Exemplary Practices in Cardiovascular Care: Results on Clinical Quality Measures from the EvidenceNOW Southwest Cooperative

3Citations
Citations of this article
48Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: Identifying characteristics of primary care practices that perform well on cardiovascular clinical quality measures (CQMs) may point to important practice improvement strategies. Objective: To identify practice characteristics associated with high performance on four cardiovascular disease CQMs. Design: Longitudinal cohort study among 211 primary care practices in Colorado and New Mexico. Quarterly CQM reports were obtained from 178 (84.4%) practices. There was 100% response rate for baseline practice characteristics and implementation tracking surveys. Follow-up implementation tracking surveys were completed for 80.6% of practices. Participants: Adult patients, staff, and clinicians in family medicine, general internal medicine, and mixed-specialty practices. Intervention: Practices received 9 months of practice facilitation and health information technology support, plus biannual collaborative learning sessions. Main Measures: This study identified practice characteristics associated with overall highest performance using area under the curve (AUC) analysis on aspirin therapy, blood pressure management, and smoking cessation CQMs. Results: Among 178 practices, 39 were exemplars. Exemplars were more likely to be a Federally Qualified Health Center (69.2% vs 35.3%, p = 0.0006), have an underserved designation (69.2% vs 45.3%, p = 0.0083), and have higher percentage of patients with Medicaid (p < 0.0001). Exemplars reported greater use of cardiovascular disease registries (61.5% vs 29.5%,), standing orders (38.5 vs 22.3%) or electronic health record prompts (84.6% vs 49.6%) (all p < 0.05), were more likely to have medical home recognition (74.4% vs 43.2%, p = 0.0006), and reported greater implementation of building blocks of high-performing primary care: regular quality improvement team meetings (3.0 vs 2.2), patient experience survey (3.1 vs 2.2), and resources for patients to manage their health (3.0 vs 2.3). High improvers (n = 45) showed greater improvement implementing team-based care (32.8 vs 11.7, p = 0.0004) and population management (37.4 vs 20.5, p = 0.0057). Conclusions: Multiple strategies—registries, prompts and protocols, patient self-management support, and patient-team partnership activities—were associated with delivering high-quality cardiovascular care over time, measured by CQMs. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT02515578.

References Powered by Scopus

Efficacy and safety of more intensive lowering of LDL cholesterol: A meta-analysis of data from 170 000 participants in 26 randomised trials

5494Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

AHA/ACCF secondary prevention and risk reduction therapy for patients with coronary and other atherosclerotic vascular disease: 2011 update: A guideline from the American Heart Association and American College of Cardiology Foundation

1343Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Effects of intensive blood pressure lowering on cardiovascular and renal outcomes: Updated systematic review and meta-analysis

827Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Effects of consumers and health providers working in partnership on health services planning, delivery and evaluation

16Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Association of Clinician Practice Ownership with Ability of Primary Care Practices to Improve Quality Without Increasing Burnout

7Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Fernald, D. H., Mullen, R., Hall, T., Bienstock, A., Kirchner, S., Knierim, K., … Dickinson, W. P. (2020). Exemplary Practices in Cardiovascular Care: Results on Clinical Quality Measures from the EvidenceNOW Southwest Cooperative. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 35(11), 3197–3204. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-020-06094-5

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 10

67%

Researcher 3

20%

Lecturer / Post doc 2

13%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceut... 4

31%

Nursing and Health Professions 4

31%

Medicine and Dentistry 3

23%

Psychology 2

15%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free