Roberta E Goldman1, Donna R Parker2, Joanna Brown2, Judith Walker2, Charles B Eaton2, Jeffrey M Borkan2. 1. Department of Family Medicine, The Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island Roberta_Goldman@brown.edu. 2. Department of Family Medicine, The Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island.
Abstract
PURPOSE: There is a strong push in the United States to evaluate whether the patient-centered medical home (PCMH) model produces desired results. The explanatory and contextually based questions of how and why PCMH succeeds in different practice settings are often neglected. We report the development of a comprehensive, mixed qualitative-quantitative evaluation set for researchers, policy makers, and clinician groups. METHODS: To develop an evaluation set, the Brown Primary Care Transformation Initiative convened a multidisciplinary group of PCMH experts, reviewed the PCMH literature and evaluation strategies, developed key domains for evaluation, and selected or created methods and measures for inclusion. RESULTS: The measures and methods in the evaluation set (survey instruments, PCMH meta-measures, patient outcomes, quality measures, qualitative interviews, participant observation, and process evaluation) are meant to be used together. PCMH evaluation must be sufficiently comprehensive to assess and explain both the context of transformation in different primary care practices and the experiences of diverse stakeholders. In addition to commonly assessed patient outcomes, quality, and cost, it is critical to include PCMH components integral to practice culture transformation: patient and family centeredness, authentic patient activation, mutual trust among practice employees and patients, and transparency, joy, and collaboration in delivering and receiving care in a changing environment. CONCLUSIONS: This evaluation set offers a comprehensive methodology to enable understanding of how PCMH transformation occurs in different practice settings. This approach can foster insights about how transformation affects critical outcomes to achieve meaningful, patient-centered, high-quality, and cost-effective sustainable change among diverse primary care practices.
PURPOSE: There is a strong push in the United States to evaluate whether the patient-centered medical home (PCMH) model produces desired results. The explanatory and contextually based questions of how and why PCMH succeeds in different practice settings are often neglected. We report the development of a comprehensive, mixed qualitative-quantitative evaluation set for researchers, policy makers, and clinician groups. METHODS: To develop an evaluation set, the Brown Primary Care Transformation Initiative convened a multidisciplinary group of PCMH experts, reviewed the PCMH literature and evaluation strategies, developed key domains for evaluation, and selected or created methods and measures for inclusion. RESULTS: The measures and methods in the evaluation set (survey instruments, PCMH meta-measures, patient outcomes, quality measures, qualitative interviews, participant observation, and process evaluation) are meant to be used together. PCMH evaluation must be sufficiently comprehensive to assess and explain both the context of transformation in different primary care practices and the experiences of diverse stakeholders. In addition to commonly assessed patient outcomes, quality, and cost, it is critical to include PCMH components integral to practice culture transformation: patient and family centeredness, authentic patient activation, mutual trust among practice employees and patients, and transparency, joy, and collaboration in delivering and receiving care in a changing environment. CONCLUSIONS: This evaluation set offers a comprehensive methodology to enable understanding of how PCMH transformation occurs in different practice settings. This approach can foster insights about how transformation affects critical outcomes to achieve meaningful, patient-centered, high-quality, and cost-effective sustainable change among diverse primary care practices.
Authors: Edward H Wagner; Katie Coleman; Robert J Reid; Kathryn Phillips; Melinda K Abrams; Jonathan R Sugarman Journal: Prim Care Date: 2012-04-24 Impact factor: 2.907
Authors: Debra L Scammon; Andrada Tomoaia-Cotisel; Rachel L Day; Julie Day; Jaewhan Kim; Norman J Waitzman; Timothy W Farrell; Michael K Magill Journal: Health Serv Res Date: 2013-11-01 Impact factor: 3.402
Authors: Christine A Sinsky; Rachel Willard-Grace; Andrew M Schutzbank; Thomas A Sinsky; David Margolius; Thomas Bodenheimer Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2013 May-Jun Impact factor: 5.166
Authors: Andrada Tomoaia-Cotisel; Debra L Scammon; Norman J Waitzman; Peter F Cronholm; Jacqueline R Halladay; David L Driscoll; Leif I Solberg; Clarissa Hsu; Ming Tai-Seale; Vanessa Hiratsuka; Sarah C Shih; Michael D Fetters; Christopher G Wise; Jeffrey A Alexander; Diane Hauser; Carmit K McMullen; Sarah Hudson Scholle; Manasi A Tirodkar; Laura Schmidt; Katrina E Donahue; Michael L Parchman; Kurt C Stange Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2013 May-Jun Impact factor: 5.166
Authors: Asaf Bitton; Gregory R Schwartz; Elizabeth E Stewart; Daniel E Henderson; Carol A Keohane; David W Bates; Gordon D Schiff Journal: Milbank Q Date: 2012-09 Impact factor: 4.911
Authors: Deborah Peikes; Aparajita Zutshi; Janice L Genevro; Michael L Parchman; David S Meyers Journal: Am J Manag Care Date: 2012-02 Impact factor: 2.229
Authors: David E Gerber; Torsten Reimer; Erin L Williams; Mary Gill; Laurin Loudat Priddy; Deidi Bergestuen; Joan H Schiller; Haskell Kirkpatrick; Simon J Craddock Lee Journal: J Oncol Pract Date: 2016-09-30 Impact factor: 3.840
Authors: Cecilie Røe; Erik Bautz-Holter; Nada Andelic; Helene Lundgaard Søberg; Boya Nugraha; Christoph Gutenbrunner; Andrea Boekel; Marit Kirkevold; Grace Engen; Juan Lu Journal: Arch Rehabil Res Clin Transl Date: 2022-04-13
Authors: Roberta E Goldman; Joanna Brown; Patricia Stebbins; Donna R Parker; Victoria Adewale; Renee Shield; Mary B Roberts; Charles B Eaton; Jeffrey M Borkan Journal: SAGE Open Med Date: 2018-06-18
Authors: Lauren E Ball; Katelyn A Barnes; Lisa Crossland; Caroline Nicholson; Claire Jackson Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2018-11-19 Impact factor: 2.655