Emergency department use following incentives to provide after-hours primary care: a retrospective cohort study

ObjectiveDiagnostic error is a key healthcare concern and can result in substantial morbidity and mortality. Yet no study has investigated the relationship between adverse outcomes resulting from diagnostic errors and one potentially large contributor to these errors: deficiencies in diagnostic knowledge. Our objective was to measure that associations between diagnostic knowledge and adverse outcomes after visits to primary care physicians that were at risk for diagnostic errors.Setting/participants1410 US general internists who recently took their American Board of Internal Medicine Maintenance of Certification (ABIM-IM-MOC) exam treating 42 407 Medicare beneficiaries who experienced 48 632 ‘index’ outpatient visits for new problems at risk for diagnostic error because the presenting problem (eg, dizziness) was related to prespecified diagnostic error sensitive conditions (eg, stroke).Outcome measures90-day risk of all-cause death, and, for outcome conditions related to the index visits diagnosis, emergency department (ED) visits and hospitalisations.DesignUsing retrospective cohort study design, we related physician performance on ABIM-IM-MOC diagnostic exam questions to patient outcomes during the 90-day period following an index visit at risk for diagnostic error after controlling for practice characteristics, patient sociodemographic and baseline clinical characteristics.ResultsRates of 90-day adverse outcomes per 1000 index visits were 7 for death, 11 for hospitalisations and 14 for ED visits. Being seen by a physician in the top versus bottom third of diagnostic knowledge during an index visit for a new problem at risk for diagnostic error was associated with 2.9 fewer all-cause deaths (95% CI −5.0 to −0.7, p=0.008), 4.1 fewer hospitalisations (95% CI −6.9 to −1.2, p=0.006) and 4.9 fewer ED visits (95% CI −8.1% to −1.6%, p=0.003) per 1000 visits.ConclusionHigher diagnostic knowledge was associated with lower risk of adverse outcomes after visits for problems at heightened risk for diagnostic error.

Download Full-text

Does emergency department use and post-visit physician care cluster geographically and temporally for adolescents who self-harm? A population-based 9-year retrospective cohort study from Alberta, Canada

BMC Psychiatry ◽

10.1186/s12888-016-0941-3 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 16 (1) ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Rhonda J. Rosychuk ◽

David W. Johnson ◽

Liana Urichuk ◽

Kathryn Dong ◽

Amanda S. Newton

Keyword(s):

Emergency Department ◽

Cohort Study ◽

Retrospective Cohort Study ◽

Retrospective Cohort ◽

Population Based ◽

Emergency Department Use ◽

Physician Care ◽

Self Harm

Download Full-text

Does Emergency Department Use for Alcohol and Other Drug Use Cluster Geographically? A Population-Based Retrospective Cohort Study

Substance Use & Misuse ◽

10.3109/10826084.2016.1160122 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 51 (9) ◽

pp. 1239-1244 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Amanda S. Newton ◽

Kassi Shave ◽

Rhonda J. Rosychuk

Keyword(s):

Emergency Department ◽

Cohort Study ◽

Drug Use ◽

Retrospective Cohort Study ◽

Retrospective Cohort ◽

Population Based ◽

Emergency Department Use

Download Full-text

Comparing primary care Interprofessional and non-interprofessional teams on access to care and health services utilization in Ontario, Canada: a retrospective cohort study

BMC Health Services Research ◽

10.1186/s12913-021-06595-x ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 21 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Wissam Haj-Ali ◽

Brian Hutchison ◽

Rahim Moineddin ◽

Walter P. Wodchis ◽

Richard H. Glazier

Keyword(s):

