Background

 Primary care (PC) is the foundation of the Kenyan health care system, providing comprehensive care, health promotion and managing all illnesses across the lifecycle. In the private sector in Nairobi, PC is principally offered by the general practitioners, also known as family doctors (FDs). The majority have no postgraduate training. Little is known about how patients perceive their capability.

Aim

 To assess patients' perceptions of the scope of practice of FDs working in private sector PC clinics in Nairobi and their awareness of the new category of family physicians (FPs) and the discipline of family medicine.

Setting

 Private sector PC clinics in Nairobi.

Methods

 A descriptive survey using a structured, self-administered questionnaire. Simple random sampling was used to recruit 162 patient participants.

Results

 Of the participants, 30% knew the difference between FPs and FDs. There was a high to moderate confidence that FDs could treat common illnesses; provide lifestyle advice; family planning (66%) and childhood immunisations (64%). In adolescents and adults, low confidence was expressed in their ability to manage tuberculosis (58%), human immunodeficiency virus (55%) and cancer (33%). In the elderly, there was low confidence in their ability to manage depression (55%), anxiety (57%), urinary incontinence (57%) and diabetes (59%). There was low confidence in their ability to provide antenatal care (55%) and Pap smears (42%).

Conclusion

 Patients did not perceive that FDs could offer fully comprehensive PC services. These perceptions may be addressed by defining the expected package of care, designing a system that encourages the utilisation of PC and employing FPs.

Background & aims

Formal Hepatitis C virus (HCV) education improves HCV knowledge but the impact on treatment uptake and outcome is not well described. We aimed to evaluate the impact of formal HCV patient education on primary provider-specialist HCV comanagement and treatment.

Methods

Primary care providers within the San Francisco safety-net health care system were surveyed and the records of HCV-infected patients before and after institution of a formal HCV education class by liver specialty (2006-2011) were reviewed retrospectively.

Results

Characteristics of 118 patients who received anti-HCV therapy were: mean age 51, 73% males and ~50% White and uninsured. The time to initiation of HCV treatment was shorter among those who received formal education (median 136 vs 284 days, P < 0.0001). When controlling for age, gender, race and HCV viral load, non-1 genotype (OR 6.17, 95% CI 2.3-12.7, P = 0.0003) and receipt of HCV education (OR 3.0, 95% CI 1.1-7.9, P = 0.03) were associated with sustained virologic treatment response. Among 94 provider respondents (response rate = 38%), mean age was 42, 62% were White, and 63% female. Most providers agreed that the HCV education class increased patients' HCV knowledge (70%), interest in HCV treatment (52%), and provider-patient communication (56%). A positive provider attitude (Coef 1.5, 95% CI 0.1-2.9 percent, P = 0.039) was independently associated with referral rate to education class.

Conclusions

Formal HCV education expedites HCV therapy and improves virologic response rates. As primary care provider attitude plays a significant role in referral to HCV education class, improving provider knowledge will likely enhance access to HCV specialty services in the vulnerable population.

Artificial intelligence (AI) is poised as a transformational force in healthcare. This paper presents a current environmental scan, through the eyes of primary care physicians, of the top ten ways AI will impact primary care and its key stakeholders. We discuss ten distinct problem spaces and the most promising AI innovations in each, estimating potential market sizes and the Quadruple Aims that are most likely to be affected. Primary care is where the power, opportunity, and future of AI are most likely to be realized in the broadest and most ambitious scale. We propose how these AI-powered innovations must augment, not subvert, the patient-physician relationship for physicians and patients to accept them. AI implemented poorly risks pushing humanity to the margins; done wisely, AI can free up physicians' cognitive and emotional space for patients, and shift the focus away from transactional tasks to personalized care. The challenge will be for humans to have the wisdom and willingness to discern AI's optimal role in twenty-first century healthcare, and to determine when it strengthens and when it undermines human healing. Ongoing research will determine the impact of AI technologies in achieving better care, better health, lower costs, and improved well-being of the workforce.

Introduction

The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) is a commonly used implementation science framework to facilitate design, evaluation, and implementation of evidence-based interventions. Its comprehensiveness is an asset for considering facilitators and barriers to implementation and also makes the framework cumbersome to use. We describe adaptations we made to CFIR to simplify its pragmatic application, for use in a learning health system context, in the evaluation of a complex patient-centered care transformation.

Methods

We conducted a qualitative study and structured our evaluation questions, data collection methods, analysis, and reporting around CFIR. We collected qualitative data via semi-structured interviews and observations with key stakeholders throughout. We identified and documented adaptations to CFIR throughout the evaluation process.

Results

We analyzed semi-structured interviews with key stakeholders (n = 23) from clinical observations (n = 5). We made three key adaptations to CFIR: (a) promoted "patient needs and resources," a subconstruct of the outer setting, to its own domain within CFIR during data analysis; (b) divided the "inner setting" domain into three layers that account for the hierarchy of health care systems (i. pilot clinic, ii. peer clinics, and iii. overarching health care system); and (c) tailored several construct definitions to fit a patient-centered, primary care setting. Analysis yielded qualitative findings concentrated in the CFIR domains "intervention characteristics" and "outer setting," with a robust number of findings in the new domain "patient needs and resources."

