{"title":"HIGH-STAKES KNOWLEDGE ASSESSMENT AT ABFM: WHAT WE HAVE LEARNED AND HOW IT IS USEFUL","authors":"W. Newton, T. O'neill, Ting Wang","doi":"10.1370/afm.2811","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.2811","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":22305,"journal":{"name":"The Annals of Family Medicine","volume":"393 1","pages":"186 - 188"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"76815681","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Use of Telephone Interview for Cognitive Status (TICS) for the Detection of Dementia in Primary Care","authors":"J. Ocampo, M. Johansen","doi":"10.1370/afm.2800","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.2800","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":22305,"journal":{"name":"The Annals of Family Medicine","volume":"112 1","pages":"202 - 202"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79343793","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Herrer Abdulrahman, Eva Jansen, M. Hoevenaar-Blom, J. V. van Dalen, L. V. van Wanrooij, E. V. van Bussel, W. V. van Gool, E. Richard, E. P. Moll van Charante
PURPOSE Cognitive diagnostic work-up in primary care is not always physically feasible, owing to chronic disabilities and/or travel restrictions. The identification of dementia might be facilitated with diagnostic instruments that are time efficient and easy to perform, as well as useful in the remote setting. We assessed whether the Telephone Interview for Cognitive Status (TICS) might be a simple and accurate alternative for remote diagnostic cognitive screening in primary care. METHODS We administered the TICS (range, 0-41) for 810 of 1,473 older people aged 84.5 (SD, 2.4) years. We scrutinized electronic health records for participants with TICS scores ≤30 and for a random sample of participants with TICS scores >30 for a dementia diagnosis using all data from the Prevention of Dementia by Intensive Vascular Care (preDIVA) trial for 8-12 years of follow-up. We used multiple imputation to correct for verification bias. RESULTS Of the 810 participants, 155 (19.1%) had a TICS score ≤30, and 655 (80.9%) had a TICS score >30. Electronic health records yielded 8.4% (13/154) dementia diagnoses for participants with TICS ≤30 vs none with TICS >30. Multiple imputation for TICS >30 yielded a median of 7/655 (1.1%; interquartile range, 5-8) estimated dementia cases. After multiple imputation, the optimal cutoff score was ≤29, with mean sensitivity 65.4%, specificity 87.8%, positive predictive value 11.9%, negative predictive value 99.0%, and area under the curve 77.4% (95% CI, 56.3%-90.0%). CONCLUSIONS In the present older population, the TICS performed well as a diagnostic screening instrument for excluding dementia and might be particularly useful when face-to-face diagnostic screening is not feasible in family practice or research settings. The potential reach to large numbers of people at low cost could contribute to more efficient medical management in primary care.
{"title":"Diagnostic Accuracy of the Telephone Interview for Cognitive Status for the Detection of Dementia in Primary Care","authors":"Herrer Abdulrahman, Eva Jansen, M. Hoevenaar-Blom, J. V. van Dalen, L. V. van Wanrooij, E. V. van Bussel, W. V. van Gool, E. Richard, E. P. Moll van Charante","doi":"10.1370/afm.2768","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.2768","url":null,"abstract":"PURPOSE Cognitive diagnostic work-up in primary care is not always physically feasible, owing to chronic disabilities and/or travel restrictions. The identification of dementia might be facilitated with diagnostic instruments that are time efficient and easy to perform, as well as useful in the remote setting. We assessed whether the Telephone Interview for Cognitive Status (TICS) might be a simple and accurate alternative for remote diagnostic cognitive screening in primary care. METHODS We administered the TICS (range, 0-41) for 810 of 1,473 older people aged 84.5 (SD, 2.4) years. We scrutinized electronic health records for participants with TICS scores ≤30 and for a random sample of participants with TICS scores >30 for a dementia diagnosis using all data from the Prevention of Dementia by Intensive Vascular Care (preDIVA) trial for 8-12 years of follow-up. We used multiple imputation to correct for verification bias. RESULTS Of the 810 participants, 155 (19.1%) had a TICS score ≤30, and 655 (80.9%) had a TICS score >30. Electronic health records yielded 8.4% (13/154) dementia diagnoses for participants with TICS ≤30 vs none with TICS >30. Multiple imputation for TICS >30 yielded a median of 7/655 (1.1%; interquartile range, 5-8) estimated dementia cases. After multiple imputation, the optimal cutoff score was ≤29, with mean sensitivity 65.4%, specificity 87.8%, positive predictive value 11.9%, negative predictive value 99.0%, and area under the curve 77.4% (95% CI, 56.3%-90.0%). CONCLUSIONS In the present older population, the TICS performed well as a diagnostic screening instrument for excluding dementia and might be particularly useful when face-to-face diagnostic screening is not feasible in family practice or research settings. The potential reach to large numbers of people at low cost could contribute to more efficient medical management in primary care.","PeriodicalId":22305,"journal":{"name":"The Annals of Family Medicine","volume":"13 1","pages":"130 - 136"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81033277","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Implementing High-Quality Primary Care: To What End?","authors":"R. Phillips","doi":"10.1370/afm.2802","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.2802","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":22305,"journal":{"name":"The Annals of Family Medicine","volume":"1 1","pages":"107 - 108"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"87362135","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
