4
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Characteristics of Americans With Primary Care and Changes Over Time, 2002-2015

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          <p class="first" id="d556469e262">This survey study assesses who has primary care in the United States and how this has changed over time. </p>

          Related collections

          Most cited references5

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Association of Primary Care Physician Supply With Population Mortality in the United States, 2005-2015

          Recent US health care reforms incentivize improved population health outcomes and primary care functions. It remains unclear how much improving primary care physician supply can improve population health, independent of other health care and socioeconomic factors.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Quality and Experience of Outpatient Care in the United States for Adults With or Without Primary Care

            How do the quality and experience of outpatient care differ between adults with or without an endorsed source of primary care? In this nationally representative survey study of 49 286 adults with and 21 133 adults without primary care, Americans with primary care received significantly more high-value care (4 of 5 composites), received slightly more low-value care (3 of 4 composites), and reported significantly better health care access and experience. These differences were stable from 2002 to 2014. Policymakers and health system leaders seeking to improve value should consider increasing investment in primary care. The US health care system is typically organized around hospitals and specialty care. The value of primary care remains unclear and debated. To determine whether an association exists between receipt of primary care and high-value services, low-value services, and patient experience. This is a nationally representative analysis of noninstitutionalized US adults 18 years or older who participated in the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey. Propensity score–weighted quality and experience of care were compared between 49 286 US adults with and 21 133 adults without primary care from 2012 to 2014. Temporal trends were also analyzed from 2002 to 2014. Patient-reported receipt of primary care, determined by the 4 “Cs” of primary care: first-contact care that is comprehensive, continuous, and coordinated. Thirty-nine clinical quality measures and 7 patient experience measures aggregated into 10 clinical quality composites (6 high-value and 4 low-value services), an overall patient experience rating, and 2 experience composites. From 2002 to 2014, the mean annual survey response rate was 58% (range, 49%-65%). Between 2012 and 2014, compared with respondents without primary care (before adjustment), those with primary care were older (50 [95% CI, 50-51] vs 38 [95% CI, 38-39] years old), more often female (55% [95% CI, 54%-55%] vs 42% [95% CI, 41%-43%]), and predominately white individuals (50% [95% CI, 49%-52%] vs 43% [95% CI, 41%-45%]). After propensity score weighting, US adults with or without primary care had the same mean numbers of outpatient (6.7 vs 5.9; difference, 0.8 [95% CI, −0.2 to 1.8]; P  = .11), emergency department (0.2 for both; difference, 0.0 [95% CI, −0.1 to 0.0]; P  = .17), and inpatient (0.1 for both; difference, 0.0 [95% CI, 0.0-0.0]; P  = .92) encounters annually, but those with primary care filled more prescriptions (mean, 14.1 vs 10.7; difference, 3.4 [95% CI, 2.0-4.7]; P  < .001) and were more likely to have a routine preventive visit in the past year (mean, 72.2% vs 57.5%; difference, 14.7% [95% CI, 12.3%-17.1%]; P  < .001). From 2012 to 2014, Americans with primary care received more high-value care in 4 of 5 composites. For example, 78% of those with primary care received high-value cancer screening compared with 67% without primary care (difference, 10.8% [95% CI, 8.5%-13.0%]; P  < .001). Americans with or without primary care received low-value care with similar frequencies on 3 of 4 composites, although Americans with primary care received more low-value antibiotics (59% vs 48%; difference, 11.0% [95% CI, 2.8%-19.3%] P  < .001). Respondents with primary care also reported significantly better health care access and experience. For example, physician communication was highly rated for a greater proportion of those with (64%) vs without (54%) primary care (difference, 10.2%; 95% CI, 7.2%-13.1%; P  < .001). Differences in quality and experience between Americans with or without primary care were essentially stable between 2002 and 2014. Receipt of primary care was associated with significantly more high-value care, slightly more low-value care, and better health care experience. Policymakers and health system leaders seeking to improve value should consider increasing investments in primary care. This national survey study uses Medical Expenditure Panel Survey data collected from a large sample of noninstitutionalized US adults to assess whether an association exists between receipt of primary care and high- or low-value services or patient experience.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              The convenience revolution for treatment of low-acuity conditions.

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                JAMA Internal Medicine
                JAMA Intern Med
                American Medical Association (AMA)
                2168-6106
                December 16 2019
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Division of General Internal Medicine and Primary Care, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
                [2 ]Harvard Medical School, Harvard University, Boston, Massachusetts
                [3 ]Division of General Internal Medicine and Geriatrics, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois
                [4 ]Department of Health Care Policy, Harvard Medical School, Harvard University, Boston, Massachusetts
                [5 ]Division of General Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts
                Article
                10.1001/jamainternmed.2019.6282
                6990950
                31841583
                5b85ec9f-7dbf-4ddd-ab15-8709a108cb9b
                © 2019
                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article