Conclusions

To make CFIR more accessible and relevant for wider use in the context of patient-centered care transformations within a learning health system, a few adaptations are key. Specifically, we found success by teasing apart interactions across the inner layers of a health system, tailoring construct definitions, and placing additional focus on patient needs.

Background

Hypertension is the most prevalent and important risk factor for cardiovascular disease, affecting nearly 50% of the US adult population; however, only 30% of these patients achieve controlled blood pressure (BP). Incorporating strategies into primary care that take into consideration individual patient needs, such as remote BP monitoring, may improve hypertension management.

Objective

From March 2018 to December 2018, Stanford implemented a precision health pilot called Humanwide, which aimed to leverage high-technology and high-touch medicine to tailor individualized care for conditions such as hypertension. We examined multi-stakeholder perceptions of hypertension management in Humanwide to evaluate the program's acceptability, appropriateness, feasibility, and sustainability.

Methods

We conducted semistructured interviews with 16 patients and 15 health professionals to assess their experiences with hypertension management in Humanwide. We transcribed and analyzed the interviews using a hybrid approach of inductive and deductive analysis to identify common themes around hypertension management and consensus methods to ensure reliability and validity.

Results

A total of 63% (10/16) of the patients and 40% (6/15) of the health professionals mentioned hypertension in the context of Humanwide. These participants reported that remote BP monitoring improved motivation, BP control, and overall clinic efficiency. The health professionals discussed feasibility challenges, including the time needed to analyze BP data and provide individualized feedback, integration of BP data, technological difficulties with the BP cuff, and decreased patient use of remote BP monitoring over time.

Conclusions

Remote BP monitoring for hypertension management in Humanwide was acceptable to patients and health professionals and appropriate for care. Important challenges need to be addressed to improve the feasibility and sustainability of this approach by leveraging team-based care, engaging patients to sustain remote BP monitoring, standardizing electronic medical record integration of BP measurements, and finding more user-friendly BP cuffs.

Background and objectives

Family medicine postgraduate programmes in Kenya are examining the benefits of Community-Oriented Primary Care (COPC) curriculum, as a method to train residents in population-based approaches to health care delivery. Whilst COPC is an established part of family medicine training in the United States, little is known about its application in Kenya. We sought to conduct a qualitative study to explore the development and implementation of COPC curriculum in the first two family medicine postgraduate programmes in Kenya.

Method

Semi-structured interviews of COPC educators, practitioners, and academic stakeholders and focus groups of postgraduate students were conducted with COPC educators, practitioners and academic stakeholders in two family medicine postgraduate programmes in Kenya. Discussions were transcribed, inductively coded and thematically analysed.

Results

Two focus groups with eight family medicine postgraduate students and interviews with five faculty members at two universities were conducted. Two broad themes emerged from the analysis: expected learning outcomes and important community-based enablers. Three learning outcomes were (1) making a community diagnosis, (2) understanding social determinants of health and (3) training in participatory research. Three community-based enablers for sustainability of COPC were (1) partnerships with community health workers, (2) community empowerment and engagement and (3) institutional financial support.

Conclusions

Our findings illustrate the expected learning outcomes and important communitybased enablers associated with the successful implementation of COPC projects in Kenya and will help to inform future curriculum development in Kenya.

Purpose

Implementing team-based care into existing primary care is challenging; understanding facilitators and barriers to implementation is critical. We assessed adoption and acceptability of new roles in the first 6 months of launching a team-based care model focused on preventive care, population health, and psychosocial support.

Methods

We conducted qualitative rapid ethnography at a community-based test clinic, including 74 hours of observations and 28 semi-structured interviews. We identified implementation themes related to team-based care and specifically the integration of three roles purposively designed to enhance coordination for better patient outcomes, including preventive screening and mental health: (1) medical assistants as care coordinators; (2) extended care team specialists, including clinical pharmacist and behavioral health professional; and (3) advanced practice providers (APPs)-ie, nurse practitioners and physician assistants.

Results

All stakeholders (ie, patients, providers, and staff) reported positive perceptions of care coordinators and extended care specialists; these roles were well defined and quickly implemented. Care coordinators effectively managed care between visits and established strong patient relationships. Specialist colocation facilitated patient access and well-supported diabetes services and mental health care. We also observed unanticipated value: Care coordinators relayed encounter-relevant chart information to providers while scribing; extended care specialists supported informal continuing medical education. In contrast, we observed uncertain definition and expectations of the APP role across stakeholders; accordingly, adoption and acceptability of the role varied.

Conclusions

Practice redesign can redistribute responsibility and patient connection throughout a team but should emphasize well-defined roles. Ethnography, conducted early in implementation with multistakeholder perspectives, can provide rapid and actionable insights about where roles may need refinement or redefinition to support ultimate physical and mental health outcomes for patients.

Background

Current evaluation methods are mismatched with the speed of health care innovation and needs of health care delivery partners. We introduce a qualitative approach called the lightning report method and its specific product-the "Lightning Report." We compare implementation evaluation results across four projects to explore report sensitivity and the potential depth and breadth of lightning report method findings.