PURPOSE The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is an unprecedented global public health crisis. Mass vaccination is the safest and fastest pandemic exit strategy. Mass vaccination clinics are a particularly important tool in quickly achieving herd immunity. Primary care physicians have played a crucial role in organizing and running vaccination clinics. In this special report, we synthesize existing guidelines and peer-reviewed studies to provide physicians with practical guidance on planning and implementing COVID-19 mass vaccination clinics. METHODS PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE and Embase were used to search for relevant literature using search terms that included COVID-19, mass vaccination, and best practice. We also identified and analyzed national and international guidelines. RESULTS Forty-six relevant articles, reports, and guidelines were identified and synthesized. Articles included mass vaccination clinic guidelines and studies before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Key considerations for COVID-19 mass vaccination clinics include leadership and role designation, site selection, clinic layout and workflow, day-to-day operations, infection prevention, and communication strategies. CONCLUSIONS Planning and implementing a successful COVID-19 mass vaccination clinic requires several key considerations. Primary care plays an important role in organizing clinics and ensuring populations made vulnerable by social and economic policies are being reached. Ongoing data collection is required to evaluate and continuously improve COVID-19 mass vaccination efforts. As the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccine rollout occurs in various countries, research will be required to identify the main factors for success to inform future pandemic responses. VISUAL ABSTRACT
{"title":"Best Practices for COVID-19 Mass Vaccination Clinics","authors":"Shima Shakory, Azza Eissa, T. Kiran, A. Pinto","doi":"10.1370/afm.2773","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.2773","url":null,"abstract":"PURPOSE The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is an unprecedented global public health crisis. Mass vaccination is the safest and fastest pandemic exit strategy. Mass vaccination clinics are a particularly important tool in quickly achieving herd immunity. Primary care physicians have played a crucial role in organizing and running vaccination clinics. In this special report, we synthesize existing guidelines and peer-reviewed studies to provide physicians with practical guidance on planning and implementing COVID-19 mass vaccination clinics. METHODS PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE and Embase were used to search for relevant literature using search terms that included COVID-19, mass vaccination, and best practice. We also identified and analyzed national and international guidelines. RESULTS Forty-six relevant articles, reports, and guidelines were identified and synthesized. Articles included mass vaccination clinic guidelines and studies before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Key considerations for COVID-19 mass vaccination clinics include leadership and role designation, site selection, clinic layout and workflow, day-to-day operations, infection prevention, and communication strategies. CONCLUSIONS Planning and implementing a successful COVID-19 mass vaccination clinic requires several key considerations. Primary care plays an important role in organizing clinics and ensuring populations made vulnerable by social and economic policies are being reached. Ongoing data collection is required to evaluate and continuously improve COVID-19 mass vaccination efforts. As the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccine rollout occurs in various countries, research will be required to identify the main factors for success to inform future pandemic responses. VISUAL ABSTRACT","PeriodicalId":22305,"journal":{"name":"The Annals of Family Medicine","volume":"11 1","pages":"149 - 156"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84252755","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
PURPOSE Physicians’ use of self-assessment to guide quality improvement or board certification activities often does not correlate with more objective measures, and they may spend valuable time on activities that support their strengths instead of addressing gaps. Our objective was to study whether viewing quality measures, with peer comparisons, would affect the selection of certification activities. METHODS We conducted a cluster-randomized controlled trial—the Trial of Data Exchange for Maintenance of certification and Raising Quality (TRADEMaRQ)—with 4 partner organizations during 2015-2017. Physicians were presented their quality data within their online certification portfolios before (intervention) vs after (control) they chose board certification activities. The primary outcome was whether the selected activity addressed a quality gap (a quality area in which the physician scored below the mean for the study population). RESULTS Of 2,570 invited physicians, 254 physicians completed the study: 130 in the intervention group and 124 in the control group. Nearly one-fifth of participating physicians did not complete any certification activities during the study. A sizable minority of those in the intervention group, 18.4%, never reviewed their quality dashboard. Overall, just 27.2% of completed certification activities addressed a quality gap, and there was no significant difference in this outcome in the intervention group vs the control group in either bivariate or adjusted analyses (odds ratio = 1.28; 95% CI, 0.90-1.82). CONCLUSIONS Physicians did not use quality performance data in choosing certification activities. Certification boards are being pressed to make their programs relevant to practice, less burdensome, and supportive of quality improvement in alignment with value-based payment models. Using practice data to drive certification choices would meet these goals.
