Erin S Rogers1,2, Allison M Cuthel3, Carolyn A Berry3, Sue A Kaplan3, Donna R Shelley3. 1. New York University School of Medicine, Department of Population Health, New York, New York Erin.Rogers@nyulangone.org. 2. VA NY Harbor Healthcare System, New York, New York. 3. New York University School of Medicine, Department of Population Health, New York, New York.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Small independent primary care practices (SIPs) often lack the resources to implement system changes. HealthyHearts NYC, funded through the EvidenceNOW initiative of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, studied the effectiveness of practice facilitation to improve cardiovascular disease- related care in 257 SIPs. We sought to understand SIP clinicians' perspectives on the benefits of practice facilitation. METHODS: We conducted in-depth interviews with 19 SIP clinicians enrolled in HealthyHearts NYC. Interviews were transcribed and coded using deductive and inductive approaches. To understand whether the perceived benefits of practice facilitation differ based on the availability of internal staff for quality improvement (QI), we compared themes pertaining to benefits between practices with 3 or fewer office staff vs more than 3 office staff. RESULTS: Clinicians perceived 2 main benefits of practice facilitation. First, facilitators served as a connection to the external health care environment for SIPs, often through teaching and information sharing. Second, facilitators provided electronic health record (EHR)/data expertise, often by teaching functionality and completing technical assistance and tasks. SIPs with more than 3 office staff felt that facilitators provided benefits primarily through teaching, whereas SIPs with 3 or fewer staff felt that facilitators also provided hands-on support. At the intersections of these benefits, there emerged 3 central practice facilitation benefits: (1) creating awareness of quality gaps, (2) connecting practices to information, resources, and strategies, and (3) optimizing the EHR for QI goals. CONCLUSIONS: SIP clinicians perceived practice facilitation to be an important resource for connecting their practice to the external health care environment and resources, and helping their practice build QI capacity through teaching, hands-on support, and EHR-driven solutions.
PURPOSE: Small independent primary care practices (SIPs) often lack the resources to implement system changes. HealthyHearts NYC, funded through the EvidenceNOW initiative of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, studied the effectiveness of practice facilitation to improve cardiovascular disease- related care in 257 SIPs. We sought to understand SIP clinicians' perspectives on the benefits of practice facilitation. METHODS: We conducted in-depth interviews with 19 SIP clinicians enrolled in HealthyHearts NYC. Interviews were transcribed and coded using deductive and inductive approaches. To understand whether the perceived benefits of practice facilitation differ based on the availability of internal staff for quality improvement (QI), we compared themes pertaining to benefits between practices with 3 or fewer office staff vs more than 3 office staff. RESULTS: Clinicians perceived 2 main benefits of practice facilitation. First, facilitators served as a connection to the external health care environment for SIPs, often through teaching and information sharing. Second, facilitators provided electronic health record (EHR)/data expertise, often by teaching functionality and completing technical assistance and tasks. SIPs with more than 3 office staff felt that facilitators provided benefits primarily through teaching, whereas SIPs with 3 or fewer staff felt that facilitators also provided hands-on support. At the intersections of these benefits, there emerged 3 central practice facilitation benefits: (1) creating awareness of quality gaps, (2) connecting practices to information, resources, and strategies, and (3) optimizing the EHR for QI goals. CONCLUSIONS: SIP clinicians perceived practice facilitation to be an important resource for connecting their practice to the external health care environment and resources, and helping their practice build QI capacity through teaching, hands-on support, and EHR-driven solutions.
Keywords:
health information technology; organizational change; physician perspective; practice facilitation; practice transformation; practice-based research; primary care; professional practice; qualitative research; small independent primary care practices
Authors: Laura J Damschroder; David C Aron; Rosalind E Keith; Susan R Kirsh; Jeffery A Alexander; Julie C Lowery Journal: Implement Sci Date: 2009-08-07 Impact factor: 7.327
Authors: Donna R Shelley; Gbenga Ogedegbe; Sheila Anane; Winfred Y Wu; Keith Goldfeld; Heather T Gold; Sue Kaplan; Carolyn Berry Journal: Implement Sci Date: 2016-07-04 Impact factor: 7.327
Authors: Robert L Phillips; Deborah J Cohen; Arthur Kaufman; W Perry Dickinson; Samuel Cykert Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2019-08-12 Impact factor: 5.166
Authors: Nadia Islam; Erin S Rogers; Antoinette Schoenthaler EDd; Lorna E Thorpe; Donna Shelley Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2020-07 Impact factor: 11.561
Authors: Jacqueline R Halladay; Bryan J Weiner; Jung In Kim; Darren A DeWalt; Stephanie Pierson; Jason Fine; Ann Lefebvre; Monique Mackey; Dawn Bergmire; Crystal Cené; Kamal Henderson; Samuel Cykert Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2020-07-28 Impact factor: 2.655
Authors: Alvaro Sánchez; Heather L Rogers; Susana Pablo; Esther García; Inmaculada Rodríguez; Mª Antonia Flores; Olga Galarza; Ana B Gaztañaga; Pedro A Martínez; Eider Alberdi; Elena Resines; Ana I Llarena; Gonzalo Grandes Journal: BMC Fam Pract Date: 2021-02-11 Impact factor: 2.497
Authors: Ann M Nguyen; Allison M Cuthel; Erin S Rogers; Nancy Van Devanter; Hang Pham-Singer; Sarah Shih; Carolyn A Berry; Donna R Shelley Journal: J Prim Care Community Health Date: 2020 Jan-Dec