Hector P Rodriguez1,2, Rachel Mosher Henke3, Salma Bibi4, Patricia P Ramsay4, Stephen M Shortell4,5. 1. Center for Healthcare Organizational and Innovation Research, University of California, Berkeley. hrod@berkeley.edu. 2. Division of Health Policy and Management, UC Berkeley School of Public Health. hrod@berkeley.edu. 3. Truven Health Analytics. 4. Center for Healthcare Organizational and Innovation Research, University of California, Berkeley. 5. Division of Health Policy and Management, UC Berkeley School of Public Health.
Abstract
UNLABELLED: Policy Points The rate of adoption of chronic care management processes (CMPs) by physician organizations has been fairly slow in spite of demonstrated effectiveness of CMPs in improving outcomes of chronic care. Exnovation (ie, removal of innovations) by physician organizations largely explains the slow population-level increases in practice use of CMPs over time. Expanded health information technology functions may aid practices in retaining CMPs. Low provider reimbursement by Medicaid programs, however, may contribute to disinvestment in CMPs by physician organizations. CONTEXT: Exnovation is the process of removal of innovations that are not effective in improving organizational performance, are too disruptive to routine operations, or do not fit well with the existing organizational strategy, incentives, structure, and/or culture. Exnovation may contribute to the low overall adoption of care management processes (CMPs) by US physician organizations over time. METHODS: Three national surveys of US physician organizations, which included common questions about organizational characteristics, use of CMPs, and health information technology (HIT) capabilities for practices of all sizes, and Truven Health Insurance Coverage Estimates were integrated to assess organizational and market influences on the exnovation of CMPs in a longitudinal cohort of 1,048 physician organizations. CMPs included 5 strategies for each of 4 chronic conditions (diabetes, asthma, congestive heart failure, and depression): registry use, nurse care management, patient reminders for preventive and care management services to prevent exacerbations of chronic illness, use of nonphysician clinicians to provide patient education, and quality of care feedback to physicians. FINDINGS: Over one-third (34.1%) of physician organizations exnovated CMPs on net. Quality of care data feedback to physicians and patient reminders for recommended preventive and chronic care were discontinued by over one-third of exnovators, while nurse care management and registries were largely retained. Greater proportions of baseline Medicaid practice revenue (incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 1.44, p < 0.001) and increasing proportions of revenue from Medicaid (IRR = 1.02, p < 0.05) were associated with greater CMP exnovation by physician organizations on net. Practices with greater expansion of HIT functionality exnovated fewer CMPs (IRR = 0.91, p < 0.001) compared to practices with less expansion of HIT functionality. CONCLUSIONS: Exnovation of CMPs is an important reason why the population-level adoption of CMPs by physician organizations has remained low. Expanded HIT functions and changes to Medicaid reimbursement and incentives may aid the retention of CMPs by physician organizations.
UNLABELLED: Policy Points The rate of adoption of chronic care management processes (CMPs) by physician organizations has been fairly slow in spite of demonstrated effectiveness of CMPs in improving outcomes of chronic care. Exnovation (ie, removal of innovations) by physician organizations largely explains the slow population-level increases in practice use of CMPs over time. Expanded health information technology functions may aid practices in retaining CMPs. Low provider reimbursement by Medicaid programs, however, may contribute to disinvestment in CMPs by physician organizations. CONTEXT: Exnovation is the process of removal of innovations that are not effective in improving organizational performance, are too disruptive to routine operations, or do not fit well with the existing organizational strategy, incentives, structure, and/or culture. Exnovation may contribute to the low overall adoption of care management processes (CMPs) by US physician organizations over time. METHODS: Three national surveys of US physician organizations, which included common questions about organizational characteristics, use of CMPs, and health information technology (HIT) capabilities for practices of all sizes, and Truven Health Insurance Coverage Estimates were integrated to assess organizational and market influences on the exnovation of CMPs in a longitudinal cohort of 1,048 physician organizations. CMPs included 5 strategies for each of 4 chronic conditions (diabetes, asthma, congestive heart failure, and depression): registry use, nurse care management, patient reminders for preventive and care management services to prevent exacerbations of chronic illness, use of nonphysician clinicians to provide patient education, and quality of care feedback to physicians. FINDINGS: Over one-third (34.1%) of physician organizations exnovated CMPs on net. Quality of care data feedback to physicians and patient reminders for recommended preventive and chronic care were discontinued by over one-third of exnovators, while nurse care management and registries were largely retained. Greater proportions of baseline Medicaid practice revenue (incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 1.44, p < 0.001) and increasing proportions of revenue from Medicaid (IRR = 1.02, p < 0.05) were associated with greater CMP exnovation by physician organizations on net. Practices with greater expansion of HIT functionality exnovated fewer CMPs (IRR = 0.91, p < 0.001) compared to practices with less expansion of HIT functionality. CONCLUSIONS: Exnovation of CMPs is an important reason why the population-level adoption of CMPs by physician organizations has remained low. Expanded HIT functions and changes to Medicaid reimbursement and incentives may aid the retention of CMPs by physician organizations.
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: Hector P Rodriguez; Sean R McClellan; Salma Bibi; Lawrence P Casalino; Patricia P Ramsay; Stephen M Shortell Journal: Med Care Res Rev Date: 2015-11-16 Impact factor: 3.929
Authors: Sean R McClellan; Lawrence P Casalino; Stephen M Shortell; Diane R Rittenhouse Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2013-02-08 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Diane R Rittenhouse; Lawrence P Casalino; Stephen M Shortell; Sean R McClellan; Robin R Gillies; Jeffrey A Alexander; Melinda L Drum Journal: Health Aff (Millwood) Date: 2011-06-30 Impact factor: 6.301
Authors: John W Williams; Martha Gerrity; Tracey Holsinger; Steve Dobscha; Bradley Gaynes; Allen Dietrich Journal: Gen Hosp Psychiatry Date: 2007 Mar-Apr Impact factor: 3.238
Authors: Lawrence Casalino; Robin R Gillies; Stephen M Shortell; Julie A Schmittdiel; Thomas Bodenheimer; James C Robinson; Thomas Rundall; Nancy Oswald; Helen Schauffler; Margaret C Wang Journal: JAMA Date: 2003 Jan 22-29 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Chris Miller-Rosales; Isomi M Miake-Lye; Amanda L Brewster; Stephen M Shortell; Hector P Rodriguez Journal: Health Serv Res Date: 2022-03-04 Impact factor: 3.734
Authors: Isomi M Miake-Lye; Emmeline Chuang; Hector P Rodriguez; Gerald F Kominski; Elizabeth M Yano; Stephen M Shortell Journal: Implement Sci Date: 2017-08-24 Impact factor: 7.327
Authors: Tannaz Moin; Jessica M Harwood; Carol M Mangione; Nicholas Jackson; Sam Ho; Susan L Ettner; O Kenrik Duru Journal: Med Care Date: 2020-06 Impact factor: 3.178