Primary Care ◽

Emergency Department ◽

Access To Care ◽

Retrospective Cohort ◽

Emergency Department Use ◽

Services Utilization ◽

Interprofessional Teams ◽

Primary Care Teams ◽

Patient Reported ◽

After Hours

Abstract Background Many countries, including Canada, have introduced primary care reforms to improve health system functioning and value. The purpose of this study was to examine the association between receiving care from interprofessional primary care teams and after-hours access to care, patient-reported walk-in clinic visits and emergency department use. Methods We conducted a retrospective cohort study linking population-based administrative databases to Ontario’s Health Care Experience Survey (HCES) between 2012 and 2018. We adjusted for physician group characteristics as well as individual physician and patient characteristics while assessing the relationship between receiving care from interprofessional teams and the outcomes of interest. Results As of March 31st, 2015, there were 465 physician groups with HCES respondents of which 177 (38.0%) were interprofessional teams and 288 (62.0%) were non-interprofessional teams in the same blended capitation reimbursement model. In this period, there were 4518 physicians with HCES respondents, of whom 2131 (47.2%) were in interprofessional teams and 2387 (52.8%) were in non-interprofessional teams. There were 10,102 HCES respondents included in this study, of whom 42.4% were in interprofessional teams and 42.3% were in non-interprofessional teams. After adjustment, we found that being in an interprofessional team was associated with an increase in the odds of patients reporting same/next day access to care by 12.0% (OR = 1.12 CI = 1.00 to 1.24 p-value 0.0436) and a decrease in the odds of patients reporting walk-in clinic use by 16% (OR = 0.84 CI = 0.75 to 0.94 p-value 0.0019). After adjustment, there were no significant differences in patient-reported after-hours access to care and emergency department use. Conclusions Ontario has invested heavily in interprofessional primary care teams. As compared to patients in non-interprofessional teams, patients in interprofessional teams self-reported more timely access to care and less walk-in clinic use but no significant difference in self-reported access to after-hours care or in emergency department use. For jurisdictions aiming to expand physician voluntary participation in interprofessional teams, our study results inform expectations around access to care and health services utilization.

Download Full-text

A Retrospective Cohort Study of SARS-CoV-2 Infection in Hypertenses Patients in a Primary Care Center

SSRN Electronic Journal ◽

10.2139/ssrn.3605259 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Esther Hernandez Castilla ◽

Lucia Vallejo Serrano ◽

Monica Saenz Ausejo ◽

Beatriz Pax Sanchez ◽

Katharina Ramrath ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Primary Care ◽

Cohort Study ◽

Retrospective Cohort Study ◽

Retrospective Cohort ◽

Care Center ◽

Primary Care Center

Download Full-text

Treatment of chronic noncancer pain in patients on opioid therapy in primary care: A retrospective cohort study

Canadian Pharmacists Journal / Revue des Pharmaciens du Canada ◽

10.1177/1715163519887766 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 153 (1) ◽

pp. 52-58

Author(s):

Arden R. Barry ◽

Chantal E. Chris

Keyword(s):

Primary Care ◽

Cohort Study ◽

Back Pain ◽

Retrospective Cohort Study ◽

Retrospective Cohort ◽

Opioid Therapy ◽

Opioid Agonist ◽

Chronic Noncancer Pain ◽

Opioid Dose ◽

Noncancer Pain

Background: This study sought to characterize the real-world treatment of chronic noncancer pain (CNCP) in patients on opioid therapy in primary care. Methods: A retrospective cohort study from 2014-18 was conducted at a multidisciplinary primary care clinic in Chilliwack, British Columbia. Included were adults on daily opioid therapy for CNCP. Patients receiving palliative care or ≤1 visit were excluded. Outcomes of interest included use of opioid/nonopioid pharmacotherapy, number/frequency of visits and proportion of patients able to reduce/discontinue opioid therapy. Results: Seventy patients (mean age 53 years, 53% male, 51% back pain) were included. Median follow-up was 6 visits over 12 months. Sixty-two patients (89%) reduced their opioid dose, 6 patients had no change and 2 patients required a dose increase. Mean opioid dose was reduced from 183 to 70 mg morphine equivalents daily. Twenty-four patients (34%) discontinued opioid therapy, 6 patients (9%) transitioned to opioid agonist therapy and 6 patients (9%) breached their opioid treatment agreement. Nonopioid pharmacotherapy included nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (64%), gabapentinoids (63%), tricyclic antidepressants (56%) and nabilone (51%). Discussion: Over half of patients were no longer on opioid therapy by the end of the study. Most patients had a disorder (e.g., back pain) for which opioids are generally not recommended. Overall mean opioid dose was reduced from baseline by approximately 60% over 1 year. Lack of access to specialized pain treatments may have accounted for high nonopioid pharmacotherapy usage. Conclusions: This study demonstrates that treatment of CNCP and opioid tapering can successfully be achieved in a primary care setting. Can Pharm J (Ott) 2020;153:xx-xx.

Download Full-text