Mary E Tinetti1,2, Aanand D Naik3,4, Lilian Dindo3,4, Darce M Costello1, Jessica Esterson1, Mary Geda1, Jonathan Rosen5, Kizzy Hernandez-Bigos5, Cynthia Daisy Smith6,7, Gregory M Ouellet1, Gina Kang1, Yungah Lee1, Caroline Blaum8. 1. Department of Medicine, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut. 2. Department of Chronic Disease Epidemiology, Yale School of Public Health, New Haven, Connecticut. 3. Houston Center for Innovations in Quality, Effectiveness, and Safety (IQuESt), Michael E. DeBakey VA Medical Center, Houston, Texas. 4. Department of Medicine (Health Services Research and Geriatrics), Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas. 5. Connecticut Center for Primary Care, Farmington, Connecticut. 6. American College of Physicians, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 7. Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia. 8. Department of Medicine, New York University School of Medicine, New York.
Abstract
IMPORTANCE: Health care may be burdensome and of uncertain benefit for older adults with multiple chronic conditions (MCCs). Aligning health care with an individual's health priorities may improve outcomes and reduce burden. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether patient priorities care (PPC) is associated with a perception of more goal-directed and less burdensome care compared with usual care (UC). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Nonrandomized clinical trial with propensity adjustment conducted at 1 PPC and 1 UC site of a Connecticut multisite primary care practice that provides care to almost 15% of the state's residents. Participants included 163 adults aged 65 years or older who had 3 or more chronic conditions cared for by 10 primary care practitioners (PCPs) trained in PPC and 203 similar patients who received UC from 7 PCPs not trained in PPC. Participant enrollment occurred between February 1, 2017, and March 31, 2018; follow-up extended for up to 9 months (ended September 30, 2018). INTERVENTIONS: Patient priorities care, an approach to decision-making that includes patients' identifying their health priorities (ie, specific health outcome goals and health care preferences) and clinicians aligning their decision-making to achieve these health priorities. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Primary outcomes included change in patients' Older Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (O-PACIC), CollaboRATE, and Treatment Burden Questionnaire (TBQ) scores; electronic health record documentation of decision-making based on patients' health priorities; medications and self-management tasks added or stopped; and diagnostic tests, referrals, and procedures ordered or avoided. RESULTS: Of the 366 patients, 235 (64.2%) were female and 350 (95.6%) were white. Compared with the UC group, the PPC group was older (mean [SD] age, 74.7 [6.6] vs 77.6 [7.6] years) and had lower physical and mental health scores. At follow-up, PPC participants reported a 5-point greater decrease in TBQ score than those who received UC (ß [SE], -5.0 [2.04]; P = .01) using a weighted regression model with inverse probability of PCP assignment weights; no differences were seen in O-PACIC or CollaboRATE scores. Health priorities-based decisions were mentioned in clinical visit notes for 108 of 163 (66.3%) PPC vs 0 of 203 (0%) UC participants. Compared with UC patients, PPC patients were more likely to have medications stopped (weighted comparison, 52.0% vs 33.8%; adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 2.05; 95% CI, 1.43-2.95) and less likely to have self-management tasks (57.5% vs 62.1%; AOR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.41-0.84) and diagnostic tests (80.8% vs 86.4%; AOR, 0.22; 95% CI, 0.12-0.40) ordered. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: This study's findings suggest that patient priorities care may be associated with reduced treatment burden and unwanted health care. Care aligned with patients' priorities may be feasible and effective for older adults with MCCs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03600389.
IMPORTANCE: Health care may be burdensome and of uncertain benefit for older adults with multiple chronic conditions (MCCs). Aligning health care with an individual's health priorities may improve outcomes and reduce burden. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether patient priorities care (PPC) is associated with a perception of more goal-directed and less burdensome care compared with usual care (UC). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Nonrandomized clinical trial with propensity adjustment conducted at 1 PPC and 1 UC site of a Connecticut multisite primary care practice that provides care to almost 15% of the state's residents. Participants included 163 adults aged 65 years or older who had 3 or more chronic conditions cared for by 10 primary care practitioners (PCPs) trained in PPC and 203 similar patients who received UC from 7 PCPs not trained in PPC. Participant enrollment occurred between February 1, 2017, and March 31, 2018; follow-up extended for up to 9 months (ended September 30, 2018). INTERVENTIONS: Patient priorities care, an approach to decision-making that includes patients' identifying their health priorities (ie, specific health outcome goals and health care preferences) and clinicians aligning their decision-making to achieve these health priorities. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Primary outcomes included change in patients' Older Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (O-PACIC), CollaboRATE, and Treatment Burden Questionnaire (TBQ) scores; electronic health record documentation of decision-making based on patients' health priorities; medications and self-management tasks added or stopped; and diagnostic tests, referrals, and procedures ordered or avoided. RESULTS: Of the 366 patients, 235 (64.2%) were female and 350 (95.6%) were white. Compared with the UC group, the PPC group was older (mean [SD] age, 74.7 [6.6] vs 77.6 [7.6] years) and had lower physical and mental health scores. At follow-up, PPC participants reported a 5-point greater decrease in TBQ score than those who received UC (ß [SE], -5.0 [2.04]; P = .01) using a weighted regression model with inverse probability of PCP assignment weights; no differences were seen in O-PACIC or CollaboRATE scores. Health priorities-based decisions were mentioned in clinical visit notes for 108 of 163 (66.3%) PPC vs 0 of 203 (0%) UC participants. Compared with UC patients, PPC patients were more likely to have medications stopped (weighted comparison, 52.0% vs 33.8%; adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 2.05; 95% CI, 1.43-2.95) and less likely to have self-management tasks (57.5% vs 62.1%; AOR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.41-0.84) and diagnostic tests (80.8% vs 86.4%; AOR, 0.22; 95% CI, 0.12-0.40) ordered. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: This study's findings suggest that patient priorities care may be associated with reduced treatment burden and unwanted health care. Care aligned with patients' priorities may be feasible and effective for older adults with MCCs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03600389.
