Visith Uy1, Suepattra G May, Caroline Tietbohl, Dominick L Frosch. 1. Staff Research Assistant II, Department of Medicine, Division of General Internal Medicine and Health Services Research, University of California Los Angeles (UCLA), Los Angeles, CAAssistant Research AnthropologistResearch AssistantAssociate Investigator, Palo Alto Medical Foundation Research Institute, Palo Alto, CAAssociate Professor of Medicine, Department of Medicine, Division of General Internal Medicine and Health Services Research, University of California Los Angeles (UCLA), Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A growing body of literature documents the value of decision support interventions (DESIs) in facilitating patient participation in preference sensitive decision making, but little is known about their implementation in routine care. OBJECTIVE: This study explored barriers and facilitators to prescribing DESIs in primary care. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Four community-based primary care practices across Los Angeles County serving diverse low and middle income populations participated. DESIGN: The first phase focused on implementing DESI prescribing into routine care. Weekly academic detailing visits served to identify barriers to DESI prescribing, generate ethnographic field notes and record DESI prescriptions. The second phase explored the impact of a financial incentive on DESI prescribing. At the project's conclusion, each physician completed an in-depth interview. RESULTS: The four practices prescribed an average of 6.5 DESIs a month (range 3.6-9.2) during Phase I. The financial incentive increased DESI prescribing by 71% to 11.1 per month (range 3.5-21.4). The estimated percentages of patients who viewed the DESI were 37.9 and 43.9% during Phases I and II, respectively. Qualitative data suggest that physician buy-in with the project goal was crucial to DESI distribution success. Competing demands and time pressures were persistent barriers. The effects of the financial incentive were mixed. CONCLUSIONS: This study confirmed the importance of physician engagement when implementing DESIs and found mixed effects for providing financial incentives. The relatively low rate of DESI viewing suggests further research on increasing patient uptake of these interventions in routine practice is necessary.
BACKGROUND: A growing body of literature documents the value of decision support interventions (DESIs) in facilitating patient participation in preference sensitive decision making, but little is known about their implementation in routine care. OBJECTIVE: This study explored barriers and facilitators to prescribing DESIs in primary care. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Four community-based primary care practices across Los Angeles County serving diverse low and middle income populations participated. DESIGN: The first phase focused on implementing DESI prescribing into routine care. Weekly academic detailing visits served to identify barriers to DESI prescribing, generate ethnographic field notes and record DESI prescriptions. The second phase explored the impact of a financial incentive on DESI prescribing. At the project's conclusion, each physician completed an in-depth interview. RESULTS: The four practices prescribed an average of 6.5 DESIs a month (range 3.6-9.2) during Phase I. The financial incentive increased DESI prescribing by 71% to 11.1 per month (range 3.5-21.4). The estimated percentages of patients who viewed the DESI were 37.9 and 43.9% during Phases I and II, respectively. Qualitative data suggest that physician buy-in with the project goal was crucial to DESI distribution success. Competing demands and time pressures were persistent barriers. The effects of the financial incentive were mixed. CONCLUSIONS: This study confirmed the importance of physician engagement when implementing DESIs and found mixed effects for providing financial incentives. The relatively low rate of DESI viewing suggests further research on increasing patient uptake of these interventions in routine practice is necessary.
Authors: Margaret Holmes-Rovner; Diane Valade; Catherine Orlowski; Catherine Draus; Barbara Nabozny-Valerio; Susan Keiser Journal: Health Expect Date: 2000-09 Impact factor: 3.377
Authors: Annette M O'Connor; John E Wennberg; France Legare; Hilary A Llewellyn-Thomas; Benjamin W Moulton; Karen R Sepucha; Andrea G Sodano; Jaime S King Journal: Health Aff (Millwood) Date: 2007 May-Jun Impact factor: 6.301
Authors: Ian D Graham; Jo Logan; Carol L Bennett; Justin Presseau; Annette M O'Connor; Susan L Mitchell; Jacqueline M Tetroe; Ann Cranney; Paul Hebert; Shawn D Aaron Journal: BMC Med Inform Decis Mak Date: 2007-07-06 Impact factor: 2.796
Authors: Qian Yang; John Zimmerman; Aaron Steinfeld; Lisa Carey; James F Antaki Journal: ACM Trans Comput Hum Interact Date: 2016-05 Impact factor: 2.351
Authors: David E Sandberg; Melissa Gardner; Kristin Kopec; Megan Urbanski; Nina Callens; Catherine E Keegan; Beverly M Yashar; Patricia Y Fechner; Margarett Shnorhavorian; Eric Vilain; Stefan Timmermans; Laura A Siminoff Journal: Semin Pediatr Surg Date: 2019-09-13 Impact factor: 2.754
Authors: Lisa S Callegari; Karin M Nelson; David E Arterburn; Christine Dehlendorf; Sara L Magnusson; Samantha K Benson; E Bimla Schwarz; Sonya Borrero Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2021-02-04 Impact factor: 6.473
Authors: Jeff Belkora; Shelley Volz; Meredith Loth; Alexandra Teng; Margot Zarin-Pass; Dan Moore; Laura Esserman Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2015-05-28 Impact factor: 2.655
Authors: Ingrid Nota; Constance H C Drossaert; Erik Taal; Harald E Vonkeman; Cees J Haagsma; Mart A F J van de Laar Journal: Arthritis Res Ther Date: 2016-10-28 Impact factor: 5.156
Authors: Glyn Elwyn; Isabelle Scholl; Caroline Tietbohl; Mala Mann; Adrian G K Edwards; Catharine Clay; France Légaré; Trudy van der Weijden; Carmen L Lewis; Richard M Wexler; Dominick L Frosch Journal: BMC Med Inform Decis Mak Date: 2013-11-29 Impact factor: 2.796
Authors: Anik M C Giguere; Michel Labrecque; R Brian Haynes; Roland Grad; Pierre Pluye; France Légaré; Michel Cauchon; Matthew Greenway; Pierre-Hugues Carmichael Journal: Implement Sci Date: 2014-10-05 Impact factor: 7.327