{"title":"Physicians’ Choice of Board Certification Activity Is Unaffected by Baseline Quality of Care: The TRADEMaRQ Study","authors":"Lars E. Peterson, John Johannides, R. Phillips","doi":"10.1370/afm.2770","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.2770","url":null,"abstract":"PURPOSE Physicians’ use of self-assessment to guide quality improvement or board certification activities often does not correlate with more objective measures, and they may spend valuable time on activities that support their strengths instead of addressing gaps. Our objective was to study whether viewing quality measures, with peer comparisons, would affect the selection of certification activities. METHODS We conducted a cluster-randomized controlled trial—the Trial of Data Exchange for Maintenance of certification and Raising Quality (TRADEMaRQ)—with 4 partner organizations during 2015-2017. Physicians were presented their quality data within their online certification portfolios before (intervention) vs after (control) they chose board certification activities. The primary outcome was whether the selected activity addressed a quality gap (a quality area in which the physician scored below the mean for the study population). RESULTS Of 2,570 invited physicians, 254 physicians completed the study: 130 in the intervention group and 124 in the control group. Nearly one-fifth of participating physicians did not complete any certification activities during the study. A sizable minority of those in the intervention group, 18.4%, never reviewed their quality dashboard. Overall, just 27.2% of completed certification activities addressed a quality gap, and there was no significant difference in this outcome in the intervention group vs the control group in either bivariate or adjusted analyses (odds ratio = 1.28; 95% CI, 0.90-1.82). CONCLUSIONS Physicians did not use quality performance data in choosing certification activities. Certification boards are being pressed to make their programs relevant to practice, less burdensome, and supportive of quality improvement in alignment with value-based payment models. Using practice data to drive certification choices would meet these goals.","PeriodicalId":22305,"journal":{"name":"The Annals of Family Medicine","volume":"19 1","pages":"110 - 115"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89814897","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Kellia J. Hansmann, Julia Alberth, Robert Freidel, Allison Jenness
{"title":"Adapting an In-Clinic Resource Navigator Program to a Virtual Referral Model","authors":"Kellia J. Hansmann, Julia Alberth, Robert Freidel, Allison Jenness","doi":"10.1370/afm.2791","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.2791","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":22305,"journal":{"name":"The Annals of Family Medicine","volume":"37 1","pages":"181 - 181"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"78895122","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"FROM AFMRD: WHO TO GO TO FOR WHAT: THE ABFM OR THE ACGME","authors":"Sarah Z. Cole, Karen Elisa Milian Olmos","doi":"10.1370/afm.2779","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.2779","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":22305,"journal":{"name":"The Annals of Family Medicine","volume":"10 1","pages":"182 - 185"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"72726039","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Our problem-oriented approach to health care, though historically reasonable and undeniably impactful, is no longer well matched to the needs of an increasing number of patients and clinicians. This situation is due, in equal parts, to advances in medical science and technologies, the evolution of the health care system, and the changing health challenges faced by individuals and societies. The signs and symptoms of the failure of problem-oriented care include clinician demoralization and burnout; patient dissatisfaction and non-adherence; overdiagnosis and labeling; polypharmacy and iatrogenesis; unnecessary and unwanted end-of-life interventions; immoral and intolerable disparities in both health and health care; and inexorably rising health care costs. A new paradigm is needed, one that humanizes care while guiding the application of medical science to meet the unique needs and challenges of individual people. Shifting the focus of care from clinician-identified abnormalities to person-relevant goals would elevate the role of patients; individualize care planning; encourage prioritization, prevention, and end-of-life planning; and facilitate teamwork. Paradigm shifts are difficult, but the time has come for a reconceptualization of health and health care that can guide an overdue transformation of the health care system.
{"title":"Failure of the Problem-Oriented Medical Paradigm and a Person-Centered Alternative","authors":"J. Mold","doi":"10.1370/afm.2782","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.2782","url":null,"abstract":"Our problem-oriented approach to health care, though historically reasonable and undeniably impactful, is no longer well matched to the needs of an increasing number of patients and clinicians. This situation is due, in equal parts, to advances in medical science and technologies, the evolution of the health care system, and the changing health challenges faced by individuals and societies. The signs and symptoms of the failure of problem-oriented care include clinician demoralization and burnout; patient dissatisfaction and non-adherence; overdiagnosis and labeling; polypharmacy and iatrogenesis; unnecessary and unwanted end-of-life interventions; immoral and intolerable disparities in both health and health care; and inexorably rising health care costs. A new paradigm is needed, one that humanizes care while guiding the application of medical science to meet the unique needs and challenges of individual people. Shifting the focus of care from clinician-identified abnormalities to person-relevant goals would elevate the role of patients; individualize care planning; encourage prioritization, prevention, and end-of-life planning; and facilitate teamwork. Paradigm shifts are difficult, but the time has come for a reconceptualization of health and health care that can guide an overdue transformation of the health care system.","PeriodicalId":22305,"journal":{"name":"The Annals of Family Medicine","volume":"223 1","pages":"145 - 148"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"76719244","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：