BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The Patient-centered Medical Home (PCMH) is a central concept in the evolving debate about American health care reform. We studied family medicine residency training programs' continuity clinics to assess baseline status of implementing PCMH components and to compare implementation status between community-based and university training programs. METHODS: We conducted a survey 24 continuity clinics in 14 residency programs that are part of the Preparing the Personal Physicians for Practice (P(4)) program. We asked questions about aspects of P(4) that had been already implemented at the beginning of the P(4) program. We defined high implementation as aspects that were present in >50% of clinics and low implementation as those present in <50% of clinics. We compared features at university-based and community-based clinics. RESULTS: High areas of implementation were having an electronic health record (EHR), fully secured remote access, electronic patient notes/scheduling/billing, chronic disease management registries, and open-access scheduling. Low areas of implementation included hospital EHR with computerized physician order entry, asynchronous communication with patients, ongoing population-based QA using EHR, use of preventive registries, and practice-based research using EHR. Few differences were noted between university- and community-based residency programs. CONCLUSIONS: Many features of the PCMH were already established at baseline in programs participating in P(4).
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The Patient-centered Medical Home (PCMH) is a central concept in the evolving debate about American health care reform. We studied family medicine residency training programs' continuity clinics to assess baseline status of implementing PCMH components and to compare implementation status between community-based and university training programs. METHODS: We conducted a survey 24 continuity clinics in 14 residency programs that are part of the Preparing the Personal Physicians for Practice (P(4)) program. We asked questions about aspects of P(4) that had been already implemented at the beginning of the P(4) program. We defined high implementation as aspects that were present in >50% of clinics and low implementation as those present in <50% of clinics. We compared features at university-based and community-based clinics. RESULTS: High areas of implementation were having an electronic health record (EHR), fully secured remote access, electronic patient notes/scheduling/billing, chronic disease management registries, and open-access scheduling. Low areas of implementation included hospital EHR with computerized physician order entry, asynchronous communication with patients, ongoing population-based QA using EHR, use of preventive registries, and practice-based research using EHR. Few differences were noted between university- and community-based residency programs. CONCLUSIONS: Many features of the PCMH were already established at baseline in programs participating in P(4).
Authors: Benjamin F Crabtree; Paul A Nutting; William L Miller; Kurt C Stange; Elizabeth E Stewart; Carlos Roberto Jaén Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2010 Impact factor: 5.166
Authors: John W Saultz; Peggy O'Neill; James M Gill; Frances E Biagioli; Shawn Blanchard; Jean P O'Malley; David Brown; John C Rogers; Patricia A Carney Journal: Acad Med Date: 2010-06 Impact factor: 6.893
Authors: John M Westfall; Linda Zittleman; Marc Ringel; Christin Sutter; Kelly McCaffrey; Susan Gale; Tony Gerk; Sergio Sanchez; William LeBlanc; L Miriam Dickinson; Perry Dickinson Journal: London J Prim Care (Abingdon) Date: 2014
Authors: Fadya El Rayess; Roberta Goldman; Christopher Furey; Rabin Chandran; Arnold R Goldberg; Gowri Anandarajah Journal: J Grad Med Educ Date: 2015-12
Authors: Erin R Giovannetti; Sydney Dy; Bruce Leff; Christine Weston; Karen Adams; Tom B Valuck; Aisha T Pittman; Caroline S Blaum; Barbara A McCann; Cynthia M Boyd Journal: Am J Manag Care Date: 2013-10-01 Impact factor: 2.229