Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine最新文献

Background: Discharge communication between hospitalists and primary care clinicians is essential to improve care coordination, minimize adverse events, and decrease unplanned health services use. Health-related social needs are key drivers of health, and hospitalists and primary care clinicians value communicating social needs at discharge.

Objective: To 1) characterize the current state of discharge communications between an academic medical center hospital and primary care clinicians at associated clinics; 2) seek feedback about the potential usefulness of discharge readiness information to primary care clinicians.

Design: Exploratory, convergent mixed methods.

Participants: Primary care clinicians from Family Medicine and General Internal Medicine of an academic medical center in the US Intermountain West.

Approach: Literature-informed REDCap survey. Semistructured interview guide developed with key informants, grounded in current literature. Survey data were descriptively summarized; interview data were deductively and inductively coded, organized by topics.

Results: Two key topics emerged: 1) discharge communication, with interrelated topics of transitional care management and follow-up appointment challenges, and recommendations for improving discharge communication; and 2) usefulness of the discharge readiness information, included interrelated topics related to lack of shared understanding about roles and responsibilities across settings and ethical concerns related to identifying problems that may not have solutions.

Conclusions: While reiterating perennial discharge communication and transitional care management challenges, this study reveals new evidence about how these issues are interrelated with assessing and responding to patients' lack of readiness for discharge and unmet social needs during care transitions. Primary care clinicians had mixed views on the usefulness of discharge readiness information. We offer recommendations for improving discharge communication and transitional care management (TCM) processes, which may be applicable in other care settings.

Introduction: Social drivers of health (SDH) strongly influence health outcomes and disparities. Although systemic level change is vital to address the disparities driven by SDH, it is also crucial that health care organizations develop the ability to care for patients in a manner that accounts for social factors and their influence on patient health. Although primary care is a natural fit for health-related social needs (HRSN) screening and intervention, significant barriers can impede primary care's effectiveness in this area.

Methods: We conducted 3 focus groups with family medicine clinicians, clinical staff, and social care workers in an academic medical center using a semistructured discussion guide to explore current practices, perceived benefits, barriers, and potential opportunities and approaches for integrating routine HRSN screening in primary care.

Results: 3 primary themes emerged from the focus groups. They included 1) the barriers to routine screening in primary care, including time, workload, emotional burden, patient factors, and team members' fear of inadequacy of resources or their own ability; 2) the importance and benefit of HRSN screening, including the opportunity to improve patient care through increased care team awareness of the patient's context, interventions to address HRSN, and improved relationships between the care team and the patient; and 3) recommendations for implementing routine screening in primary care, including opportunities to optimize workflow and technology, the importance of an electronic medical record (EMR)-integrated resource database, and the centrality of teamwork.

Discussion: Family medicine health care teams embrace the importance of HRSN screening and the potential for positive impact. However, there are vital barriers and considerations to address for HRSN screening to be effectively integrated into primary care visits.

The Medicare Advantage (MA) Program, home to nearly half of the eligible Medicare population, has recently come under increased scrutiny. Recent investigations conducted by the United States Senate Committee on Finance and Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) have uncovered marketing practices of MA insurance agents that "were not complying with current regulation and unduly pressuring beneficiaries, as well as failing to provide accurate or enough information to assist a beneficiary in making an informed enrollment decision." These findings come at a time in which MA programs are under investigation for denials of prior authorization requests that fall within Medicare guidelines for covered health services. In this Commentary we consider the backdrop for the growing scrutiny of the MA program and the implications thereof to its future trajectory.

The landscape of diabetes management has changed, such that the goal of pharmacotherapy extends beyond glucose-lowering to prioritize risk reduction of cardiovascular disease and diabetic kidney disease. Two newer classes of medications, glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2-Is), have become first line therapies for many patients with type 2 diabetes to reduce cardiovascular and renal complications of type 2 diabetes. This review article will describe the mechanism of action, evidence for cardiovascular and kidney outcomes, contraindications, adverse effects, and risk mitigation strategies for the GLP-1 RA and SGLT2-I drug classes. In addition, we will provide a practical approach for primary care clinicians to prescribe, adjust, and combine these medication classes, while considering patient preference, tolerability, comorbidities, cost, and availability.

Objective: The objective of this study is to describe the facilitators and barriers of telemedicine during the COVID-19 pandemic for primary care clinicians in safety-net settings.

Methods: We selected 5 surveys fielded between September 2020 and March 2023 from the national "Quick COVID-19 Primary Care Survey" by the Larry A. Green Center, with the Primary Care Collaborative. We used an explanatory sequential mixed method approach. We compared safety-net practices (free & charitable organization, federally qualified health center (FQHC), clinics with a 50% or greater Medicaid) to all other settings. We discuss: 1) telemedicine services provided; 2) clinician motivations; 3) and telemedicine access.

Results: All clinicians were similarly motivated to implement telemedicine. Safety-net clinicians were more likely to report use of phone visits. These clinicians felt less "confident in my use of telemedicine" (covariate-adjusted OR = 0.611, 95% CI 0.43 - 0.87) and were more likely to report struggles with televisits in March 2023 (covariate-adjusted OR = 1.73, 95% CI 1.16 - 2.57), particularly with physical examinations. Safety-net clinicians were more likely to endorse reductions in no-shows (covariate-adjusted OR = 1.77, 95% CI 1.17 - 2.68). Telemedicine increased access and new patient-facing demands including portal communications.

Conclusions: This study enhances our understanding of the use of telemedicine within the safety-net setting. Clinician perceptions are important for identifying barriers to telemedicine following the end of the Federal COVID-19 Public Health Emergency. Clinicians highlighted significant limitations to its use including clinical appropriateness, quality of physical examinations, and added patient-facing workload.

Anabolic bone agents, such as parathyroid hormone receptor agonists (teriparatide and abaloparatide) and sclerostin-inhibiting monoclonal antibody (romosozumab), are superior at preventing clinically significant fractures and/or vertebral fractures in women with and without severe osteoporosis compared with bisphosphonates.

Academic medicine continues to characterize the experiences of Black and other minoritized faculty in medicine to enhance their careers and promote their advancement. An issue of discussion is tenure and its role in the advancement and retention of this group. Tenure is a sign of national presence, command of an area of study, and can demonstrate support from the institution in terms of permanent employment, eligibility to apply for awards, sit or vote on certain committees or qualify for certain leadership opportunities. Anecdotally there have been reports that tenure is a thing of the past that has lost relevance prompting some to end tenure in their institutions. Reasons for this are complex, however the literature does not include minoritized faculty as a reason for the need to revise or eliminate tenure and tenure earning tracks. The authors discuss 3 reasons why Black and other minoritized faculty should be afforded the opportunity to achieve permanent status in their academic health centers. They include histories of being denied freedom, having information concealed or being giving false information, and being denied permanent academic employment status.