay (LOS) and admissions for ambulatory care sensitive conditions (ACSC). We conducted bivariate analyses, using T-Tests and ANOVA, and multivariate analysis, using ordinary least of squares regression, to determine whether increased contact with outpatient clinics was associated with ED visit and admission rates. A separate analysis was conducted for patients with a mental health diagnosis. Results: Our sample consisted of 2,988 patients, seen at least once in the resident-run primary care clinic, averaging 7 outpatient visits across all sub-specialties. There were 2,544 ED visits (1317 unique patients), 571 inpatient admissions (368 unique patients), and 126 ACSC admissions (97 unique patients). Patients who were hospitalized averaged 2 admissions; average LOS was 9.5 days. Multivariate analysis, controlling for sociodemographic and health factors, found more ambulatory care visits were associated with more ED visits and more inpatient admissions (p < 0.01). There was no statistically significant association between ambulatory care visits and LOS or ACSC admissions. A mental health diagnosis was associated with increased ambulatory care visits, and increased ED visits and inpatient admissions, and a 4 day longer LOS. Conclusions: Among patients seen in the resident internal medicine clinic, we were surprised to find that more outpatient visits were positively associated with more ED visits and admissions when controlling for all sociodemographic factors and health status. Our study adds to the body of literature, as there has been little previously published about resident clinic outcomes. Further studies are needed on how to improve these resident run clinics in order to help prevent ED visits and admission. Our study also showed that a mental health diagnosis was positively associated with ambulatory care visits, consistent with the previous literature
EMBASE:622329239
ISSN: 1525-1497
CID: 3139062

DO MEDICAL TEAMS RESPOND TO SOCIAL DETERMINANTS OF HEALTH? USPS PROVIDE INSIGHT [Meeting Abstract]

Zabar, Sondra; Watsula-Morley, Amanda; Altshuler, Lisa; Hanley, Kathleen; Kalet, Adina; Porter, Barbara; Wallach, Andrew B.; Gillespie, Colleen C.
ISI:000442641400194
ISSN: 0884-8734
CID: 4449772