BACKGROUND: Valid measurement of physician performance requires accurate identification of patients for whom a physician is responsible. Among all patients seen by a physician, some will be more strongly connected to their physician than others, but the effect of connectedness on measures of physician performance is not known. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether patient-physician connectedness affects measures of clinical performance. DESIGN: Population-based cohort study. SETTING: Academic network of 4 community health centers and 9 hospital-affiliated primary care practices. PATIENTS: 155 590 adults with 1 or more visits to a study practice from 2003 to 2005. MEASUREMENTS: A validated algorithm was used to connect patients to either 1 of 181 physicians or 1 of 13 practices in which they received most of their care. Performance measures included breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening in eligible patients; hemoglobin A(1c) measurement and control in patients with diabetes; and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol measurement and control in patients with diabetes and coronary artery disease. RESULTS: Overall, 92 315 patients (59.3%) were connected to a specific physician, whereas 53 669 patients (34.5%) were connected only to a specific practice and 9606 patients (6.2%) could not be connected to a physician or practice. The proportion of patients in a practice who could be connected to a physician varied markedly (45.6% to 71.2% of patients per practice; P < 0.001). Physician-connected patients were significantly more likely than practice-connected patients to receive guideline-consistent care (for example, adjusted mammography rates were 78.1% vs. 65.9% [P < 0.001] and adjusted hemoglobin A(1c) rates were 90.3% vs. 74.9% [P < 0.001]). Receipt of preventive care varied more by whether patients were more or less connected to a physician than by race or ethnicity. LIMITATION: Patient-physician connectedness was assessed in 1 primary care network. CONCLUSION: Patients seen in primary care practices seem to be variably connected with a specific physician, and less connected patients are less likely to receive guideline-consistent care. FUNDING: National Cancer Institute.
BACKGROUND: Valid measurement of physician performance requires accurate identification of patients for whom a physician is responsible. Among all patients seen by a physician, some will be more strongly connected to their physician than others, but the effect of connectedness on measures of physician performance is not known. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether patient-physician connectedness affects measures of clinical performance. DESIGN: Population-based cohort study. SETTING: Academic network of 4 community health centers and 9 hospital-affiliated primary care practices. PATIENTS: 155 590 adults with 1 or more visits to a study practice from 2003 to 2005. MEASUREMENTS: A validated algorithm was used to connect patients to either 1 of 181 physicians or 1 of 13 practices in which they received most of their care. Performance measures included breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening in eligible patients; hemoglobin A(1c) measurement and control in patients with diabetes; and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol measurement and control in patients with diabetes and coronary artery disease. RESULTS: Overall, 92 315 patients (59.3%) were connected to a specific physician, whereas 53 669 patients (34.5%) were connected only to a specific practice and 9606 patients (6.2%) could not be connected to a physician or practice. The proportion of patients in a practice who could be connected to a physician varied markedly (45.6% to 71.2% of patients per practice; P < 0.001). Physician-connected patients were significantly more likely than practice-connected patients to receive guideline-consistent care (for example, adjusted mammography rates were 78.1% vs. 65.9% [P < 0.001] and adjusted hemoglobin A(1c) rates were 90.3% vs. 74.9% [P < 0.001]). Receipt of preventive care varied more by whether patients were more or less connected to a physician than by race or ethnicity. LIMITATION: Patient-physician connectedness was assessed in 1 primary care network. CONCLUSION: Patients seen in primary care practices seem to be variably connected with a specific physician, and less connected patients are less likely to receive guideline-consistent care. FUNDING: National Cancer Institute.
Authors: Tim Doran; Catherine Fullwood; Hugh Gravelle; David Reeves; Evangelos Kontopantelis; Urara Hiroeh; Martin Roland Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2006-07-27 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Denis Pereira Gray; Philip Evans; Kieran Sweeney; Pamela Lings; David Seamark; Clare Seamark; Michael Dixon; Nicholas Bradley Journal: J R Soc Med Date: 2003-04 Impact factor: 18.000
Authors: Simone Dahrouge; William Hogg; Jaime Younger; Elizabeth Muggah; Grant Russell; Richard H Glazier Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2016 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 5.166
Authors: Utibe R Essien; Wei He; Alaka Ray; Yuchiao Chang; Jonathan R Abraham; Daniel E Singer; Steven J Atlas Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2019-04-08 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Aisha James; Seth A Berkowitz; Jeffrey M Ashburner; Yuchiao Chang; Daniel M Horn; Sandra M O'Keefe; Steven J Atlas Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2018-01-08 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Steven J Atlas; Richard W Grant; William T Lester; Jeffrey M Ashburner; Yuchiao Chang; Michael J Barry; Henry C Chueh Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2010-09-15 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Fredric D Wolinsky; Suzanne E Bentler; Li Liu; John F Geweke; Elizabeth A Cook; Maksym Obrizan; Elizabeth A Chrischilles; Kara B Wright; Michael P Jones; Gary E Rosenthal; Robert L Ohsfeldt; Robert B Wallace Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2009-12-08 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: Ann S O'Malley; Eugene C Rich; Alyssa Maccarone; Catherine M DesRoches; Robert J Reid Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2015-08 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Jennifer E DeVoe; Terri Nordin; Kristen Kelly; Marguerite Duane; Sarah Lesko; Saria Carter Saccocio; Lenard I Lesser Journal: J Am Board Fam Med Date: 2011 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 2.657