Methods

The lightning report method was refined over 2.5 years across four projects: team-based primary care, cancer center transformation, precision health in primary care, and a national life-sustaining decisions initiative. The novelty of the lightning report method is the application of Plus/Delta/Insight debriefing to dynamic implementation evaluation. This analytic structure captures Plus ("what works"), Delta ("what needs to be changed"), and Insights (participant or evaluator insights, ideas, and recommendations). We used structured coding based on implementation science barriers and facilitators outlined in the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) applied to 17 Lightning Reports from four projects.

Results

Health care partners reported that Lighting Reports were valuable, easy to understand, and they implied reports supported "corrective action" for implementations. Comparative analysis revealed cross-project emphasis on the domains of Inner Setting and Intervention Characteristics, with themes of communication, resources/staffing, feedback/reflection, alignment with simultaneous interventions and traditional care, and team cohesion. In three of the four assessed projects, the largest proportion of coding was to the clinic-level domain of Inner Setting-ranging from 39% for the cancer center project to a high of 56% for the life-sustaining decisions project.

Conclusions

The lightning report method can fill a gap in rapid qualitative approaches and is generalizable with consistent but flexible core methods. Comparative analysis suggests it is a sensitive tool, capable of uncovering differences and insights in implementation across projects. The Lightning Report facilitates partnered evaluation and communication with stakeholders by providing real-time, actionable insights in dynamic health care implementations.

Purpose

Scribes are increasingly being used in clinical practice despite a lack of high-quality evidence regarding their effects. Our objective was to evaluate the effect of medical scribes on physician satisfaction, patient satisfaction, and charting efficiency.

Methods

We conducted a randomized controlled trial in which physicians in an academic family medicine clinic were randomized to 1 week with a scribe then 1 week without a scribe for the course of 1 year. Scribes drafted all relevant documentation, which was reviewed by the physician before attestation and signing. In encounters without a scribe, the physician performed all charting duties. Our outcomes were physician satisfaction, measured by a 5-item instrument that included physicians' perceptions of chart quality and chart accuracy; patient satisfaction, measured by a 6-item instrument; and charting efficiency, measured by time to chart close.

Results

Scribes improved all aspects of physician satisfaction, including overall satisfaction with clinic (OR = 10.75), having enough face time with patients (OR = 3.71), time spent charting (OR = 86.09), chart quality (OR = 7.25), and chart accuracy (OR = 4.61) (all P values <.001). Scribes had no effect on patient satisfaction. Scribes increased the proportion of charts that were closed within 48 hours (OR =1.18, P =.028).

Conclusions

To our knowledge, we have conducted the first randomized controlled trial of scribes. We found that scribes produced significant improvements in overall physician satisfaction, satisfaction with chart quality and accuracy, and charting efficiency without detracting from patient satisfaction. Scribes appear to be a promising strategy to improve health care efficiency and reduce physician burnout.

Background

Humanwide was precision health embedded in primary care aiming to leverage high-tech and high-touch medicine to promote wellness, predict and prevent illness, and tailor treatment to individual medical and psychosocial needs.

Methods

We conducted a study assessing implementation outcomes to inform spread and scale, using mixed methods of semi-structured interviews with diverse stakeholders and chart reviews. Humanwide included: 1) health coaching; 2) four digital health tools for blood-pressure, weight, glucose, and activity; 3) pharmacogenomic testing; and 4) genetic screening/testing. We examined implementation science constructs: reach/penetration, acceptability, feasibility, and sustainability. Chart reviews captured preliminary clinical outcomes.

Results

Fifty of 69 patients (72%) invited by primary care providers participated in the Humanwide pilot. We performed chart reviews for the 50 participating patients. Participants were diverse overall (50% non-white, 66% female). Over half of the participants were obese and 58% had one or more major cardiovascular risk factor: dyslipidemia, hypertension, diabetes. Reach/penetration of Humanwide components varied: pharmacogenomics testing 94%, health coaching 80%, genetic testing 72%, and digital health 64%. Interview participants (n=27) included patients (n=16), providers (n=9), and the 2 staff who were allocated dedicated time for Humanwide patient intake and orientation. Patients and providers reported Humanwide was acceptable; it engaged patients holistically, supported faster medication titration, and strengthened patient-provider relationships. All patients benefited clinically from at least one Humanwide component. Feasibility challenges included: low provider self-efficacy for interpreting genetics and pharmacogenomics; difficulties with data integration; patient technology challenges; and additional staffing needs. Patient financial burden concerns surfaced with respect to sustainability.

Conclusion

This is the first report of implementation of a multi-component precision health model embedded in team-based primary care. We found acceptance from both patients and providers; however, feasibility barriers must be overcome to enable broad spread and sustainability. We found that barriers to implementation of precision health in a team-based primary care clinic are mundane and straightforward, though not necessarily easy to overcome. Future implementation endeavors should invest in basics: education, workflow, and reflection/evaluation. Strengthening fundamentals will enable healthcare systems to more nimbly accept the responsibility of meeting patients at the crossroads of innovative science and routinized clinical systems.