Authors: Donna M Zulman; Jeremy B Sussman; Xisui Chen; Christine T Cigolle; Caroline S Blaum; Rodney A Hayward Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2011-02-01 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Cynthia M Boyd; Jennifer L Wolff; Erin Giovannetti; Lisa Reider; Carlos Weiss; Qian-li Xue; Bruce Leff; Chad Boult; Travonia Hughes; Cynthia Rand Journal: Med Care Date: 2014-03 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Rosie Ferris; Caroline Blaum; Eliza Kiwak; Janet Austin; Jessica Esterson; Gene Harkless; Gary Oftedahl; Michael Parchman; Peter H Van Ness; Mary E Tinetti Journal: J Aging Health Date: 2017-02-01
Authors: C Adrian Austin; Dinushika Mohottige; Rebecca L Sudore; Alexander K Smith; Laura C Hanson Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2015-07 Impact factor: 21.873
Authors: Aanand D Naik; Lilian N Dindo; Julia R Van Liew; Natalie E Hundt; Lauren Vo; Kizzy Hernandez-Bigos; Jessica Esterson; Mary Geda; Jonathan Rosen; Caroline S Blaum; Mary E Tinetti Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2018-10-03 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Sarah L Szanton; Y Natalia Alfonso; Bruce Leff; Jack Guralnik; Jennifer L Wolff; Ian Stockwell; Laura N Gitlin; David Bishai Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2017-11-22 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Elizabeth A Bayliss; Denise E Bonds; Cynthia M Boyd; Melinda M Davis; Bruce Finke; Michael H Fox; Russell E Glasgow; Richard A Goodman; Suzanne Heurtin-Roberts; Sue Lachenmayr; Cristin Lind; Elizabeth A Madigan; David S Meyers; Suzanne Mintz; Wendy J Nilsen; Sally Okun; Sarah Ruiz; Marcel E Salive; Kurt C Stange Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2014 May-Jun Impact factor: 5.166
Authors: Gregory M Ouellet; Eliza Kiwak; Darcé M Costello; Ariel R Green; Mary Geda; Aanand D Naik; Mary E Tinetti Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2020-11-09 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Mary F Wyman; Daniel Liebzeit; Corrine I Voils; Barbara J Bowers; Elizabeth N Chapman; Andrea Gilmore-Bykovskyi; Korey A Kennelty; Amy J H Kind; Julia Loosen; Nicole Rogus-Pulia; Melissa Dattalo Journal: Patient Educ Couns Date: 2020-02-15
Authors: Adeline Dorough; Derek Forfang; Shannon L Murphy; James W Mold; Abhijit V Kshirsagar; Darren A DeWalt; Jennifer E Flythe Journal: Nephrol Dial Transplant Date: 2020-08-01 Impact factor: 5.992
Authors: Lina M Brinker; Matthew C Konerman; Pedram Navid; Michael P Dorsch; Jennifer McNamara; Cristen J Willer; Mary E Tinetti; Scott L Hummel; Parag Goyal Journal: Am J Med Date: 2020-08-18 Impact factor: 4.965
Authors: C Barrett Bowling; Richard Sloane; Carl Pieper; Alison Luciano; Barry R Davis; Lara M Simpson; Paula T Einhorn; Suzanne Oparil; Paul Muntner Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2020-06-05 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Komal Patel Murali; John D Merriman; Gary Yu; Allison Vorderstrasse; Amy Kelley; Abraham A Brody Journal: Am J Hosp Palliat Care Date: 2020-06-08 Impact factor: 2.500
Authors: Ozan Unlu; Emily B Levitan; Evgeniya Reshetnyak; Jerard Kneifati-Hayek; Ivan Diaz; Alexi Archambault; Ligong Chen; Joseph T Hanlon; Mathew S Maurer; Monika M Safford; Mark S Lachs; Parag Goyal Journal: Circ Heart Fail Date: 2020-10-13 Impact factor: 8.790
Authors: Tullika Garg; Courtney A Polenick; Nancy Schoenborn; Jane Jih; Alexandra Hajduk; Melissa Y Wei; Jaime Hughes Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2021-05-14 Impact factor: 4.964